The War of The Worlds, H.G. Wells, 1898
Great Expectations, Charles Dickens, 1861
Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper ("On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies"), A. Einstein, 1905
The prime glory of Einstein's 1905 papers is their accessibility.
Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper is famously devoid of footnotes, and contains no insurmountable math.
Of course he dashed off another three articles in the same edition of Annalen der Physik, all on the same level of comprehensibility, one of which scored him a Nobel prize.
The difficulty of relativity was and is a silly meme.
A common argument is that it's valuable to have a partner as a sounding board and as a source of moral support. These roles are vital, but they don't necessarily have to be filled by founders. Einstein needed the help of his friend Michele Besso to develop special relativity, but Besso wasn't a coauthor on Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper.
I don't see two as a natural lower bound on the number
That's expecting far too much. It was a couple decades before E=mc². Einstein published 'Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper' in 1905. People weren't sure if such a thing as an atom even existed in the 19th century.
《世界之战》，H.G. 威尔斯，1898 年 《远大前程》，查尔斯·狄更斯，1861 年 《论动体的电动力学》（Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper），阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦，1905 年
The War of The Worlds, H.G. Wells, 1898 Great Expectations, Charles Dickens, 1861 Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper ("On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies"), A. Einstein, 1905
爱因斯坦 1905 年论文的最大亮点在于其通俗易懂。 《论动体的电动力学》（Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper）是出了名的没有一条脚注，而且不包含任何高不可攀的数学知识。 当然，他在同一期《物理年鉴》（Annalen der Physik）上还一气呵成发表了另外三篇文章，全都是同样的通俗易懂，其中一篇还让他斩获了诺贝尔奖。 狭义相对论很难这个说法，以前是、现在也依然是个愚蠢的 meme。
The prime glory of Einstein's 1905 papers is their accessibility. Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper is famously devoid of footnotes, and contains no insurmountable math. Of course he dashed off another three articles in the same edition of Annalen der Physik, all on the same level of comprehensibility, one of which scored him a Nobel prize. The difficulty of relativity was and is a silly meme.
一个常见的论调是，拥有一个合伙人作为交流想法的共鸣板（sounding board）并提供精神支持是非常有价值的。这些角色固然至关重要，但并不一定非要由联合创始人来扮演。爱因斯坦在构思狭义相对论时需要好友 Michele Besso 的帮助，但 Besso 并没有成为《论动体的电动力学》（Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper）的共同作者。 我认为两个人并不是团队人数的天然下限
A common argument is that it's valuable to have a partner as a sounding board and as a source of moral support. These roles are vital, but they don't necessarily have to be filled by founders. Einstein needed the help of his friend Michele Besso to develop special relativity, but Besso wasn't a coauthor on Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper. I don't see two as a natural lower bound on the number
那是期望过高了。那还是在 E=mc² 问世几十年前呢。爱因斯坦在 1905 年发表了《论动体的电动力学》（Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper）。在 19 世纪，人们甚至都还不能确定“原子”这玩意儿到底存不存在。
That's expecting far too much. It was a couple decades before E=mc². Einstein published 'Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper' in 1905. People weren't sure if such a thing as an atom even existed in the 19th century.