On the shoulder of giants
There is no such thing as completely original work. In fact, everything is a more or less an accurate copy of another work existing in some point in space and time.
Even acknowledgments must be taken relatively. One might say that the works of Einstein were based on the works of Newton and others, but with relativity in past and future and
deterministic reality, it is equally valid to say that Newton had no choice but to invent the basis for the works of Einstein.
Physical manifestation of this is the entanglement of Newton (in 17th century) and [relative equivalent of] Einstein at some distant point in space but at the same point in time (relative to Earth).
Thus, it is valid to say that the works of this Einstein [equivalent] were the basis for the works of Newton.
That is one of the reasons I cannot force anyone to give me credit for my work.
However, since this is not conscious copying of work, it is fair to give credit for such relatively original work. In fact, it is not only fair, but obviously, if everyone would be taking without
giving back nothing would be sustainable and nothing could ever exist.
My works would not be possible without the works of Kepler, Einstein and countless others - scientists, researchers and genuine seekers of truth. It is always impossible to list everyone with
direct and indirect influence on one's work.
Although it is common practice to acknowledge influence only of direct influencers (leaving it to their responsibility to acknowledge their
direct, one's indirect, influencers), I simply don't see the point even in that, as it would be hard work just to find out who they all were and there's strong possibility I would
It is most important to give credit to one at the moment in space and time as close as possible to the moment of space and time one's work is published, during one's lifetime, otherwise, one
presents sufficient acknowledgment with references to such work or even simply by use (when there is no abuse).