Question: When was Einstein's first paper submitted?
About the article "Albert Einstein", section "Thermodynamic fluctuations and statistical physics".

Candidate passages:
Albert Einstein's first paper submitted in 1900 to "Annalen der Physik" was on capillary attraction.
It was published in 1901 with the title "Folgerungen aus den Capillaritätserscheinungen", which translates as "Conclusions from the capillarity phenomena".
Two papers he published in 1902–1903 (thermodynamics) attempted to interpret atomic phenomena from a statistical point of view.
These papers were the foundation for the 1905 paper on Brownian motion, which showed that Brownian movement can be construed as firm evidence that molecules exist.
His research in 1903 and 1904 was mainly concerned with the effect of finite atomic size on diffusion phenomena.
For a long time, it was believed that Einstein and Hilbert found the field equations of gravity independently.
While Hilbert's paper was submitted somewhat earlier than Einstein's, it only appeared in 1916, after Einstein's field equations paper had appeared in print.
For this reason there was no good reason to suspect plagiarism on either side.
In 1978, a November 18, 1915 letter from Einstein to Hilbert resurfaced, in which Einstein thanked Hilbert for sending an explanation of Hilbert's work.
This was not unexpected to most scholars, who were well aware of the correspondence between Hilbert and Einstein that November, and who continued to hold the view expressed by Albrecht Fölsing in his Einstein biography: In November, when Einstein was totally absorbed in his theory of gravitation, he essentially only corresponded with Hilbert, sending Hilbert his publications and, on November 18, thanking him for a draft of his article.
Einstein must have received that article immediately before writing this letter.
Could Einstein, casting his eye over Hilbert's paper, have discovered the term which was still lacking in his own equations, and thus 'nostrified' Hilbert?
In the very next sentence, after asking the rhetorical question, Folsing answers it with "This is not really probable...", and then goes on to explain in detail why  "[Einstein's] eventual derivation of the equations was a logical development of his earlier arguments—in which, despite all the mathematics, physical principles invariably predominated.
His approach was thus quite different from Hilbert's, and Einstein's achievements can, therefore, surely be regarded as authentic."
In their 1997 "Science" paper, Corry, Renn and Stachel quote the above passage and comment that "the arguments by which Einstein is exculpated are rather weak, turning on his slowness in fully grasping Hilbert's mathematics", and so they attempted to find more definitive evidence of the relationship between the work of Hilbert and Einstein, basing their work largely on a recently discovered pre-print of Hilbert's paper.
A discussion of the controversy around this paper is given below.
Those who contend that Einstein's paper was motivated by the information obtained from Hilbert have referred to the following sources:  The correspondence between Hilbert and Einstein mentioned above.
More recently, it became known that Einstein was also given notes of Hilbert's November 16 talk about his theory.
Einstein's November 18 paper on the perihelion motion of Mercury, which still refers to the incomplete field equations of November 4 and 11.
(The perihelion motion depends only on the vacuum equations, which are unaffected by the trace term that was added to complete the field equations.)
Reference to the final form of the equations appears only in a footnote added to the paper, indicating that Einstein had not known the final form of the equations on November 18.
This is not controversial, and is consistent with the well-known fact that Einstein did not complete the field equations (with the trace term) until November 25.  Letters of Hilbert, Einstein, and other scientists may be used in attempts to make guesses about the content of Hilbert's letter to Einstein, which is not preserved, or of Hilbert's lecture in Göttingen on November 16.
Those who contend that Einstein's work takes priority over Hilbert's, or that both authors did their work independently have used the following arguments:  Hilbert modified his paper in December 1915, and the November 18 version sent to Einstein did not contain the final form of the field equations.
The extant part of the printer proofs does not have the explicit field equations.
This is the point of view defended by Corry, Renn, Stachel, and Sauer.
Sauer (1999) and Todorov (2005) agree with Corry, Renn and Satchel that Hilbert's proofs show that Hilbert had originally presented a non-covariant theory, which was dropped from the revised paper.
Corry "et al."
quote from the proofs: "Since our mathematical theorem ... can provide only ten essentially independent equations for the 14 potentials [...] and further, maintaining general covariance makes quite impossible more than ten essential independent equations [...] then, in order to keep the deterministic characteristic of the fundamental equations of physics [...] four further non-covariant equations ...
unavoidable."
(proofs, pages 3 and 4.
Corry "et al.")
Hilbert derives these four extra equations and continues "these four differential equations [... supplement the gravitational equations [...] to yield a system of 14 equations for the 14 potentials formula_4, formula_6: the system of fundamental equations of physics".
(proofs, page 7.
Corry "et al.").
Hilbert's first theory (lecture Nov 16, lecture Nov 20, proofs Dec 6) was titled "The fundamental equations of Physics".
In proposing non-covariant fundamental equations, based on the Ricci tensor but restricted in this way, Hilbert was following the causality requirement that Einstein and Grassman had introduced in the Entwurf papers of 1913.
One may attempt to reconstruct the way in which Einstein may have arrived at the field equations independently.
This is, for instance, done in the paper of Logunov, Mestvirishvili and Petrov quoted below.
Renn and Sauer investigate the notebook used by Einstein in 1912 and claim he was close to the correct theory at that time.  
  Before 1997, "the commonly accepted view was that David Hilbert completed the general theory of relativity at least 5 days before Albert Einstein submitted his conclusive paper on this theory on 25 November 1915.
Hilbert's article, bearing the date of submission 20 November 1915 but published only on 31 March 1916, presents a generally covariant theory of gravitation, including field equations essentially equivalent to those in Einstein's paper" (Corry, Renn and Stachel, 1997).
Since the discovery of printer's proofs of Hilbert's paper of Nov 20, dated 6 Dec 1915, which show a number of differences from the finally published paper, this 'commonly accepted view' has been challenged.
Whether Einstein got the correct mathematical formulation for general relativity from Hilbert, or formulated it independently.
Points at issue: * The content of Hilbert's November 16 letter/postcard to Einstein is not known.
It is however, clear from Einstein's response that it was an account of Hilbert's work.
* It is not known what was on the missing part of Hilbert's printer proofs.
The missing portion is large enough to have contained the field equations in an explicit form.
There are several competing speculations about the content of the missing piece.
* Based on the above, it is not known whether Hilbert had formulated the field equations in an explicit form before December 6 (the date of the printer's proofs) or not.
* It is known from the proofs that Hilbert introduced four non-covariant equations in order to specify the gravitational potentials formula_8 and that this approach was dropped from his revised paper.
Whether Hilbert ever tried to claim priority for the field equations - it seems clear that he regarded the theory of general relativity as Einstein's theory.
What Hilbert thought he was referring to when he used the term "equations of my theory" about Einstein's research.
Hilbert made a similar remark in a letter to Karl Schwarzschild.
General relativity.
There are a large number of opinions related to these involving questions of "who should get the credit" - these are not enumerated here. 
In 1924, Einstein received a description of a statistical model from Indian physicist Satyendra Nath Bose, based on a counting method that assumed that light could be understood as a gas of indistinguishable particles.
Einstein noted that Bose's statistics applied to some atoms as well as to the proposed light particles, and submitted his translation of Bose's paper to the "Zeitschrift für Physik".
Einstein also published his own articles describing the model and its implications, among them the Bose–Einstein condensate phenomenon that some particulates should appear at very low temperatures.
It was not until 1995 that the first such condensate was produced experimentally by Eric Allin Cornell and Carl Wieman using ultra-cooling equipment built at the NIST–JILA laboratory at the University of Colorado at Boulder.
Bose–Einstein statistics are now used to describe the behaviors of any assembly of bosons.
Einstein's sketches for this project may be seen in the Einstein Archive in the library of the Leiden University. 
Einstein's ""Zur Elektrodynamik bewegter Körper"" ("On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies") was received on 30 June 1905 and published 26 September of that same year.
It reconciles Maxwell's equations for electricity and magnetism with the laws of mechanics, by introducing major changes to mechanics close to the speed of light.
This later became known as Einstein's special theory of relativity.
Consequences of this include the time-space frame of a moving body appearing to slow down and contract (in the direction of motion) when measured in the frame of the observer.
This paper also argued that the idea of a luminiferous aether—one of the leading theoretical entities in physics at the time—was superfluous.
In his paper on mass–energy equivalence, Einstein produced "E" = "mc"2 from his special relativity equations.
Einstein's 1905 work on relativity remained controversial for many years, but was accepted by leading physicists, starting with Max Planck.