Honest question: there is any example of Einstein being proved wrong?
Was he indeed always right on his theories for phenomenons before they could be proved by experiments; or is that the case that we only hear about when he is proved right?
He (kind of) had to add the cosmological constant to GR just so the universe wouldn't collapse onto itself and instead be static. The idea of the unchanging universe was maybe partly due to personal or religious preconceptions. So at least in his mind the universe was static, which of course was proven "wrong" by the discovery that the universe is expanding. This was not a proper scientific theory of his, rather a preconception, like his aversion to the randomness of Quantum Physics (again, religion it appears).
Of course, being Einstein, he was again on the right side of the argument when the universe was much later discovered to be accelerating, again requiring a cosmological constant (or some similar fudge factor).
I don't know if you can say he was proven wrong, but the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox was put forward to demonstrate that quantum mechanics must be incomplete, because to accept it implied "spooky action at a distance".
Today, most physicists accept the spooky action at a distance rather than the idea that QM is incomplete.
He was a proponent of hidden variable theory, which tried to reconcile quantum mechanics with determinism, famously saying "God does not play dice". People often say that hidden variable theories were proven impossible, and thus Einstein was proven wrong. That's not quite true, and only local hidden variables have been ruled out.
It also disparages his contribution to the scientific discussion to just state that he was "proven wrong".
Bohr's argument in the discussion was a bit of a mess and I couldn't pull anything out of his rebuttal to EPR other than an assertion that QM behaves the way it does and not to pay any attention to the man behind the curtain. Its a very philosophical argument with very little scientific content and he just proposes that the QM math is correct because its correct, as far as I can tell.
EPR made a logical cogent argument. It was based on the philosophical principle of the locality of physics. They translated that into the mathematics of Quantum Mechanics and proposed a simple experimental test. Later that was refined by Bell and tested experimentally by Aspect and others. It was the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paper that laid the groundwork of how to test the non-locality/hidden-variables of QM though.
EPR moved the scientific discussion forwards much more than Bohr did, but it turns out the test they proposed showed that the position they favored was incorrect.
Also Einstein was arguing first and foremost that physics must be _local_. That's in opposition to the "spooky action at a distance" bit that he didn't like. Since local hidden variables are ruled out then he really was proven "wrong".
TL;DR I think Bohr's argument is rubbish, and Einstein's is solid, but the Universe is a bitch and doesn't care...
Was he indeed always right on his theories for phenomenons before they could be proved by experiments; or is that the case that we only hear about when he is proved right?