Lost in Translation

thesis Lost in translation

Physicists know that Heike Kamerlingh determination of what is presently referred Onnes discovered superconductivity in 1911, It seems that the to as the Hubble parameter.” that James Chadwick discovered the neutron Suspicious, indeed. But it is still unknown in 1932, and that Edwin Hubble discovered ‘Hubble constant’ why this omission was made, and who was the expansion of the Universe in 1931 — the ought to be called the responsible. In any event, scientists in the Hubble constant describing that expansion English-speaking world — and the public — being named after him. Hendrik Lorentz ‘Lemaître constant’. were left believing that Hubble had been discovered the Lorentz transformations, just the first to deriveH , and more generally to as Albert Einstein discovered the Einstein conceive the idea of an expanding universe, equations of general relativity. All well and good. But Hubble and which is certainly among the most profound But history sometimes plays tricks with most other scientists were apparently ideas in the history of science. names, in part because all of us, having unaware that Lemaître, a physicist at the Both Hubble and Lemaître went on to limited time and so relying on the writings Catholic University of Louvain, had arrived do further influential work. Hubble — who of others, repeat what we read (especially at similar conclusions two years earlier very possibly never knew about Lemaître’s when we read it in many places) without in 1929, publishing them in a somewhat contribution — teamed up with Milton consulting the original sources. Lorentz obscure French-language journal, Annales Humason to collect data on galactic red- did derive the transformations bearing de la Société scientifique de Bruxelles. As shifts that eventually formed the foundations his name, but it wasn’t a solo effort: others Nussbaumer and Bieri note, Lemaître of observational cosmology. Lemaître went including Fitzgerald, Larmor and Heavyside originally arrived at his view by a theoretical even further, in 1931 floating in a letter helped along the way. I’ve written before route, criticizing Willem de Sitter’s earlier to Nature early thoughts on what would about Hubble’s discovery of the expanding model of a Universe dominated by a positive eventually become the ‘Big Bang’ view of the Universe, yet I now learn that he actually cosmological constant. That model, he beginning of the Universe. Two years later, came in second. argued, violated the Copernican Principle, in another paper, Lemaître suggested a link In all fairness, it seems that the ‘Hubble as it treated the observer as special. between the then still-new ideas of quantum constant’ ought to be called the ‘Lemaître Correcting this problem led Lemaître theory — especially as applied to fields — constant’ after Belgian physicist Georges instead to a new set of dynamical solutions and cosmology. The deeper explanation of Lemaître, who reported findings akin to to Einstein’s fundamental equations. From the cosmological constant Λ, he suggested, Hubble’s — and with a deeper theoretical general relativity, he derived the existence might somehow be linked to quantum backing — two years earlier. That’s the of a linear relationship between galactic vacuum fluctuations. conclusion of several threads of recent velocity and distance: v = HD. Lemaître then The profound omission from the historical research (H. Nussbaumer & immediately went further, using Hubble’s 1926 translation of Lemaître’s 1929 paper, L. Bieri, arXiv:1107.2281; D. L. Block, galactic distances to derive a numerical value discovered originally by James Peebles in arXiv:1106.3928; and S. van den Bergh, for H between 575 and 625 km s−1 Mpc−1, 1984, has been brought back into the light arXiv:1106.1195). It’s not, these studies noting that further observations would be by Nussbaumer and Bieri in the course of suggest, that Hubble didn’t do important needed to improve the data. historical research for their book Discovering work and deserve credit; only that Sadly — or possibly, suspiciously — it the Expanding Universe (Cambridge Univ., Lemaître has been unfairly deprived seems that when the Royal Astronomical 2009). Why it has remained unknown for so of his rightful position as the father of Society decided to print an English long is also somewhat mysterious, although modern cosmology. translation of Lemaître’s paper in 1931, such errors of attribution — intentional or It was in 1931 that Hubble published the the translation completely omitted the not — probably aren’t as unusual in science paper that linked his name to the notion of section in which Lemaître reported his as we think. the expanding Universe. Based on his own most important findings. Who was the Indeed, other researchers (Helge recently improved data on galactic distances, translator? No one knows. Van den Bergh Kraghe and Robert Smith) have studied the Hubble reported an empirical relationship suggests that the omission doesn’t look evolution of usage of terms such as ‘Hubble’s of the form v = KD, with K giving the ratio accidental, as it took care to eliminate all law’ and ‘Hubble Constant’ and shown that between the distance D to a galaxy and its parts of the text that would have pointed they came into common usage somewhat velocity v as inferred from the red shifts of tangentially to Lemaître’s conclusions: abruptly in the 1950s, 20 years after Hubble’s galactic spectra. As Hubble noted in the “The English translation of the article”, he paper. They suggest that the link between paper, the data “indicate a linear correlation notes, “did not include the footnotes to actual work and credit is more tenuous than between distances and velocities, whether the original French version of the article. we think. “‘Hubble’s law’ is an example”, they the latter are used directly or corrected One of these footnotes explains in detail suggest, “of what has been called Stigler’s law for solar motion, according to the older how using weighted and unweighted radial of eponymy, namely, ‘No scientific discovery solutions.” Hubble calculated a value for K velocities for galaxies leads to slightly is named after its original discoverer’.” ❐

(only later renamed the Hubble constant, H0) different values for the Hubble parameter. of about 500 km s−1 Mpc−1, roughly a factor … it appears that the translator of MARK BUCHANAN of ten higher that today’s value of about Lemaître’s 1927 article deliberately deleted 65 km s−1 Mpc−1. those parts of the paper that dealt with the Corrected online: 28 October 2011

NATURE PHYSICS | VOL 7 | SEPTEMBER 2011 | www.nature.com/naturephysics 667

© 2011 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved Correction In the Thesis article ‘Lost in translation’ (Nature Phys. 7, 667; 2011), the nationality of Georges Lemaître was given incorrectly as French; Lemaître was in fact Belgian. This error has been rectified in the HTML and PDF versions.