DOCSLIB.ORG

Relativity Revealed

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Relativity Revealed SPRING BOOKS PHYSICS Relativity revealed Peter Coles extols three books on the 1919 eclipse expeditions that proved Einstein right. n 1916, Albert Einstein published No Shadow of a Doubt: The 1919 Eclipse was a critical test, because Einstein’s theory his general theory of relativity in full That Confirmed Einstein’s Theory of predicted a deflection precisely twice the mathematical detail. That opened the Relativity value obtained using Isaac Newton’s law of Iwindow on a radically new framework for DANIEL KENNEFICK universal gravitation. The needed eclipse physics, abolishing established notions of Princeton University Press (2019) came 100 years ago, in 1919. Eddington is space and time and replacing Newton’s Gravity’s Century: From Einstein’s Eclipse to now forever associated with two expeditions Images of Black Holes formulation of the laws of gravity. Ein- to view it: from Sobral in northern Brazil, ANA KOVA BY ILLUSTRATIONS stein’s revolution was to change the course RON COWEN and the island of Príncipe off the coast of Harvard University Press (2019) of science; but in the years immediately West Africa. Those momentous ventures after publication, there was no definitive Einstein’s War: How Relativity Triumphed form the kernel of three books commemo- observational evidence that his theory was Amid the Vicious Nationalism of World War I rating the centenary: No Shadow of a Doubt correct. MATTHEW STANLEY by physicist Daniel Kennefick, Gravity’s Dutton (2019) Enter Arthur Stanley Eddington. An Century by science journalist Ron Cowen, astronomer interested in Einstein’s theory and science historian Matthew Stanley’s because of its wide-ranging implications harnessing a total solar eclipse, he argued Einstein’s War. for astrophysics and cosmology, Edding- that the deflection, or bending, of light by Einstein’s theory, eight years in the ton took on the task of proving it. By the Sun’s gravity could be measured. This making, sprang from insights he had 306 | NATURE | VOL 568 | 18 APRIL 2019 | CORRECTED©2019 Spri nger N17atu rAPRILe Li mited . 2019All ri ghts reserved. ©2019 Spri nger Nature Li mited. All ri ghts reserved. SPRING BOOKS COMMENT developed after he published his theory of the expeditions, remained in England. sophisticated technology. Eddington’s special relativity in 1905. One of the effects Eddington travelled to Príncipe; Andrew plates were lost after he died in 1944 — predicted by the new theory was that light Crommelin, who worked at the Royal his sister might have thrown them away rays passing close to a massive body, such Greenwich Observatory, London, went to when she was forced to move out of the as a star, should be bent by its gravitational Sobral. Cambridge home they had shared. Crom- field. This effect had been predicted qualita- The details of the dual expeditions are melin’s plates seem to have disappeared in tively using Newton’s theory of gravity. Tan- well served by No Shadow of a Doubt. Metic- the course of successive reorganizations at talizingly, Newton himself had written in his ulously researched and vividly written, the the Royal Observatory. 1704 opus Opticks: “Do not Bodies act upon account is sure to become the standard ref- Gravity’s Century concentrates more Light at a distance, and by their action bend erence work on this fascinating example of on the broader ramifications of Einstein’s its Rays…?” But there is no evidence that ‘Big Science’. Eddington, Kennefick reveals, theory in cosmology and astrophysics, he calculated the magnitude of the effect had terrible luck. Met including black holes (the first full calculation was published by by poor weather in and gravitational German mathematician Johann Georg von Príncipe, he man- waves. At fewer than Soldner, in 1804). aged to make fewer THE 200 pages, Cowen’s Newton’s theory of gravity did not, of measurements than book is a breezy and course, formulate gravity as a consequence he had hoped. Then, ARMISTICE enjoyable read, a of curved space. That was Einstein’s innova- a proposed strike by IN NOVEMBER 1918 welcome addition to a tion. And when he calculated the effect, he a steamship company crowded shelf of books confirmed that light is deflected (as in the meant that he could LEFT JUST on these topics. Newtonian theory), but through curved not stay in Príncipe Cowen also goes space. It is this curvature that doubles the long enough to meas- ENOUGH TIME into Einstein’s incar- deflection. ure the star positions TO PUT nation as a cultural on his plates on site, icon. The ‘miracle TEST CONDITIONS and had instead to THE PLAN year’ of 1905, when Einstein first publicly aired the general the- do the analysis after he published papers ory of relativity to the Prussian Academy he had returned to INTO ACTION. on Brownian motion of Sciences in 1915. The First World War England. and the photoelectric was by then well under way, in all its horror. Crommelin had effect as well as on The next year, despite wartime severance of much better conditions in Brazil. Despite special relativity, made Einstein a star of communication channels, Eddington and technical issues with equipment that left physics. The eclipse expeditions of 1919 fellow astronomer Frank Watson Dyson many plates badly blurred, his measure- did much more, cementing his reputation — then director of the Cambridge Obser- ments were decisive, and were noticeably among physicists and transforming him vatory and Astronomer Royal, respectively closer to the Einstein prediction than to the into an international superstar. Yet, in my — managed to obtain Einstein’s published Newtonian. The results were announced col- view, at least part of the reason for that sud- papers. Dyson immediately realized that lectively in November that year, at a special den celebrity is that the expedition came the total solar eclipse in 1919 would prove joint meeting of the Royal Society and Royal just after the war’s end. Moreover, it was an ideal test. Astronomical Society in London. It made a British experiment testing the ideas of a During this eclipse, the Sun would sit front-page news around the globe. German theorist. After four terrible years in front of the Hyades, a cluster of bright of death and destruction, perhaps people stars in the constellation of Taurus. Thus, QUESTIONS AND CONFIRMATION found in Einstein’s triumph a symbol of at totality, many stars would be visible near That initial conclusion by Dyson, some sort of reconciliation. the eclipsed disk. (This was key because the Eddington, Crommelin and their teams was Stanley shares that view in Einstein’s light-bending effect predicted by Einstein subsequently confirmed by many further War. Detailed and readable, the book is greatest for stars observed close to the eclipse experiments. Yet Eddington has complements No Shadow of a Doubt as an Sun.) The stars’ positions relative to the been accused by some of mishandling the account of the eclipse expeditions and their Sun could be recorded and measured on eclipse measurements. Kennefick’s title, No political backdrop. It is especially revealing photographic plates, and then compared Shadow of a Doubt, is thus both a pun and about Einstein’s scientific work and private with reference plates showing the stars a declaration of intent to dispel these sus- life leading up to the momentous events of when the Sun was nowhere near the field picions. Kennefick discusses the criticisms 1919 — particularly in showing how these of view. Any apparent shifts, caused by in some detail. I can add a couple of brief were affected by the First World War. the Sun’s gravitational field, could then points. One of the interesting facts from Stanley’s be calculated. The more stars measured, One is that Eddington had to adopt a account is that Einstein had made a stab at the better the chance the observers would Plan B when analysing the Príncipe data, calculating the bending of light back in 1911, have of correcting for systematic errors and after misfortune had forced his hand; but, before he had formulated the full general reducing random ones. in my opinion, he did nothing unreason- theory of relativity. His result was precisely That was the idea. But there were many able. All the 1919 eclipse measurements the same as the Newtonian value. I was left practical obstacles to surmount, both in are tabulated (in F. W. Dyson et al. Philos. wondering what would have happened to his the technicalities of making the observa- Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 220, 291–333). It is reputation if measurements had been taken tions, and in the expeditionary logistics. straightforward, and also quite instruc- then. Would they have been a setback? Or The eclipse’s path of totality passed from tive, to analyse them using modern statis- would they just have driven him harder to northern Brazil across the Atlantic to West tical techniques. I’ve done this, and found produce the full theory, with its crucial factor Africa, making it impossible to mount an no evidence that Eddington ‘cooked the of two? ■ expedition from Britain until hostilities books’. It’s a huge misfortune that none of had ceased. The Armistice in November the original plates from either expedition Peter Coles is Professor of Theoretical 1918 left just enough time to put the plan survives: otherwise, it might have been Physics at Maynooth University in Ireland. into action. Dyson, in overall charge of possible to measure them using more e-mail: [email protected] ©2019 Spri nger Nature Li mited. All ri ghts reserved. ©2019 Spri nger Nature Li mited. All ri ghts reserved. 18 APRIL 2019 | VOL 568 | NATURE | 307 COMMENT BOOKS & ARTS CORRECTION In the Books & Arts article ‘Relativity revealed’ (Nature 568, 306-307; 2019), the subtitle of Einstein’s War by Matthew Stanley should have been ‘How Relativity Triumphed Amid the Vicious Nationalism of World War I’.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Assaj V2 N4 1930-Jan
    ijtlJt Journal {If tl]t J\.strauamital ~ add!,! af ~ autb J\.frita. Vol. II. JANUARY, 1930. No.4. Astronomical Society of South Africa~ "' AT HOME" TO VISITING ASTRONOMERS OF THE BRITISH ASSOCIATION. July 26, 1929, will long be remembered in the annals of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, for on the evening of that day it was "At Home" at the Oddfellows' Hall, Plein Street, Cape Town, to the visiting astronomers who were attending the meetings of the British Association. The chair was taken by Mr. A. W. Long, President of the Society, who, in opening the proceedings, said: This gathering of the Astronomical Society of South Africa has been arranged to enable the members to greet the distinguished astronomers and other eminent scien­ tists interested in astronomy who are visiting South Africa in connection with the meetings of the British Association. We have with us to-night Sir Frank Dyson, the Astronomer Royal; Professor Eddington, Director of the Cambridge University Observatory; Professor Fowl~r, Yarrow Research Professor of the Royal Society; Pro­ fessor Chapman, of the Imperial College of Science; Professor De Sitter, Director of the Leiden Observatory; Dr. Guthnick, Director of the Berlin-Babelsberg Obser­ vatory; Dr. K110x-Shaw, Director of the Radcliffe Observatory; Mr. Greaves, of the Greenwich Observa­ tory; Mr. Wrigley, of the Edinburgh Observatory; Dr. Aston, of Cambridge, and I am pleased to say that at a later stage Lord Rayleigh will also be here. In the name of the Society I extend to these gentlemen a very hearty welcome. We have been familiar with them for a very long time by name, and through their scientific attainments; now we are delighted to have the honour of meeting them in person.
    [Show full text]
  • Former Fellows Biographical Index Part
    Former Fellows of The Royal Society of Edinburgh 1783 – 2002 Biographical Index Part Two ISBN 0 902198 84 X Published July 2006 © The Royal Society of Edinburgh 22-26 George Street, Edinburgh, EH2 2PQ BIOGRAPHICAL INDEX OF FORMER FELLOWS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF EDINBURGH 1783 – 2002 PART II K-Z C D Waterston and A Macmillan Shearer This is a print-out of the biographical index of over 4000 former Fellows of the Royal Society of Edinburgh as held on the Society’s computer system in October 2005. It lists former Fellows from the foundation of the Society in 1783 to October 2002. Most are deceased Fellows up to and including the list given in the RSE Directory 2003 (Session 2002-3) but some former Fellows who left the Society by resignation or were removed from the roll are still living. HISTORY OF THE PROJECT Information on the Fellowship has been kept by the Society in many ways – unpublished sources include Council and Committee Minutes, Card Indices, and correspondence; published sources such as Transactions, Proceedings, Year Books, Billets, Candidates Lists, etc. All have been examined by the compilers, who have found the Minutes, particularly Committee Minutes, to be of variable quality, and it is to be regretted that the Society’s holdings of published billets and candidates lists are incomplete. The late Professor Neil Campbell prepared from these sources a loose-leaf list of some 1500 Ordinary Fellows elected during the Society’s first hundred years. He listed name and forenames, title where applicable and national honours, profession or discipline, position held, some information on membership of the other societies, dates of birth, election to the Society and death or resignation from the Society and reference to a printed biography.
    [Show full text]
  • The Worshipful Company of Clockmakers Past Masters Since 1631
    The Worshipful Company of Clockmakers Past Masters since 1631 1631 David Ramsey (named in the Charter) 1700 Charles Gretton 1800 Matthew Dutton 1632 David Ramsey (sworn 22nd October) 1701 William Speakman 1801 William Plumley 1633 David Ramsey, represented by his Deputy, Henry Archer 1702 Joseph Windmills 1802 Edward Gibson 1634 Sampson Shelton 1703 Thomas Tompion 1803 Timothy Chisman 1635 John Willow 1704 Robert Webster 1804 William Pearce 1636 Elias Allen 1705 Benjamin Graves 1805 William Robins 1638 John Smith 1706 John Finch 1806 Francis S Perigal Jnr 1639 Sampson Shelton 1707 John Pepys 1807 Samuel Taylor 1640 John Charleton 1708 Daniel Quare 1808 Thomas Dolley 1641 John Harris 1709 George Etherington 1809 William Robson 1642 Richard Masterson 1710 Thomas Taylor 1810 Paul Philip Barraud 1643 John Harris 1711 Thomas Gibbs 1811 Paul Philip Barraud 1644 John Harris 1712 John Shaw 1812 Harry Potter (died) 1645 Edward East 1713 Sir George Mettins (Lord Mayor 1724–1725) 1813 Isaac Rogers 1646 Simon Hackett 1714 John Barrow 1814 William Robins 1647 Simon Hackett 1715 Thomas Feilder 1815 John Thwaites 1648 Robert Grinkin 1716 William Jaques 1816 William Robson 1649 Robert Grinkin 1717 Nathaniel Chamberlain 1817 John Roger Arnold 1650 Simon Bartram 1718 Thomas Windmills 1818 William Robson 1651 Simon Bartram 1719 Edward Crouch 1819 John Thwaites 1652 Edward East 1720 James Markwick 1820 John Thwaites 1653 John Nicasius 1721 Martin Jackson 1821 Benjamin Lewis Vulliamy 1654 Robert Grinkin 1722 George Graham 1822 John Jackson Jnr 1655 John Nicasius
    [Show full text]
  • Download This Article (Pdf)
    244 Trimble, JAAVSO Volume 43, 2015 As International as They Would Let Us Be Virginia Trimble Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-4575; [email protected] Received July 15, 2015; accepted August 28, 2015 Abstract Astronomy has always crossed borders, continents, and oceans. AAVSO itself has roughly half its membership residing outside the USA. In this excessively long paper, I look briefly at ancient and medieval beginnings and more extensively at the 18th and 19th centuries, plunge into the tragedies associated with World War I, and then try to say something relatively cheerful about subsequent events. Most of the people mentioned here you will have heard of before (Eratosthenes, Copernicus, Kepler, Olbers, Lockyer, Eddington…), others, just as important, perhaps not (von Zach, Gould, Argelander, Freundlich…). Division into heroes and villains is neither necessary nor possible, though some of the stories are tragic. In the end, all one can really say about astronomers’ efforts to keep open channels of communication that others wanted to choke off is, “the best we can do is the best we can do.” 1. Introduction astronomy (though some of the practitioners were actually Christian and Jewish) coincided with the largest extents of Astronomy has always been among the most international of regions governed by caliphates and other Moslem empire-like sciences. Some of the reasons are obvious. You cannot observe structures. In addition, Arabic astronomy also drew on earlier the whole sky continuously from any one place. Attempts to Greek, Persian, and Indian writings. measure geocentric parallax and to observe solar eclipses have In contrast, the Europe of the 16th century, across which required going to the ends (or anyhow the middles) of the earth.
    [Show full text]
  • One of the Most Celebrated Physics Experiments of the 20Th Cent
    Not Only Because of Theory: Dyson, Eddington and the Competing Myths of the 1919 Eclipse Expedition Introduction One of the most celebrated physics experiments of the 20th century, a century of many great breakthroughs in physics, took place on May 29th, 1919 in two remote equatorial locations. One was the town of Sobral in northern Brazil, the other the island of Principe off the west coast of Africa. The experiment in question concerned the problem of whether light rays are deflected by gravitational forces, and took the form of astrometric observations of the positions of stars near the Sun during a total solar eclipse. The expedition to observe the eclipse proved to be one of those infrequent, but recurring, moments when astronomical observations have overthrown the foundations of physics. In this case it helped replace Newton’s Law of Gravity with Einstein’s theory of General Relativity as the generally accepted fundamental theory of gravity. It also became, almost immediately, one of those uncommon occasions when a scientific endeavor captures and holds the attention of the public throughout the world. In recent decades, however, questions have been raised about possible bias and poor judgment in the analysis of the data taken on that famous day. It has been alleged that the best known astronomer involved in the expedition, Arthur Stanley Eddington, was so sure beforehand that the results would vindicate Einstein’s theory that, for unjustifiable reasons, he threw out some of the data which did not agree with his preconceptions. This story, that there was something scientifically fishy about one of the most famous examples of an experimentum crucis in the history of science, has now become well known, both amongst scientists and laypeople interested in science.
    [Show full text]
  • November 2019
    A selection of some recent arrivals November 2019 Rare and important books & manuscripts in science and medicine, by Christian Westergaard. Flæsketorvet 68 – 1711 København V – Denmark Cell: (+45)27628014 www.sophiararebooks.com AMPÈRE, André-Marie. THE FOUNDATION OF ELECTRO- DYNAMICS, INSCRIBED BY AMPÈRE AMPÈRE, Andre-Marie. Mémoires sur l’action mutuelle de deux courans électri- ques, sur celle qui existe entre un courant électrique et un aimant ou le globe terres- tre, et celle de deux aimans l’un sur l’autre. [Paris: Feugeray, 1821]. $22,500 8vo (219 x 133mm), pp. [3], 4-112 with five folding engraved plates (a few faint scattered spots). Original pink wrappers, uncut (lacking backstrip, one cord partly broken with a few leaves just holding, slightly darkened, chip to corner of upper cov- er); modern cloth box. An untouched copy in its original state. First edition, probable first issue, extremely rare and inscribed by Ampère, of this continually evolving collection of important memoirs on electrodynamics by Ampère and others. “Ampère had originally intended the collection to contain all the articles published on his theory of electrodynamics since 1820, but as he pre- pared copy new articles on the subject continued to appear, so that the fascicles, which apparently began publication in 1821, were in a constant state of revision, with at least five versions of the collection appearing between 1821 and 1823 un- der different titles” (Norman). The collection begins with ‘Mémoires sur l’action mutuelle de deux courans électriques’, Ampère’s “first great memoir on electrody- namics” (DSB), representing his first response to the demonstration on 21 April 1820 by the Danish physicist Hans Christian Oersted (1777-1851) that electric currents create magnetic fields; this had been reported by François Arago (1786- 1853) to an astonished Académie des Sciences on 4 September.
    [Show full text]
  • Frank Schlesinger 1871-1943
    NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIRS VOLUME XXIV THIRD MEMOIR BIOGRAPHICAL MEMOIR OF FRANK SCHLESINGER 1871-1943 BY DIRK BROUWER PRESENTED TO THE ACADEMY AT THE ANNUAL MEETING, 1945 FRANK SCHLESINGER 1871-1943 BY DIRK BROUWER Frank Schlesinger was born in New York City on May n, 1871. His father, William Joseph Schlesinger (1836-1880), and his mother, Mary Wagner Schlesinger (1832-1892), both natives of the German province of Silesia, had emigrated to the United States. In Silesia they had lived in neighboring vil- lages, but they did not know each other until they met in New York, in 1855, at the home of Mary's cousin. They were mar- ried in 1857 and had seven children, all of whom grew to maturity. Frank was the youngest and, after 1939, the last survivor. His father's death, in 1880, although it brought hardships to the family, was not permitted to interfere with Frank's educa- tion. He attended public school in New York City, and eventually entered the College of the City of New York, receiv- ing the degree of Bachelor of Science in 1890. His aptitude for mathematical science, already evident in grammar school, be- came more marked in the higher stages of his education when he began to show a preference for applied mathematics. Upon completing his undergraduate work it was not possible for him to continue with graduate studies. He had to support himself, and his health at that time made it desirable for him to engage in outdoor activities.
    [Show full text]
  • SOLAR ECLIPSE NEWSLETTER SOLAR ECLIPSE March 2004 NEWSLETTER
    Volume 9, Issue 3 SOLAR ECLIPSE NEWSLETTER SOLAR ECLIPSE March 2004 NEWSLETTER The sole Newsletter dedicated to Solar Eclipses INDEX 1 Picture Josch Hambsch dscn1394_crop_ps_red2 Dear All, 2 SECalendar March 8 SECalendar for March - typos Another Solar Eclipse Newsletter. It’ brings us closer to the in- 8 SECalendar for March - Data ternational Solar Eclipse Conference. The program is quite fixed 9 SEC2004 WebPages update and the registrations are coming in quickly. Many magazines 10 SENL Index February will publish and announce the conference shortly and we hope 10 Eclipse sightings 10 SENL for all of 3003 now online of course to have a sold out theatre at the Open University of 11 16 - 9 wide screen video problem Milton Keynes. Unfortunately, Jean Meeus had to cancel. He 11 Cloud cover maps suffers lately with some health problems and prefers to attend- 12 Old eclipse legends (?) ing the conference. 13 Free! Copies of NASA's 2003 eclipse bulletin 13 Delta T But even more: The Transit of Venus is due soon. The amount 14 BAA Journal web pages of messages, on the SEML and on other mailing lists, show. 14 Eclipse music Many trips are booked and of course we all hope for the best 14 Max number of Consecutive non-central annular eclipses clear skies. This event does not happen that often and we do 16 24 years ago.... not want miss it. 17 Lunar Eclipse papers 17 Saros 0 and EMAPWIN And what about the partial solar eclipse of April. A few SEML 18 Urgent - Klipsi needs photos of Klipsi subscribers will observe from the southern part of Africa and we 19 For eclipse chasers ..
    [Show full text]
  • What Einstein Did Not Consider About Gravity
    OSP Journal of Physics and Astronomy Review Article What Einstein did Not Consider about Gravity Rowland D Independent Researcher registered with ORCID Corresponding Author: David Rowland, Independent Researcher registered with ORCID, Member of Royal [email protected] Received: June 16, 2020; Accepted: June 29, 2020; Published: July 05, 2020 Astronomical Society of Canada, Canadian Association of Physicists. E-mail: Abstract physics. GR proposes that gravity is the result of a geometric distortion of four-dimensional spacetime by massive objects. TheGeneral more relativity mass that (GR) produces is the geometric gravity in theorya body, of the gravity more distortionthat has become you get. the This accepted distortion definition supposedly of gravitation changes inthe modern trajec- tories of objects moving through space and even the paths of light rays as they pass close by massive objects. - plains in detail the logical errors, false assumptions, and misinterpretation of evidence upon which GR is based. Geometric spacetimeUnfortunately, does general not exist, relativity does not is acurve, fatally and flawed cannot theory possibly that interactis a diversion with orfrom be affectedhow gravity by gravity. really works. This study ex Introduction 1. It is not possible to assign co-ordinates to the hypothetical time axis; and In 1916, Albert Einstein published his paper on General 2. Because E = mc2 does not include any time variable, there is no- Relativity, the geometric theory of gravity [1]. General rela- where said equation fits into this four-dimensional model. tivity (GR) states that the force of gravity is associated with the curving/warping of spacetime. GR has become the cur- Source of Figure 1: Wikipedia [9].
    [Show full text]
  • Harwit M. in Search of the True Universe.. the Tools, Shaping, And
    In Search of the True Universe Astrophysicist and scholar Martin Harwit examines how our understanding of the Cosmos advanced rapidly during the twentieth century and identifies the factors contributing to this progress. Astronomy, whose tools were largely imported from physics and engineering, benefited mid-century from the U.S. policy of coupling basic research with practical national priorities. This strategy, initially developed for military and industrial purposes, provided astronomy with powerful tools yielding access – at virtually no cost – to radio, infrared, X-ray, and gamma-ray observations. Today, astronomers are investigating the new frontiers of dark matter and dark energy, critical to understanding the Cosmos but of indeterminate socio-economic promise. Harwit addresses these current challenges in view of competing national priorities and proposes alternative new approaches in search of the true Universe. This is an engaging read for astrophysicists, policy makers, historians, and sociologists of science looking to learn and apply lessons from the past in gaining deeper cosmological insight. MARTIN HARWIT is an astrophysicist at the Center for Radiophysics and Space Research and Professor Emeritus of Astronomy at Cornell University. For many years he also served as Director of the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C. For much of his astrophysical career he built instruments and made pioneering observations in infrared astronomy. His advanced textbook, Astrophysical Concepts, has taught several generations of astronomers through its four editions. Harwit has had an abiding interest in how science advances or is constrained by factors beyond the control of scientists. His book Cosmic Discovery first raised these questions.
    [Show full text]
  • No Shadow of a Doubt: the 1919 Eclipse That Confirmed Einstein's
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. 1 The Experiment That Weighed Light Although Eddington and Dyson collaborated closely in organi zing the expeditions of 1919, the two expeditions remained quite separate. Two dif­fer ent En glish observatories were involved, Dyson being director of one and Eddington of the other. Conscious of the vaga- ries of the weather, they chose dif­fer ent locations and hoped that the results from each site would confirm each other. Eddington, who was then one of E ngland’s most famous astrophysicists, personally led one expedition. He took with him a Northamptonshire clock- maker named Edwin Turner Cottingham to keep their instruments in working order while Eddington himself conducted the experiment. The Royal Obervatory at Greenwich mounted the second expedi- tion. As director of that observatory, Frank Dyson sent two of his assistants, Andrew Claude de la Cherois Crommelin and Charles Rundle Davidson. They would each operate a dif fer ent instru- ment, for some further redundancy. Dyson would oversee their data analy sis after their return toE ngland. Dyson and Eddington, working together, had hatched the plan and raised the funds, and together they would reveal the results later that year at a packed 6 For general queries, contact [email protected] © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • Testing Relativity from the 1919 Eclipse— a Question of Bias Daniel Kennefick
    Testing relativity from the 1919 eclipse— a question of bias Daniel Kennefick When interpreting experimental results, context is everything. The researchers who took and analyzed the most important eclipse data had good reasons for judging the experiment a victory for Albert Einstein. Daniel Kennefick is an assistant professor of physics at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville. One of the most famous measurements in the history of Of course, it’s not possible to be certain about any recon- 20th-century astronomy was made over the course of several struction of nearly century-old experimental decisions, but I months in 1919. Teams of observers from the Greenwich and argue that the balance of evidence lies heavily in favor of the Cambridge observatories in the UK traveled to Brazil and view that the leaders of the 1919 expedition, Frank Watson western Africa to observe a total solar eclipse that took place Dyson and Eddington, had reasonable grounds for judging on 29 May 1919. Their aim was to establish whether the paths that their results were inconsistent with the prediction of of light rays were deflected in passing through the strong gravitational field of the Sun. Their observations were subse- quently presented as establishing the soundness of general relativity; that is, the observations were more consistent with the predictions of the new gravitational theory developed by Albert Einstein than with the traditional Newtonian theory. In recent decades many physicists and historians of science have cast doubt on the soundness of the famous experiment. They claim that the measurements made in 1919 were not sufficiently accurate to decide between the Einstein- ian and Newtonian theories of gravity.
    [Show full text]