Changes

Eddington's observation protocol was somewhat muddled by an incorrect initial calculation, by several people including Einstein himself, of what the effect would be, and some "cherry picking" of the data to be used <ref name="waller">''Einstein's Luck'', John Waller, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-860719-9</ref><ref>[http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0102462 Peter Coles (University of Nottingham, UK): ''"Einstein, Eddington and the 1919 Eclipse"'']</ref>.  The data selection could be considered "manipulation" or "fudging", by Eddington, who had a personal stake in the outcome.  His analysis techniques would not pass muster today.  Nevertheless, the deflection has been verified with ever-increasing precision in subsequent eclipses, and, with exquisite precision, in the observations of quasar 3C273.

Eddington's observation protocol was somewhat muddled by an incorrect initial calculation, by several people including Einstein himself, of what the effect would be, and some "cherry picking" of the data to be used <ref name="waller">''Einstein's Luck'', John Waller, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-860719-9</ref><ref>[http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0102462 Peter Coles (University of Nottingham, UK): ''"Einstein, Eddington and the 1919 Eclipse"'']</ref>.  The data selection could be considered "manipulation" or "fudging", by Eddington, who had a personal stake in the outcome.  His analysis techniques would not pass muster today.  Nevertheless, the deflection has been verified with ever-increasing precision in subsequent eclipses, and, with exquisite precision, in the observations of quasar 3C273.

Eddington next promoted the theory of relativity to the English-speaking world in his ''Mathematical Theory of Relativity'' (1923).  As the title suggests, this theory was more a mathematical vision of how the universe should be, rather than what it actually was.  When a reporter asked Eddington whether only three people even understood the theory, Eddington supposedly arrogantly retorted, "Who's the third?"

 

Eddington spent much of his career promoting relativity, and particularly general relativity, to the English-speaking scientific community.  He was a very popular and respected writer and lecturer.  General relativity was so abstruse at the time (it still is, though much less so) that even the leading scientists didn't understand it.  His 1923 book ''The Mathematical Theory of Relativity''<ref>''The Mathematical Theory of Relativity'', Arthur Eddington, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-19-860719-9</ref> was a major undertaking in this regard.

 

He also participated in many scientific lectures and colloquia.  There is an anecdote<ref name="waller"/> (sources differ on whether it is apocryphal) about an exchange during a lecture that he gave in 1919 at the Royal Society on the topic of general relativity.  An audience member, Ludvig Silberstein, suggested to him "Professor Eddington, you must be one of three persons in the world who understands general relativity."  Silberstein was presumably thinking of himself, Eddington, and Einstein.  Eddington paused for a moment.  Silberstein then said "Don't be modest, Eddington!"  Eddington replied "I'm trying to think who is the third."

But Eddington did not fare well after that.  He strongly opposed a theory about massive [[star]]s known as [[white dwarf|white dwarves]] put forth by Indian physicist Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, but Eddington was proven wrong and Chandrasekhar later won a Nobel Prize for his work.  Eddington finally lost all credibility when he first insisted that a physical constant (the fine structure constant) measured to be close to 1/136 must precisely equal 1/136 to make the math easier, but when later measurements suggested a value closer to 1/137 Eddington insisted that it must precisely equal to 1/137 instead.  He was wrong both times.

But Eddington did not fare well after that.  He strongly opposed a theory about massive [[star]]s known as [[white dwarf|white dwarves]] put forth by Indian physicist Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, but Eddington was proven wrong and Chandrasekhar later won a Nobel Prize for his work.  Eddington finally lost all credibility when he first insisted that a physical constant (the fine structure constant) measured to be close to 1/136 must precisely equal 1/136 to make the math easier, but when later measurements suggested a value closer to 1/137 Eddington insisted that it must precisely equal to 1/137 instead.  He was wrong both times.