Changes

Eddington mounted two expeditions, with the best equipment available, to observe the solar eclipse of May 29, 1919.  One team went to Sobral, Brazil, and the other went to the island of Principe, off the African coast.  Upon his return, Eddington presented his observations, that he had successfully measured a deflection in the amount of Einstein's 1.75 arc-seconds, to the Royal Society, as a validation of the theory of relativity.

Eddington mounted two expeditions, with the best equipment available, to observe the solar eclipse of May 29, 1919.  One team went to Sobral, Brazil, and the other went to the island of Principe, off the African coast.  Upon his return, Eddington presented his observations, that he had successfully measured a deflection in the amount of Einstein's 1.75 arc-seconds, to the Royal Society, as a validation of the theory of relativity.

Recent analysis of Eddington’s work revealed that he was biased in selecting his data, and that overall his data were inconclusive about the theory of relativity.<ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0102462</ref>  Modern techniques for analyzing data from experiments involves extremely careful statistical analysis of the data, and generally demands a "5 sigma" level of statistical certainty, which means that there is only a one-in-three-million chance that the measurements came out that way by chance rather than by the phenomenon being measured.

Recent analysis of Eddington’s work revealed that he was biased in selecting his data, and that overall his data were inconclusive about the theory of relativity.<ref>https://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0102462</ref>  Modern techniques for analyzing data from experiments involves extremely careful statistical analysis of the data, and generally demands a "5 sigma" level of statistical certainty, which means that there is only a one-in-three-million chance that the measurements came out that way by chance rather than by the phenomenon being measured.

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>[https://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.

    

    

==Promotion of General Relativity, and the "Who is the Third?" Anecdote==

==Promotion of General Relativity, and the "Who is the Third?" Anecdote==