Eddington, Lemaitre and the hypothesis of cosmic expansion

Cormac O'Raifeartaigh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1907.12297

2020-06-06

Abstract:Arthur Stanley Eddington was one of the leading astronomers and theorists of his generation and a prominent proponent of the general theory of relativity. Yet when his former assistant Georges Lemaitre sent him a paper in 1927 suggesting that the well-known redshifts of the spiral nebulae might be a manifestation of a cosmic expansion predicted by relativity, Eddington paid no attention for three years. In this paper, we consider the reasons for this oversight. We find that conventional explanations (such as Lemaitre's status as a relatively junior researcher and his decision to publish in a lesser-known Belgian journal) do not convince. We propose an alternative explanation that has not been considered in the literature - namely that the observational data cited by Lemaitre in support of his model were of a preliminary nature and would not have been sufficiently convincing for Eddington and others to consider non-static cosmologies.

History and Philosophy of Physics,Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is: Why did Arthur Stanley Eddington and other scientists not attach importance to Georges Lemaître's work when the hypothesis of the expansion of the universe was first proposed in 1927, but began to pay attention to this theory only a few years later?

Specifically, the paper explores the following points:

1. **Historical background**:
- In 1927, Lemaître proposed the hypothesis of the expansion of the universe in his article and believed that this phenomenon could explain the redshift of spiral nebulae.
- Eddington was an authority in the fields of relativity and astronomy. He received a copy of Lemaître's article in 1927, but did not pay attention to it at that time.

2. **Traditional explanations**:
- **Status of the researcher**: Some people think that Lemaître was a relatively young scientific researcher at that time, so his work was not highly valued.
- **Status of the journal**: Some people think that Lemaître's article was published in a relatively unknown Belgian journal, resulting in its limited influence.
- **Language problem**: Some people think that the article was published in French, which may have affected the understanding of English - speaking readers.

3. **New explanation**:
- The paper proposes a new explanation: The astronomical data used by Lemaître in 1927 were not robust enough to make Eddington and other scientists take his model seriously. In particular, Lemaître used the method based on apparent magnitude to estimate the distance of nebulae, and this method has a large error.

4. **Supporting evidence**:
- Lemaître's later actions and statements also showed that he himself had reservations about the 1927 data. For example, in the 1931 translation version, he deleted the original data part and only retained a brief summary.

5. **Conclusion**:
- The paper believes that the main reason why Eddington and other scientists ignored Lemaître's hypothesis of the expansion of the universe in 1927 was that the supporting data at that time were not reliable enough. It was not until more accurate data emerged later that they began to attach importance to this theory.

Through these analyses, the paper reveals the relationship between the quality of data and the degree of acceptance by scientists in the process of scientific discovery.