From Newton to Einstein - Benjamin Harrow (fox in socks read aloud txt) 📗

Sir Frank Dyson
the Astronomer Royal

The purpose of the expedition was to determine whether any displacement is caused to a ray of light by the gravitational field of the sun, and if so, the amount of the displacement. Einstein’s theory predicted a displacement varying inversely as the distance of the ray from the sun’s center, amounting to 1″.75 for a star seen just grazing the sun.…

A study of the conditions of the 1919 eclipse showed that the sun would be very favorably placed among a group of bright stars—in fact, it would be in the most favorable possible position. A study of the conditions at various points on the path of the eclipse, in which Mr. Hinks helped us, pointed to Sobral, in Brazil, and Principe, an island off the west coast of Africa, as the most favorable stations.…

The Greenwich party, Dr. Crommelin and Mr. Davidson, reached Brazil in ample time to prepare for the eclipse, and the usual preliminary focusing by photographing stellar fields was carried out. The day of the eclipse opened cloudy, but cleared later, and the observations were carried out with almost complete success. With the astrographic telescope Mr. Davidson secured 15 out of 18 photographs showing the required stellar images. Totality lasted 6 minutes, and the average exposure of the plates was 5 to 6 seconds. Dr. Crommelin with the other lens had 7 successful plates out of 8. The unsuccessful plates were spoiled for this purpose by the clouds, but show the remarkable prominence very well.

When the plates were developed the astrographic images were found to be out of focus. This is attributed to the effect of the sun’s heat on the coelostat mirror. The images were fuzzy and quite different from those on the check-plates secured at night before and after the eclipse. Fortunately the mirror which fed the 4-inch lens was not affected, and the star images secured with this lens were good and similar to those got by the night-plates. The observers stayed on in Brazil until July to secure the field in the night sky at the altitude of the eclipse epoch and under identical instrumental conditions.

The plates were measured at Greenwich immediately after the observers’ return. Each plate was measured twice over by Messrs. Davidson and Furner, and I am satisfied that such faults as lie in the results are in the plates themselves and not in the measures. The figures obtained may be briefly summarized as follows: The astrographic plates gave 0″.97 for the displacement at the limb when the scale-value was determined from the plates themselves, and 1″.40 when the scale-value was assumed from the check plates. But the much better plates gave for the displacement at the limb 1″.98, Einstein’s predicted value being 1″.75. Further, for these plates the agreement was all that could be expected.…

After a careful study of the plates I am prepared to say that there can be no doubt that they confirm Einstein’s prediction. A very definite result has been obtained that light is deflected according to Einstein’s law of gravitation.

Professor A. S. Eddington
Royal Observatory

Mr. Cottingham and I left the other observers at Madeira and arrived at Principe on April 23.… We soon realized that the prospect of a clear sky at the end of May was not very good. Not even a heavy thunderstorm on the morning of the eclipse, three weeks after the end of the wet season, saved the situation. The sky was completely cloudy at first contact, but about half an hour before totality we began to see glimpses of the sun’s crescent through the clouds. We carried out our program exactly as arranged, and the sky must have been clearer towards the end of totality. Of the 16 plates taken during the five minutes of totality the first ten showed no stars at all; of the later plates two showed five stars each, from which a result could be obtained. Comparing them with the check-plates secured at Oxford before we went out, we obtained as the final result from the two plates for the value of the displacement of the limb 1″.6 ± 0.3.… This result supports the figures obtained at Sobral.…

I will pass now to a few words on the meaning of the result. It points to the larger of the two possible values of the deflection. The simplest interpretation of the bending of the ray is to consider it as an effect of the weight of light. We know that momentum is carried along on the path of a beam of light. Gravity in acting creates momentum in a direction different from that of the path of the ray and so causes it to bend. For the half-effect we have to assume that gravity obeys Newton’s law; for the full effect which has been obtained we must assume that gravity obeys the new law proposed by Einstein. This is one of the most crucial tests between Newton’s law and the proposed new law. Einstein’s law had already indicated a perturbation, causing the orbit of Mercury to revolve. That confirms it for relatively small velocities. Going to the limit, where the speed is that of light, the perturbation is increased in such a way as to double the curvature of the path, and this is now confirmed.

This effect may be taken as proving Einstein’s law rather than his theory. It is not affected by the failure to detect the displacement of Fraunhofer lines on the sun. If this latter failure is confirmed it will not affect Einstein’s law of gravitation, but it will affect the views on which the law was arrived at. The law is right, though the fundamental ideas underlying it may yet be questioned.…

One further point must be touched upon. Are we to attribute the displacement to the gravitational field and not to the refracting matter around the sun? The refractive index required to produce the result at a distance of 15′ from the sun would be that given by gases at a pressure of 1⁄60​ to 1⁄200​ of an atmosphere. This is of too great a density considering the depth through which the light would have to pass.

Sir J. J. Thomson
President of the Royal Society

… If the results obtained had been only that light was affected by gravitation, it would have been of the greatest importance. Newton, did, in fact, suggest this very point in his “Optics,” and his suggestion would presumably have led to the half-value. But this result is not an isolated one; it is part of a whole continent of scientific ideas affecting the most fundamental concepts of physics.… This is the most important result obtained in connection with the theory of gravitation since Newton’s day, and it is fitting that it should be announced at a meeting of the society so closely connected with him.

The difference between the laws of gravitation of Einstein and Newton come only in special cases. The real interest of Einstein’s theory lies not so much in his results as in the method by which he gets them. If his theory is right, it makes us take an entirely new view of gravitation. If it is sustained that Einstein’s reasoning holds good—and it has survived two very severe tests in connection with the perihelion of mercury and the present eclipse—then it is the result of one of the highest achievements of human thought. The weak point in the theory is the great difficulty in expressing it. It would seem that no one can understand the new law of gravitation without a thorough knowledge of the theory of invariants and of the calculus of variations.

One other point of physical interest arises from the discussion. Light is deflected in passing near huge bodies of matter. This involves alterations in the electric and magnetic field. This, again, implies the existence of electric and magnetic forces outside matter—forces at present unknown, though some idea of their nature may be got from the results of this expedition.