Stellar movements and working hypotheses: A.S. Eddington’s early astronomical career
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arthur Stanley Eddington (1882–1944) was one of the leading astrophysicists of the first half of the 20th century. He is remembered today chiefly for his research into stellar structure and general relativity, both of which he began to explore in the mid-1910s. He was also a key participant in the famous eclipse expeditions of 1919 that tested Einstein’s theory of gravity. Rather than consider these topics, in this paper I will instead examine Eddington’s early astronomical career, that is, from 1906 to about 1915. In this period, he became a well-trained practical astronomer. Eddington also established himself as a brilliant theoretical astronomer, and in so doing helped to create the role of theoretical astrophysicist through his research into star streaming. He was also, unusually for astronomers of this period, an enthusiastic advocate of the use of “working hypotheses” as crucial tools in astronomical practice. The study of Eddington’s early career therefore has much to tell us about the nature of astronomy in the years around 1910 and about Eddington. The paper underlines, for example, the continuing relevance of the “Greenwich-Cambridge Axis” for the power structure of British astronomy, and the importance of the so-called Sidereal Problem for astronomers at this time even though today it is largely forgotten.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".