The 1919 eclipse results which verified General Relativity and their later detractors: a story re-told

TL;DR

This paper revisits the 1919 eclipse measurements that confirmed Einstein's General Relativity, addressing past criticisms and clarifying the validity of the original data analysis.

Contribution

It provides a reanalysis of the 1919 data, identifying errors in previous critiques that questioned the original results' validity.

Findings

The original 1919 data supports Einstein's prediction.

Previous critiques contained analytical errors.

The 1919 results remain valid in confirming General Relativity.

Abstract

Einstein became world-famous on 7 November 1919, following press publication of a meeting held in London on 6 November 1919 where the results were announced of two British expeditions led by Eddington, Dyson and Davidson to measure how much background starlight is bent as it passes the Sun. Three data sets were obtained: two showed the measured deflection matched the theoretical prediction of Einstein's 1915 Theory of General Relativity, and became the official result; the third was discarded as defective. At the time, the experimental result was accepted by the expert astronomical community. However, in 1980 a study by philosophers of science Earman and Glymour claimed that the data selection in the 1919 analysis was flawed and that the discarded data set was fully valid and was not consistent with the Einstein prediction, and that, therefore, the overall result did not verify General Relativity. This claim, and the resulting accusation of Eddington's bias, was repeated with exaggeration in later literature, and has become ubiquitous. The 1919 and 1980 analyses of the same data provide two discordant conclusions. We reanalyse the 1919 data, and identify the error that undermines the conclusions of Earman and Glymour.