I think Eddington cooked the books .

  • Thread starter DAANEL
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Books
In summary, the conversation discusses the accuracy of a telescope used by Eddington during an eclipse and whether he manipulated his results. A paper supports Eddington's findings, but there is still historical controversy and debate over the accuracy of his measurements. Today, there is strong evidence supporting the General Relativistic calculation of light deviation.
  • #1
DAANEL
1
0
Ive been viewing for years but never posted. I am curious since I use a telescope a lot whether anyone knows if Hubble has redone Eddingtons look at stars during an eclipse because looking at the numbers in his results its obvious to me that he cooked the books. With a 60 mm telescope at the equater during the day he couldn't have got the accuracy he claimed.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #2
This paper argues pretty convincingly in Eddington's favor:

http://arxiv.org/abs/0709.0685

The question is only of historical interest, because today there is a huge body of evidence supporting the General Relativistic calculation of light deviation.
 
  • #3
There is some historical controversy over Eddington's findings, but, most are . . . questionable. As phyzguy noted, GR proponents have long since scored a decisive victory in this debate.
 
  • #4
He'd need at least 200 mm to get sub-second accuracy, but daytime turbulence would kill it. With a lot of stars on each side, he could at least use statistics to cut uncertainty by factor ~sq rt N.
 
  • #5


I cannot make a statement about whether or not Eddington "cooked the books" without proper evidence and investigation. However, I can assure you that scientific results go through rigorous testing and peer review before being accepted and published. It is possible that Eddington's methods and results have been revisited and updated over the years, but I cannot comment on the specific details of his study without further information. I encourage you to continue your curiosity and research, and perhaps even reach out to the scientific community for more information on Eddington's work.
 

1. What evidence supports the claim that Eddington cooked the books?

There may be several pieces of evidence that support the claim that Eddington cooked the books. This could include discrepancies in financial records, eyewitness accounts, or other forms of documentation.

2. How would Eddington have been able to cook the books?

There are several methods that someone could use to cook the books. This could include falsifying financial records, creating fake transactions, or manipulating numbers to make profits appear higher than they actually are.

3. What are the potential consequences if Eddington did cook the books?

If it is proven that Eddington did cook the books, he could face legal consequences such as fines or imprisonment. The company could also face penalties and damage to its reputation.

4. What steps can be taken to investigate the claim that Eddington cooked the books?

An investigation into the claim can involve reviewing financial records, conducting interviews with employees and stakeholders, and seeking expert opinions from forensic accountants or auditors.

5. Is it possible that there is a logical explanation for the discrepancies in the books other than cooking the books?

Yes, there could be other explanations for the discrepancies in the books. It is important to thoroughly investigate and consider all possibilities before reaching a conclusion.

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
613
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
47
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
1
Views
4K
Back
Top