/
Article

Chandrasekhar vs. Eddington—an unanticipated confrontation

OCT 01, 1982
For many years astronomers did not accept the validity of a young scientist’s application of the new physics because it was ridiculed by a preeminent astronomer.
Kameshwar C. Wali

Stellar evolution has for many years been one of the most exciting fields of research in astronomy and astrophysics. In the early 1930s, a young astrophysicist named Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar certainly felt this excitement when in his theoretical work he found a fundamental parameter that determines the destiny of stars. By appling both relativity and the new quantum mechanics, Chandrasekhar found a critical mass, below which stars end up as white dwarfs, and above which, as later work would show, they end up as neutron stars or black holes.

This article is only available in PDF format

References

  1. 1. See, for instance, S. Chandrasekhar, Am. J. Phys. 37, 577 (1969); https://doi.org/AJPIAS
    S. Chandrasekhar, Observatory 92, 160 (1972); https://doi.org/OBSEAR
    and interview of S. Chandrasekhar by S. Weart, AIP Niels Bohr Library, 1977, 162 pages.

  2. 2. R. H. Fowler, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 87, 114 (1926).

  3. 3. S. Chandrasekhar, Phil. Mag. 11, 592, 594 (1931).

  4. 4. S. Chandrasekhar, Z. Astrophys. 5, 321 (1932). https://doi.org/ZEASAJ
    Von Wilhelm Anderson and Edmund Clifton Stoner had independently considered relativistic effects on electron degeneracy. Their work implied the existence of a limiting mass. See, for example, E. C. Stoner, Phil. Mag. 9, 944 (1930). It was Chandrasekhar, however, who obtained a unique value for the critical mass by using the equation of state in conjunction with polytropic theory.

  5. 5. These and other excerpts are from conversations with Chandrasekhar.

  6. 6. Observatory 58, 37 (1935).https://doi.org/OBSEAR

  7. 7. Letter from W. H. McCrea, November 1979, in response to my request for his recollections and comments.

  8. 8. The ensuing excerpts are from correspondence between Chandrasekhar and Rosenfeld between January and July 1935.

  9. 9. S. Chandrasekhar, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 91, 456 (1931);
    S. Chandrasekhar, Astrophys. J. 74, 81 (1931).

  10. 10. S. Chandrasekhar, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 95, 219 (1935).

More about the authors

Kameshwar C. Wali, Syracuse University, New York.

Related content
/
Article
An interview with a prominent member of the Marshallese diaspora delves into the ongoing impact of aboveground US nuclear weapons testing in the Pacific archipelago.
/
Article
Detecting quantum particles of gravity was long considered hopeless. A new perspective, which takes advantage of quantum technologies, suggests that an experimental realization may be closer than previously thought.
/
Article
As higher-education programs compete for a shrinking pool of students, departments must better communicate the value that a physics major brings.
/
Article
Three physicists give a firsthand account of disarmament efforts in the 1980s and 1990s.
This Content Appeared In
pt-cover_1982_10.jpeg

Volume 35, Number 10

Get PT newsletters in your inbox

pt_newsletter_card_blue.png
PT The Week in Physics

A collection of PT's content from the previous week delivered every Monday.

pt_newsletter_card_darkblue.png
PT New Issue Alert

Be notified about the new issue with links to highlights and the full TOC.

pt_newsletter_card_pink.png
PT Webinars & White Papers

The latest webinars, white papers and other informational resources.

By signing up you agree to allow AIP to send you email newsletters. You further agree to our privacy policy and terms of service.