Skip to main content
Book cover

The Renaissance of General Relativity in Context pp 257–284Cite as

Birkhäuser

Closing in on the Cosmos: Cosmology’s Rebirth and the Rise of the Dark Matter Problem

  • Chapter

Part of the Einstein Studies book series (EINSTEIN,volume 16)

Abstract

Influenced by the renaissance of general relativity that came to pass in the 1950s, the character of cosmology fundamentally changed in the 1960s as it became a well-established empirical science. Although observations went to dominate its practice, extra-theoretical beliefs and principles reminiscent of methodological debates in the 1950s kept playing an important tacit role in cosmological considerations. Specifically, belief in cosmologies that modeled a “closed universe” based on Machian insights remained influential. The rise of the dark matter problem in the early 1970s serves to illustrate this hybrid methodological character of cosmological science.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-50754-1_8
  • Chapter length: 28 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-50754-1
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For an overview of the physics, see, e.g., Bertone et al. (2005), Bertone (2010), and Bertone and Tait (2018).

  2. 2.

    Contributions to methodological discussions on inflation, string theory, and the multiverse often emphasize either empirical data or deductive thought. For this opposition, see, e.g., Ellis and Silk (2014).

  3. 3.

    For broader overviews of the history of cosmology in the second half of the twentieth century, see in particular North (1965), Kragh (1996, 2006), Smeenk (2003), and Longair (2013).

  4. 4.

    Note that the idea of an expanding universe did not intrinsically involve the hypothesis of a cosmic origin or what was known as Lemaître’s “primeval-atom” hypothesis. This idea was mainly celebrated by Lemaître and Gamov, but it was no integral part of relativistic cosmology at that time. Furthermore, note that the name “relativistic cosmology” is very much a convention. Some form of relativity was necessarily used in all cosmologies (cf. McCrea 1953, 350). For a detailed exposé on early relativistic cosmology, see especially Kragh (1996).

  5. 5.

    After the revision of the Hubble constant by Baade in 1952, the mentioned time-scale problem became less problematic for relativistic cosmology, although it did not fully disappear. See also Bondi (1952, 140).

  6. 6.

    Helge Kragh has treated the details of these discussions in his 1996 book (Kragh 1996, 219–251). Much of the tensions of the methodological debates in 1950s cosmology are rooted in early debates from the 1930s. See, e.g., Gale and Urani (1999).

  7. 7.

    Many authors used different terminology for these two styles. William McCrea, for example, wrote about “deductive” and “astrophysical” attitudes in cosmology (McCrea 1953, 332).

  8. 8.

    As with many physical concepts, the exact formulation of the cosmological principle differed between authors. Dennis Sciama formulated the cosmological principle as “[e]ach particle always sees an isotropic distribution of particles around it” (Sciama 1960, 312). McVittie put it slightly differently: “[t]he development of the universe appears to be the same for each observer of an equivalent set, every one of whom assigns co-ordinates by the same method” (McVittie 1952, 96).

  9. 9.

    In a review of cosmology in 1953, McCrea wrote: “All the theories to be discussed require their models to conform to the cosmological principle (CP), though we shall see that they do so for somewhat different reasons” (McCrea 1953, 326).

  10. 10.

    See Milne (1935). In 1958 Lemaître stated: “As far as I can see, the inclination to rely on an a priori principle is related to Leibnitz [sic] philosophical attitude which made him to believe that there is some esthetical design in the Universe or even that the Universe is determined as being the best possible one” (Lemaitre 1958, 2).

  11. 11.

    See Peebles (2017) for an elaborate historical overview of the history of experimental gravitational physics. For more on the history of gravitational waves during that period, see Blum et al. (2018).

  12. 12.

    See also, e.g., Eisenstaedt (2006) and Lalli (2017).

  13. 13.

    For a comprehensive overview of the genesis of general relativity, see Renn (2007a). For an in-depth discussion of Einstein’s methodology and its development, see van Dongen (2010).

  14. 14.

    Many elaborate studies have been done on Mach’s principle, its general importance, and its role in the theory of general relativity. See specifically Barbour and Pfister (1995). The writing of a longue durée history of the principle seems to have not yet been attempted.

  15. 15.

    Einstein was the first who had formulated Mach’s ideas on inertia as a “principle” (Einstein 1918, 16).

  16. 16.

    For the role of Mach’s principle in the development of general relativity, see, e.g., Hoefer (1994), Renn (2007b), Barbour (2007), Lehmkuhl (2014), and Janssen (2014).

  17. 17.

    There were many different and more technical definitions of Machian ideas. See Goenner (1970) and references therein for examples of the use of “Mach’s principle” and “Machian” in the 1950s and 1960s. For a pre-1950s definition of Mach’s principle, see, e.g., Robertson (1933).

  18. 18.

    See, e.g., Dicke (1959, 1962) and for experimental test also Cocconi and Salpeter (1960) and Dicke (1961). For a historical overview of Dicke’s important work, see Peebles (2017).

  19. 19.

    For example, Bondi wrote that “[f]or in any theory which contemplates a changing universe, explicit and implicit assumptions must be made about the interactions between distant matter and local physical laws. These assumptions are necessarily of a highly arbitrary nature, and progress on such a basis can only be indefinite and uncertain. […] If the uniformity of the universe is sufficiently great none of these difficulties arise” (Bondi 1952, 12).

  20. 20.

    As both Chris Smeenk (2014) and Carl Hoefer (1995) have clearly spelled out, Einstein first tried to use Mach’s statement as a boundary condition to the field equations. Later, in his 1917 cosmology paper, he had turned away from this perspective. Instead, he used the fact that a spatially closed universe has no boundary region. Einstein noted: “[f]or if it were possible to regard the universe as a continuum which is finite (closed) with respect to its spatial dimensions, we should have no need at all of any such boundary conditions” (Einstein 1987, 427). For an in-depth discussion of Einstein’s 1917 paper, see O’Raifeartaigh et al. (2017).

  21. 21.

    For more information on whether general relativity is Machian, see e.g., Dicke (1962) and more generally (Barbour and Pfister 1995) and references found in footnote 16.

  22. 22.

    These catalogues include Zwicky et al. (1961), Vorontsov-Velyaminov et al. (1962), and Arp (1966).

  23. 23.

    In 1957, George Abell wrote that “[p]rior to 1949, only a few dozen clusters were known. […] In recent years, however, two independent photographic programs have indicated that clusters of galaxies are far more numerous than was formerly thought, and that indeed they may be fundamental condensations of matter in the universe” (Abell 1957, 3).

  24. 24.

    For the radio catalogues, see Edge et al. (1959) and Bennett and Smith (1962). See also (Sciama 1971a, 49–82).

  25. 25.

    National Research Council (1973, 327).

  26. 26.

    National Research Council (1972, 55–56); National Research Council (1973, 332).

  27. 27.

    National Research Council (1973, 337). David Kaiser (2002) has in great detail written about the case of manpower in American physics after World War II.

  28. 28.

    More examples of textbooks are Robertson and Noonan’s “Relativity and Cosmology” (1968), Wolfgang Rindler’s “Essential Relativity: Special, General, and Cosmological” (1969), and Zeldovich and Novikov’s “Relativistic Astrophysics: Stars and Relativity” (1971).

  29. 29.

    National Research Council (1973, 349).

  30. 30.

    National Research Council (1972, 60).

  31. 31.

    This notion is related, although distinct, from what Blum et al. call “the astrophysical turn of general relativity” (Blum et al. 2018, 8). They introduce this term to signify the refocusing of the research agendas of relativists because of the astronomical discoveries of the 1960s. What I try to describe here with a “cosmological turn” is aimed to be more inclusive: it is the change during the 1960s, in which astronomical practices more generally – and not just relativity scholars – turned toward understanding the structure and evolution of the universe.

  32. 32.

    Merleau-Ponty and Morando (1976) seem to use two interpretations of “The Rebirth of Cosmology,” the title of their book: either as one of both cosmological revolutions instigated by Newton and Einstein or in the sense of the narrower period in which cosmology had transformed to be the frontier of science by 1976. I use it in the latter sense.

  33. 33.

    In the 1950s Ryle noted “[c]osmologists always lived in a happy state of being able to postulate theories which had no chance of being disproved […]” (Ryle quoted in Kragh 1996, 309).

  34. 34.

    “Press Release: The 1974 Nobel Prize in Physics.” https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1974/press-release/. Accessed 30 Jan 2018. For more on the curious relationship between the Nobel Prize and the astronomical sciences, see Kragh (2017).

  35. 35.

    In a universe without a cosmological constant, q 0 and ρ are directly related by the equation ρ∕ρ c = 2q 0, with ρ c the critical density.

  36. 36.

    See, e.g., Oort (1958), Peebles (1971), Shapiro (1971), Noonan (1971), Weinberg (1972, 478), and Burbidge (1972, 493). The critical density is \(\rho _c = \frac {3 H^2}{8\pi G} \sim 10^{-29}\) gr. cm−3.

  37. 37.

    J. Richard Gott received a Ph.D. in 1973, Jim Gunn in 1966, David Schramm in 1971, and Beatrice Tinsley in 1966.

  38. 38.

    In a 1972 review, George Field wrote that “[t]he main interest in IGM [inter-galactic matter] stems from the evidence that galactic matter constitutes only a small fraction of the critical cosmological density of matter and energy […]” (Field 1972, 227–228).

  39. 39.

    For examples of these radio-astronomical studies, see, e.g., Roberts and Rots (1973); Rogstad and Shostak (1972); Rogstad et al. (1973). Influential optical studies were also done by Freeman (1970) and Rubin and Ford (1970).

  40. 40.

    Important overviews of the problematic dynamics of clusters include Neyman et al. (1961), Page (1967), Rood et al. (1970), and Field and Saslaw (1971). The cluster problem was first remarked by Fritz Zwicky (1933).

  41. 41.

    Note that it was even the case that a tenfold increase in galactic masses for the authors meant that “observations may be consistent” with a hundredfold increase in the universe mass density (from 0.01 to 1).

References

  • Abell, G.O. 1957. The distribution of rich clusters of galaxies. Ph.D. thesis, Pasadena: California Institute of Technology. https://thesis.library.caltech.edu/1581/1/Abell_GO_1957.pdf

  • ———. 1959. The national geographic society: Palomar observatory sky survey. Astronomical Society of the Pacific Leaflets 8(366): 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arp, H. 1966. Atlas of peculiar galaxies. The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 14: 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baade, W. 1956. The period-luminosity relation of the Cepheids. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 68: 5–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbour, J.B. 2007. Einstein and Mach’s principle. In The genesis of general relativity, ed. M. Janssen, J. Norton, J. Renn, T. Sauer, and J. Stachel, 1492–1527. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barbour, J.B., and H. Pfister, eds. 1995. Mach’s principle: From Newton’s bucket to quantum gravity. Boston: Birkhauser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, A.S., and F.G. Smith. 1962. The preparation of the revised 3C catalogue of radio sources. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 125(1): 75–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, P.G. 1957. Summary of the Chapel Hill conference. Reviews of Modern Physics 29(3): 352–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertone, G., ed. 2010. Particle dark matter: Observations, models and searches. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertone, G., and T.M.P. Tait. 2018. A new era in the search for dark matter. Nature 562(7725): 51–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertone, G., D. Hooper, and J. Silk. 2005. Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints. Physics Reports 405(5–6): 279–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum, A., D. Giulini, R. Lalli, and J. Renn. 2017. Editorial introduction to the special issue “The renaissance of Einstein’s theory of gravitation”. The European Physical Journal H 42(2): 95–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blum, A., R. Lalli, and J. Renn. 2015. The reinvention of general relativity: A historiographical framework for assessing one hundred years of curved space-time. Isis 106(3): 598–620.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. The renaissance of general relativity: How and why it happened. Annalen der Physik 528(5): 344–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2018. Gravitational waves and the long relativity revolution. Nature Astronomy 2(7): 534–543.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bondi, H. 1952. Cosmology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bondi, H., and T. Gold. 1948. The steady-state theory of the expanding universe. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 108(3): 252–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brans, C., and R.H. Dicke. 1961. Mach’s principle and a relativistic theory of gravitation. Physical Review 124(3): 925–935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burbidge, G.R. 1972. Intergalactic matter and radiation (survey lecture). In External galaxies and quasi-stellar objects, proceedings from IAU symposium no. 44 held in Uppsala, Sweden, 10–14 Aug 1970, ed. D.S. Evans, D. Wills, and B.J. Wills, 492–517. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cocconi, G., and E.E. Salpeter. 1960. Upper limit for the anisotropy of inertia from the Mössbauer effect. Physical Review Letters 4(4): 176–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Currie, A. 2015. Marsupial lions and methodological omnivory: Function, success and reconstruction in paleobiology. Biology & Philosophy 30(2): 187–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Swart, J.G., G. Bertone, and J. van Dongen. 2017. How dark matter came to matter. Nature Astronomy 1(3): 0059.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dicke, R.H. 1959. New research on old gravitation. Science 129: 621–624.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1961. Experimental tests of Mach’s principle. Physical Review Letters 7(9): 359–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1962. Mach’s principle and equivalence. In Proceedings of the international school of physics Enrico Fermi XX: Evidence for gravitational theories. Held between June 19 and July 1 in Verenna, ed. C. Møller, 264. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1964. Remarks on the observational basis of general relativity. In Gravitation and relativity, ed. H.-Y. Chiu, and W.F. Hoffman, 1–16. New York: W.A. Benjamin, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dingle, H. 1956. Cosmology and science. Scientific American 195(3): 224–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edge, D.O., J.R. Shakeshaft, W.B. McAdam, J.E. Baldwin, and S. Archer. 1959. A survey of radio sources at a frequency of 159 Mc/s. Memoirs of the Royal Astronomical Society 68: 37–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Einasto, J., A. Kaasik, and E. Saar. 1974a. Dynamic evidence on massive coronas of galaxies. Nature 250(5464): 309–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1974b. Dynamical evidence on massive coronas of galaxies. Tartu Astrofüüs. Obs. Preprint 1: 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, A. 1918. Prinzipielles zur allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie. Annalen der Physik 360(4): 241–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1922. The meaning of relativity. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1987. Cosmological considerations in the general theory of relativity. In The collected papers of Albert Einstein, vol. 6: The Berlin years: Writings, 1914–1917 (English translation supplement), ed. M.J. Klein, A. J Kox, and R. Schulman, 421–431. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Einstein, A., and W. de Sitter. 1932. On the relation between the expansion and the mean density of the universe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 18: 1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenstaedt, J. 1986. La relativité générate á l’étiage: 1925–1955. Archive for History of Exact Sciences 35: 115–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1987. Trajectoires et impasses de la solution de Schwarzschild. Archive for History of Exact Sciences 37: 275–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1989. The low water mark of general relativity, 1925–1955. In Einstein and the history of general relativity, ed. D. Howard, and J. Stachel, 277–292. Boston: Birkhäuser.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. The curious history of relativity: How Einstein’s theory of gravity was lost and found again. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, G., and J. Silk. 2014. Scientific method: Defend the integrity of physics. Nature 516(7531): 321–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, G.B. 1972. Intergalactic matter. Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 10(1): 227–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, G.B., and W.C. Saslaw. 1971. Groups of galaxies: Hidden mass or quick disintegration? The Astrophysical Journal 170: 199–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, K.C. 1970. On the disks of spiral and S0 galaxies. Astrophysical Journal 160: 811–830.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gale, G., and J. Urani. 1999. Milne, Bondi, and the ‘second way’ to cosmology. In The expanding worlds of general relativity, ed. H. Goenner, J. Renn, J. Ritter, and T. Sauer, 343–375. Boston: Birkhäuser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goenner, H. 1970. Mach’s principle and Einstein’s theory of gravitation. In Ernst Mach: Physicist and Philosopher, ed. R.S. Cohen, and R.J. Seeger, 200–215. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold, T. 1956. Cosmology. Vistas in Astronomy 2: 1721–1726.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1965. After-dinner speech. In Quasi-stellar sources and gravitational collapse: Proceedings of the 1st Texas symposium on relativistic astrophysics, ed. I. Robinson, A. Schild, and E.L. Schucking, 470. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gott, J.R.I., J.E. Gunn, D.N. Schramm, and B.M. Tinsley. 1974. An unbound universe. The Astrophysical Journal 194: 543–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, B.K., K.S. Thorne, M. Wakano, and J.A. Wheeler. 1965. Gravitation theory and gravitational collapse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawking, S.W., and G.F.R. Ellis. 1973. The large-scale structure of space-time. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoefer, C. 1994. Einstein’s struggle for a Machian gravitation theory. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 25(3): 287–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1995. Einstein’s formulations of Mach’s principle. In Mach’s principle: From Newton’s bucket to quantum gravity, ed. J.B. Barbour, and H. Pfister, 67–90. Boston: Birkhauser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoyle, F. 1948. A new model for the expanding universe. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 108(5): 372–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1949. On the cosmological problem. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 109(3): 365–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humason, M.L., N.U. Mayall, and A.R. Sandage. 1956. Redshifts and magnitudes of extragalactic nebulae. The Astronomical Journal 61(3): 97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ijjas, A., P.J. Steinhardt, and A. Loeb. 2017. Pop goes the universe. Scientific American 316(2): 32–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, M. 2014. “No success like failure…” Einstein’s quest for general relativity, 1907–1920. In The Cambridge companion to Einstein, ed. M. Janssen, and C. Lehner, 167–227. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, D. 2002. Cold War requisitions, scientific manpower, and the production of American physicists after World War II. Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences 33(1): 131–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kragh, H. 1996. Cosmology and controversy: The historical development of two theories of the universe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1999. Steady state cosmology and general relativity: Reconciliation or conflict? In The expanding worlds of general relativity, ed. H. Goenner, J. Renn, J. Ritter, and T. Sauer, 377–402. Boston: Birkhäuser.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. Conceptions of cosmos: From myths to the accelerating universe: A history of cosmology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2009. Contemporary history of cosmology and the controversy over the multiverse. Annals of Science 66(4): 529–551.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. The nobel prize system and the astronomical sciences. Journal for the History of Astronomy 48(3): 257–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lalli, R. 2017. Building the general relativity and gravitation community during the Cold War. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmkuhl, D. 2014. Why Einstein did not believe that general relativity geometrizes gravity. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 46: 316–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemaitre, G. 1958. The Primeval atom hypothesis and the problem of the clusters of galaxies. In La structure et l’évolution de l’univers, ed. R. Stoops, 1–31. Bruxelles: Institut International de Physique Solvay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Longair, M.S. 1971. Observational cosmology. Reports on Progress in Physics 34(3): 1125–1248.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. The cosmic century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mach, E. 1960. The science of mechanics: A critical and historical account of its development, 6th ed. La Salle: The Open Court Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrea, W.H. 1953. Cosmology. Reports on Progress in Physics 16(1): 321–363.

    Google Scholar 

  • McVittie, G.C. 1952. Cosmological theory, 2nd ed. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1956. General relativity and cosmology. London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1961a. Fact and theory in cosmology. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1961b. Rationalism versus empiricism in cosmology. Science 133(3460): 1231–1236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty, J., and B. Morando. 1976. The rebirth of cosmology. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milne, E.A. 1932. World structure and the expansion of the universe. Nature 130(3270): 9–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1935. Relativity, gravitation and world-structure. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. 1972. Astronomy and astrophysics for the 1970s: vol. 1: Report of the astronomy survey committee. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1973. Astronomy and astrophysics for the 1970s: vol. 2: Report of the panels. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J., T. Page, and E. Scott. 1961. Conference on the instability of systems of galaxies (Santa Barbara, California, 10–12 Aug 1961): Summary of the conference. The Astronomical Journal 66(10): 633.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noonan, T.W. 1971. The mean cosmic density from galaxy counts and mass data. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 83: 31.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, J.D. 1965. The measure of the universe: A history of modern cosmology. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oort, J.H. 1958. Distribution of galaxies and the density in the universe. In La structure et l’évolution de l’univers, ed. R. Stoops, 163–183. Bruxelles: Institut International de Physique Solvay.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Raifeartaigh, C., M. O’Keeffe, W. Nahm, and S. Mitton. 2017. Einstein’s 1917 static model of the universe: A centennial review. The European Physical Journal H 42(3): 431–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostriker, J.P., P.J.E. Peebles, and A. Yahil. 1974. The size and mass of galaxies, and the mass of the universe. Astrophysical Journal 193:L1–L4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, T. 1964. The evolution of galaxies. Science 146(3645): 804–809.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1967. Masses of galaxies: Singles and members of multiple systems. In Proceedings of the fifth Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability, vol. 3, ed. L.M. Le Cam and J. Neyman, 31–49. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peebles, P.J.E. 1971. Physical cosmology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. Robert Dicke and the naissance of experimental gravity physics, 1957–1967. The European Physical Journal H 42(2): 177–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peebles, P.J.E., and R.B. Partridge. 1967. Upper limit on the mean mass density due to galaxies. The Astrophysical Journal 148: 713–717.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renn, J., ed. 2007a. The genesis of general relativity. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007b. The third way to general relativity: Einstein and Mach in context. In The genesis of general relativity, ed. M. Janssen, J. Norton, J. Renn, T. Sauer, and J. Stachel, 945–1000. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rickles, D., and C. DeWitt-Morette, eds. 2011. The role of gravitation in physics: Report from the 1957 Chapel Hill conference. Berlin: Edition Open Sources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindler, W. 1967. Relativistic cosmology. Physics Today 20(11): 23–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, M.S., and A.H. Rots. 1973. Comparison of rotation curves of different galaxy types. Astronomy and Astrophysics 26: 483–485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, H.P. 1933. Relativistic cosmology. Reviews of Modern Physics 5(1): 62–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, I., A. Schild, and E.L. Schucking, eds. 1965. Quasi-stellar sources and gravitational collapse: Proceedings of the 1st Texas symposium on relativistic astrophysics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogstad, D.H., and G.S. Shostak. 1972. Gross properties of five SCD galaxies as determined from 21-cm observations. The Astrophysical Journal 176: 315–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogstad, D.H., G.S. Shostak, and A.H. Rots. 1973. Aperture synthesis study of neutral hydrogen in the galaxies NGC 6946 and IC 342. Astronomy and Astrophysics 22: 111–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rood, H.J., V.C.A. Rothman, and B.E. Turnrose. 1970. Empirical properties of the mass discrepancy in groups and clusters of galaxies. The Astrophysical Journal, 162: 411–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, V.C., and W.K. Ford Jr. 1970. Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a spectroscopic survey of emission regions. The Astrophysical Journal 159: 379–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryle, M. 1956. Radio galaxies. Scientific American 195(3): 204–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandage, A.R. 1961. The ability of the 200-inch telescope to discriminate between selected world models. The Astrophysical Journal 133: 355–392.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1970. Cosmology: A search for two numbers. Physics Today 23(2): 34–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schucking, E.L., and O. Heckmann. 1958. World models. In La structure et l’évolution de l’univers, ed. R. Stoops, 149–159. Bruxelles: Institut International de Physique Solvay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sciama, D.W. 1953. On the origin of inertia. Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 113(1): 34–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1959. The unity of the universe. London: Faber and Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1960. Observational aspects of cosmology. Vistas in Astronomy 3: 311–328.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1971a. Modern cosmology, 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1971b. The recent renaissance of observational cosmology. In Relativity and gravitation, based on the proceedings of an international seminar on relativity and gravitation, held at Technion City, July, 1969, ed. C.G. Kuper, and A. Peres, 283. New York: Gordon & Breach.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, C.D., and C.A. Wirtanen. 1954. The distribution of extragalactic nebulae. Astronomical Journal 59: 285–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, S.L. 1971. The density of matter in the form of galaxies. The Astronomical Journal 76: 291–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smeenk, C. 2003. Approaching the absolute zero of time: Theory development in early universe cosmology. Ph.D. thesis, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Einstein’s role in the creation of relativistic cosmology. In The Cambridge companion to Einstein, ed. M. Janssen, and C. Lehner, 228–269. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R.W. 2008. Beyond the galaxy: The development of extragalactic astronomy 1885–1965, part 1. Journal for the History of Astronomy 39: 91–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoops, R., ed. 1958. La Structure Et l’Évolution de l’Univers: Rapports Et Discussions. Bruxelles: Conseil de physique, Instituts Solvay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorne, K.S. 1994. Black holes and time warps: Einstein’s outrageous legacy. London: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dongen, J. 2010. Einstein’s unification. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vorontsov-Velyaminov, B.A., A.A. Krasnogorskaya, and V.P. Arkhipova. (1962) Morphological catalogue of galaxies. Part I. Moscow: Moscow State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weart, S. 1978. Interview of Dennis Sciama on 1978 April 14. College Park: Niels Bohr Library & Archives, American Institute of Physics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, S. 1972. Gravitation and cosmology: Principles and applications of the general theory of relativity. New York: Wiley Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, J.A. 1958. Meaning of the term, “Einstein’s theory”. In La structure et l’évolution de l’univers, ed. R. Stoops, 98–99. Bruxelles: Institut International de Physique Solvay.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1962. The universe in the light of general relativity. Monist 47(1): 40–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1974. The universe as home for man. American Scientist 62(6): 683–691.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. The present position of classical relativity theory and some of its problems. In The role of gravitation in physics: Report from the 1957 Chapel Hill conference, ed. D. Rickles, and C. DeWitt-Morette, 43–49. Berlin: Edition Open Sources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Will, C.M. 1986. Was Einstein right? Putting general relativity to the test. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1989. The renaissance of general relativity. In The new physics, ed. P. Davies, 7–33. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwicky, F. 1933. Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln. Helvetica Physica Acta 6: 110–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwicky, F., E. Herzog, P. Wild, M. Karpowicz, and C.T. Kowal. 1961. Catalogue of galaxies and of clusters of galaxies, vol. I. Pasadena: California Institute of Technology (CIT).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I am most grateful to Helge Kragh, Sjang ten Hagen, and the editors of this volume, Alexander Blum, Roberto Lalli, and Jürgen Renn, for helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. Many thanks go also to Jeroen van Dongen and Gianfranco Bertone for their guidance, suggestions, and inspiring discussions on the project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Physics & Vossius Center for the History of Humanities and Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Jaco de Swart

Authors
  1. Jaco de Swart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jaco de Swart .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, Germany

    Alexander S. Blum, Roberto Lalli & Jürgen Renn,  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

de Swart, J. (2020). Closing in on the Cosmos: Cosmology’s Rebirth and the Rise of the Dark Matter Problem. In: Blum, A.S., Lalli, R., Renn, J. (eds) The Renaissance of General Relativity in Context. Einstein Studies, vol 16. Birkhäuser, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50754-1_8

Download citation