Harlow Shapley: The Scale Of The Universe

891 Words2 Pages

In the early 1900s, the size of the universe had not been known. There were many different theories about the size, but no one had known for sure. However, in late 1919, George Ellery Hale, founder and Director of Mount Wilson Observatory in Nevada, had the idea of a debate between Harlow Shapley of the Mount Wilson Observatory and Heber D. Curtis of the Lick Observatory over the size of the universe. This debate is now known as The Great Debate. In this debate, titled “The Scale of the Universe,” both men used faulty and fragmented evidence to corroborate their arguments. The winner of the debate was not known at the time, as no one knew if what they were saying was true. However, Curtis was said to be more eloquent in his delivery of his …show more content…

He also believed that observed “nebulae” were just smaller dust clouds within the Milky Way Galaxy. However, he also believed that the Sun was not the center of the galaxy. To support his claims, he used many types of evidence. His argument against the sun being the center of the galaxy was that globular clusters were more prominent towards one half the the sky, the side closer to the center. To support his single galaxy theory, He claimed that if “nebulae” were separate galaxies, they would have to be 108 light years away for the measurements to be correct, a distance not fathomable at the time. He also used claims by Adriaan van Maanen that he observed the Pinwheel Galaxy spinning. If this were true, then it would have to be within the span of the Milky Way Galaxy because if it were a separate galaxy it would be spinning at speeds far greater than the speed of light, which is physically impossible. His other main argument for a single galaxy theory was that that it had been observed that, what we now know as the Andromeda Galaxy, had given off an amount of light that had momentarily outshone the entire “nebula.” This amount of energy was seemingly impossible at the time, if the “nebula” was indeed a separate …show more content…

He discovered that spiral nebulae were actually separate galaxies that were incredibly distant from our own. It has also been proven that a supermassive black hole is at the center of galaxies, not the Sun. These facts have proven that both Curtis and Shapley were both right and wrong about major issues. Shapley was correct about the sun not being the center of the universe and Curtis was correct about spiral nebulae being separate galaxies. However, both were incorrect about the size of the Milky Way Galaxy. The actual number is less than Shapley’s overestimation and more than Curtis’s underestimation, so somewhere in between. So, the answer to who won the debate seems unclear, as they were both right and wrong about some issues. However, since their papers used in the argument were titled “The Scale of the Universe” you could conclude that Curtis won because of this technicality. Since he was correct about multiple galaxies and the universe being far larger than just our own galaxy, he could rightfully be considered the winner of the debate, because he correct about the main issue of the debate, despite being incorrect about other minor topics within the

Open Document