Editing Chandrasekhar limit (section)

=== Chandrasekhar–Eddington dispute ===
{{Main|Chandrasekhar–Eddington dispute}}
Chandrasekhar's work on the limit aroused controversy, owing to the opposition of the British [[astrophysicist]] [[Arthur Eddington]]. Eddington was aware that the existence of [[black hole]]s was theoretically possible, and also realized that the existence of the limit made their formation possible. However, he was unwilling to accept that this could happen. After a talk by Chandrasekhar on the limit in 1935, he replied:

{{Blockquote|The star has to go on radiating and radiating and contracting and contracting until, I suppose, it gets down to a few km radius, when gravity becomes strong enough to hold in the radiation, and the star can at last find peace. ... I think there should be a law of Nature to prevent a star from behaving in this absurd way!<ref>{{cite journal | year = 1935 | title = Meeting of the Royal Astronomical Society, Friday, 1935 January 11 | journal = The Observatory | volume = 58 | pages = 33–41 | bibcode=1935Obs....58...33.}}</ref>}}

Eddington's proposed solution to the perceived problem was to modify relativistic mechanics so as to make the law {{math|''P'' {{=}} ''K''<sub>1</sub>''ρ''<sup>5/3</sup>}} universally applicable, even for large {{mvar|ρ}}.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Eddington | first1 = A. S. | year = 1935 | title = On "Relativistic Degeneracy" | journal = Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society | volume = 95 | issue = 3| pages = 194–206 | bibcode=1935MNRAS..95..194E | doi=10.1093/mnras/95.3.194a| doi-access = free }}</ref>  Although [[Niels Bohr]], Fowler, [[Wolfgang Pauli]], and other physicists agreed with Chandrasekhar's analysis, at the time, owing to Eddington's status, they were unwilling to publicly support Chandrasekhar.<ref name="eos">''Empire of the Stars: Obsession, Friendship, and Betrayal in the Quest for Black Holes'', Arthur I. Miller, Boston, New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2005, {{ISBN|0-618-34151-X}}; reviewed at ''The Guardian'': [http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/scienceandnature/0,,1472561,00.html The battle of black holes] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061011105404/http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/scienceandnature/0,,1472561,00.html |date=2006-10-11 }}.</ref>{{rp|pp.=110–111}}  Through the rest of his life, Eddington held to his position in his writings,<ref>{{cite journal | year = 1935 | title = The International Astronomical Union meeting in Paris, 1935 | journal = The Observatory | volume = 58 | pages = 257–265 [259] | bibcode=1935Obs....58..257.}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Eddington | first1 = A. S. | year = 1935 | title = Note on "Relativistic Degeneracy" | journal = Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society | volume = 96 | pages = 20–21 | bibcode=1935MNRAS..96...20E|doi = 10.1093/mnras/96.1.20 | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Eddington | first1 = Arthur | year = 1935| title = The Pressure of a Degenerate Electron Gas and Related Problems | journal = Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences | volume = 152 | issue = 876| pages = 253–272 | jstor=96515 | doi=10.1098/rspa.1935.0190|bibcode = 1935RSPSA.152..253E | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>''Relativity Theory of Protons and Electrons'', Sir Arthur Eddington, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1936, chapter 13.</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Eddington | first1 = A. S. | year = 1940 | title = The physics of white dwarf matter | journal = Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society | volume = 100 | issue = 8| pages = 582–594 | bibcode=1940MNRAS.100..582E | doi=10.1093/mnras/100.8.582| doi-access = free }}</ref> including his work on his [[Arthur Stanley Eddington#Fundamental theory and the Eddington number|fundamental theory]].<ref>''Fundamental Theory'', Sir A. S. Eddington, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1946, §43–45.</ref>  The drama associated with this disagreement is one of the main themes of ''Empire of the Stars'', [[Arthur I. Miller]]'s biography of Chandrasekhar.<ref name="eos"/>  In Miller's view:

{{blockquote|Chandra's discovery might well have transformed and accelerated developments in both physics and astrophysics in the 1930s. Instead, Eddington's heavy-handed intervention lent weighty support to the conservative community astrophysicists, who steadfastly refused even to consider the idea that stars might collapse to nothing. As a result, Chandra's work was almost forgotten.<ref name="eos"/>{{rp|p=150}}}}

However, Chandrasekhar chose to move on, leaving the study of stellar structure to focus on stellar dynamics.<ref name=Trimble2011/>{{rp|51}} In 1983 in recognition for his work, Chandrasekhar shared a Nobel prize "for his theoretical studies of the physical processes of importance to the structure and evolution of the stars" with [[William Alfred Fowler]].<ref>{{Cite web |title=The Nobel Prize in Physics 1983 |url=https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/1983/summary/ |access-date=2023-10-03 |website=NobelPrize.org |language=en-US}}</ref>