Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin: The Woman Who Decoded the Stars

Discover the inspiring story of Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin, a trailblazing astronomer whose groundbreaking work redefined our understanding of the stars. From her early days in England, where her fascination with science defied societal norms, to her pivotal encounter with Sir Arthur Eddington and her struggles at Cambridge University, Cecilia's journey was one of resilience and brilliance. Despite barriers to women in academia, her landmark thesis on the composition of stars changed astronomy forever. Join us as we explore her legacy—a testament to the power of curiosity, perseverance, and the joy of discovery.

Please note transcription accuracy may vary.

Sources:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Stars-Are-Made-Payne-Gaposchkin

https://www.wildlifetrusts.org/wildlife-explorer/wildflowers/bee-orchid

Music by:
(Neffex - A year ago)
(Neffex - dont want to let myself go)

Transcript

0:00

Hi, hi, hi. Welcome to another mini episode. I'm going to try my best to make it mini. Your reward will be the widening of the horizon as you climb. And if you achieve that reward, you will ask for no other. This is a quote from Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin cecilia was born on the 10th of May, 1900 in Wendover, England. Cecilia's journey began as the first child to Emma and Edward Payne. From an early age, Cecilia displayed a fascination with the natural world. Often Looking at the stars and naming the constellations. Like the Big Dipper and Orion's Belt. This curiosity was nurtured by her family, even when they faced challenges, including the sad loss of her father when she was only four years old. Her mother Emma played a pivotal role in shaping Cecilia's early interests. One memorable night they witnessed a meteor streak across the sky. Emma created a rhyme about the event, ensuring that young Cecilia would never forget the wonder that they had seen. These formative experiences planted the seeds for a lifetime passion for science. Because yes, we have a scientist. because I don't feel like I've ever covered a scientist, and that didn't seem okay. So I wanted to cover a scientist that, again, because I feel like maybe I've been living under a rock. I had never heard of her. Shame on me. I will continue. She often recalled the moment when she encountered the bee Orchid. The bee Orchid, for those who do not know, is a plant found in England and I'll put a link, I'll put a link on the show notes. I want to go off on one of my tangents about Orchids, but I'm not, I'm going to stay on point. When she encountered the bee Orchid, it made her heart race. And it was in that moment she realised her calling was in science. She grew up in a time where society didn't have those expectations of women to do anything other than to keep the house, raise children, and on top of that she grew up during the time when she grew up in a time where Religion and science were slightly in conflict. Everything has to come from, um, everything has to come from God. Not saying it doesn't, I'm just saying science and religion just they, they didn't align. She grew up in a time where societal expectations confined women to limited roles. During this time, was also there, casting a sceptical eye on scientific pursuits. Following her father's death, they then relocated to Bayswater in London. Her intellectual curiosity was encouraged by her teacher, mentor, called Dorothy Gaglish. Her intellectual curiosity, when she then started school, was challenged. She did not find that she giving the information or being encouraged to pursue what she wanted to pursue, she would later go on to say that She struggled to connect with her peers due to what she would describe as a restless mind Fast forward to 1919 in 1919 she would go on to earn a scholarship to Cambridge University Where she go on where she would face a subtle but persistent message Mathematics was for boys and botany was suitable for girls. She would persevere focusing on her studies and embracing opportunities that came her way. One of those opportunities was when a peer was unable to attend a lecture by Sir Arthur Eddington and gave Cecilia her ticket. This was during a time where Only four women were permitted to attend this event. The lecture was on Eddington's exhibition to test Einstein's theory of relativity. This lecture left her profoundly inspired. She would later describe it as a pivotal moment, shaping her decision to pursue astronomy. Her restless mind found purpose in exploring how physics could illuminate the cosmos. Yes, we're talking about the cosmos. I'm so super excited. I think I'm losing my voice but I'm going to keep going. Despite her accomplishments at Cambridge, Cecilia was denied a degree. because the university did not award degrees to women until 1947. Shame on you, Cambridge, and shame on you, the United Kingdom, this wasn't actually ubiquitous. because at Oxford, if she'd have gone to Oxford, she would have been able to have got a degree. This was Cambridge. Cambridge at that time, it was an old boys club. Women were allowed to attend Cambridge because it was like a gesture of goodwill. You know, if you must, we'll allow a certain amount of you in, I will move on. as I was saying before, I actually just interrupted myself. She was denied her degree because the university did not award degrees to women until 1947. At the age of 23, she would then embark on a journey to America. And I'm actually yaying America for this one. This was during the 1920s, where things had started to change. She would arrive on the year that Time magazine came out. And at the time, it used to cost 15 cents. She would note the difference in America to the United Kingdom observing that Americans appeared more curious than their British counterparts, which felt more in tune with who she was. She did find, America was just more of a welcoming environment for women in science. At Harvard College Observatory, she wrote her groundbreaking doctoral thesis. Proposing that stars are primarily composed of hydrogen and helium. Her theory was, surprise surprise, dismissed by her male colleagues, it was not till later that she would then go on to earn the recognition as one of the greatest astrologers of her time. Okay, so obviously I'm just so super grateful that she did this. So, on those nights when you look up to the stars, I'm fine, maybe you don't care, but actually I feel like maybe we should, and we do, because it's because of her that actually we know what the stars compose of, she was such a trailblazer for women in science. To her male counterparts who dismissed what she said, she would be proven right, and now, because of her, work would go on to challenge the way other scientists viewed the stars I do need to add though that the only reason why at the time, Astrologers then accepted what she had been saying about the stars. We accepted it because Other research came out by a man called Henry Norris Russell and he got the same conclusion as she had regarding the stars, but he didn't, he just had a different process. And when he then put his research out, then it was accepted that Okay, the stars are made of helium and hydrogen. Oh, okay, that's true. Takes a man to say it when a woman said it. No, you don't know what you're talking about. I will, I'm not going to, I'm just going to move on. I think the reason this is such, this was such an issue was because she, through hard work and perseverance, she discovered something so inspirational, which changed how. we look up at the stars and how we view them her findings were dismissed purely because of her gender. She would later go on to say that, I was to blame for not having pressed my point. I had given in to authority when I believed I was right. I note it here as a warning to the young. If you are sure of your facts, you should defend your position. I do personally believe this is a point that we should all take on board that when you believe in something, don't let anyone else try and dismiss you for whatever reason, whatever gender, whatever race. She would go on to say that even though she was paid so little she was just grateful. She was grateful that she could use the telescopes, that she had the library. I don't know if anyone has watched, I'm sure it's on Apple TV, called Lessons in Chemistry with Brie Larson. When I read this book, it brought me back to when I watched that show, that TV series, which I'm gonna say is absolutely phenomenal. Love, love, love it. She would know that. The title Scientist or Scholar, neither of those words have a gender. She would say, I'd once pictured myself as a rebel against the feminine role. Because remember, during this time, the feminine role was a certain role. But in this, I was wrong. My rebellion was against being fought and treated as inferior. She would go on to become a professor at Harvard, the first woman to be promoted to that position from within the university. Her theses would be described as the most brilliant theses ever written in astronomy. She would also say that if you're going to get into science and you want to embark on that as a career. Don't do it for fame or money. There's easier ways to do that. You do it because, because you love it, because it's your passion and the reward will be widening of the horizon she has now the recognition as one of the greatest astrologers of her time. I feel like usually I'm always act of kindness or not act of kindness. Massive act of kindness. Her story is one of resilience, curiosity and groundbreaking achievement. Her work not only redefined our understanding of the universe, but also paved the way for future generations of women in science. Her legacy reminds us of the power of persistence and the joy of discovery. Just wanted to add, because I probably should have done this in the beginning, my research was based on a book called What the Stars are Made Of. I'm going to put the link in the show notes. If you're even slightly interested, it's actually a really, really good read. I found it really interesting. Thank you, thank you for listening and as always, be kind to others, but most importantly, be kind to yourself.