In the early 1900s, most astronomers mistakenly believed that 66 percent of the sun's substance was iron. As a graduate student at Harvard University in the 1920s, Cecilia Payne—later a professor of astronomy there—argued pioneeringly that the sun is instead composed largely of hydrogen and helium. later uniformly accepted, encountered strong resistance among professional astronomers.
The orthodox view that the sun was mainly iron was buttressed by the knowledge that Earth and all known asteroids contain iron. Also, the evidence from spectroscopy—a technique used to identify chemicals by the distinctive spectral properties of the light patterns they emit when heated to incandescence—was generally taken to show that "iron" hypothesis had to be reexamined, together with the extensive spectroscopic data alleged to support it.
Preliminary examination of the spectroscopic data convinced Payne that they lent themselves to multiple readings. She suspected that preconceptions about the sun's makeup as being mainly iron might have led to skewed interpretations of that data, and this led her to subject the data to rigorous critical scrutiny and review. Analyzed without that what she had examined was data about the sun's outer surface rather than its interior.
Absent a generally accepted explanation of how hydrogen and helium could produce the sun's energy, Payne's findings could not easily override her contemporaries' preconceptions. We now know that the sun's heat is generated through nuclear fusion: the sun's gravitational force compresses together atoms of hydrogen, causing a nuclear reaction. This reaction produces on Einstein's equation governing the relationship between mass and energy—eventually provided strong confirmation of Payne's results.
What this question is testing
Topic
The author is telling the story of a young female scientist in the 1920s who got the sun right when everyone else had it wrong — and how the establishment took years to catch up with her.
Framework
Highlight Noteworthy. The author isn't arguing against Payne's critics — they're showcasing how a real discovery can be resisted because the underlying physics doesn't yet exist to explain it.
Main Point
The simpler version: Cecilia Payne, as a grad student, looked at the same data everyone else was using and concluded the sun is mostly hydrogen and helium, not iron. She was right. But her contemporaries dismissed her because they couldn't see how hydrogen could produce the sun's heat. Once Einstein's mass-energy equation and the idea of nuclear fusion came along, the puzzle was solved — and Payne's finding was finally accepted.
P1: The pioneer
Almost everyone thought the sun was mostly iron. A grad student named Cecilia Payne disagreed. She turned out to be right, but the establishment fought her.
P2: Why the iron view felt obvious
Earth has iron, asteroids have iron, and the spectroscopic data looked like it pointed to iron too. But there was a problem: Lord Kelvin's theory of how the sun produced heat required it to be only 20 million years old — and the fossil record clearly said billions. So Payne thought the iron story had to be wrong.
P3: Reading the data fresh
Payne suspected that what people thought they were seeing in the spectroscopic data was distorted by what they expected to see. When she looked without that preconception, the data fit a sun that's 90% hydrogen, mostly helium for the rest, and only a bit of iron. Other astronomers tried to explain her finding away — for instance by claiming she was only seeing the outer surface, not the interior.
Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.