Search

With the arrival of computers, plasma physics and several fresh investigators by the early 1960s, understanding the spiral structure of galaxies entered a new stage of unusually vigorous activity broadly grouped under the umbrella marked "density-wave theory". Paper I starts with acknowledging B. Lindblad, rightly regarded the main father of this whole subject, and then describes the early contributions by Lynden-Bell, Toomre, Hunter and Kalnajs, who had formulated and applied such notions as the stability of flat galaxies, the regenerative spiral phenomenon, the shearing density waves and the global spiral modes. But the foremost enthusiast and proponent of the density-wave picture was undoubtedly C.C. Lin whose 1964 and 1966 papers with Shu, written in support of his working hypothesis of the quasi-stationary wave-mode spiral structure, had a big and immediate impact upon astronomers, at least as a welcome sign that genuine understanding of the spiral phenomenon seemed in some sense to be just around the corner. We find that even Lin occasionally let himself get carried away with too much enthusiasm as for instance when he wrote that his relatively exploratory work with Shu had already led to a "theory free from the kinematical difficulty of differential rotation", or that it "enables us to provide a mechanism to explain the existence of a spiral pattern over the whole disk while allowing the individual spiral arms to be broken and fragmentary" (Lin 1967b, p.462). Already at the time such optimism was not entirely shared by other experts, and by the late 1960s - as we shall see in Paper II - it had become very clear to everyone that much hard work still remained to explain even the persistence, much less the dynamical origins, of the variety of spirals that we observe., Comment: 50 pages, 11 figures

By the 1970s the spiral subject was in considerable disarray. The semiempirical theory by Lin and Shu was confronted with serious problems. They were put on the defensive over their tightly wrapped steady modes on two principal fronts: from the radial propagation at the group velocity that would tend to wind them almost at the material rate, and from the tendencies of galaxy disks toward a strong global instability that appeared likely to overwhelm them. Of course, one might claim that such threats were imaginary and only of academic interest, on the ground that nature itself had overcome them. One might also be confident that the QSSS hypothesis must be correct as illuminated by the everlasting truth of Hubble's classification. One might even take pride in the fact that a very promising concept developed, although not connected to the wave steadiness, on spiral shocks in interstellar gas and their induced star formation. But such a heuristic approach did not stimulate very strong progress in understanding dynamical principles of the spiral phenomenon; moreover, it often misled, and a rich irony was already that the supposed QSSS favorites M51 and M81 turned out most probably not to be quasi-steady at all. A further irony was the continuing failure of Lin and Shu to account the trailing character of their 'modes', while that was already grasped by their direct 'deductive' opponents. But the greatest irony lay in the fact that the concept later known as swing amplification, worked out by the mid-1960s, was originally denigrated by Lin's camp as relating exclusively to 'material arms', whereas it turned out in the end to be of vital importance to this entire spiral enterprise including the variants of chaotic ragged patterns, tidal transient grand designs and growing or quasi-steady modes., Comment: 65 pages, 15 figures