First and foremost， I want to acknowledge my fianc6e Erin Eisenbarth， who came up with the idea for the book and has watched me wrestle with it all the way along. She is a historian， and I am a physicist， and I found her insights on how to do historical research invaluable. On ~casion， I asked her to comment on sections or help me understand some thorny historical problem; at other times， she would encourage me not to allow myself to be too distracted with minutiae far removed from the main narrative. While I don't have the same kind of expertise to offer her as she completes her own dissertation， I hope I can at least help her in return by cooking us dinner， and perhaps baking the occasional batch of brownies， as she reaches crunch time in her own project.
　　I'd also like to acknowledge several former students of mine， each of whom is now a scholar in her own right： Jing Min Chia， who performed much of the investigation of Mayer's time at Sarah Lawrence， working with Abby Lester， the superb arcluvist at Sarah Lawrence College; Kristen Koopman， who invited me to Virguua Tech to give a seminar based on my preliminary work on the chapter on Cecilia Payne; and the historian of science Dr Kelly O'Donnell， who provided me valuable feedback on that same chapter.
　　One thing I have discovered about this process is that writing about history is hard. The historical record is full of apparent contradictions; modern writings often get taken in by legends that have grown up over time， or misinterpret key pieces of evidence. While I have uncovered a few instances where that has occurred， I am sure I have fallen prey to other misconceptions， and likely created a few new misinterpretations of my own. I look forward to hearing from readers who know better about one point or another， and themselves want to set the record straight.