Adair was right in his time.

The subunit molar mass of hemoglobin was established in the 19th century by chemical analysis, the tetramer structure by osmotic pressure determination in 1924 and by the newly developed analytical ultracentrifuge in 1926, which became a powerful tool for biological macromolecule molar mass determinations. The Svedberg equation was derived by eliminating the translational friction coefficient relating to sedimentation and diffusion in the ultracentrifuge in a strictly solute/solvent vanishing concentration two-component system analysis. A differential equation describing the radial equilibrium concentration distribution in the ultracentrifuge was also derived, both yielding the buoyant molar mass (1-nu2rho)M2 term. Many years later it was realized that solutions of biological macromolecules are multicomponent systems and the two-component analysis leads to minor or major erroneous results. Thermodynamic derivation of an equation for multicomponent systems redefines the buoyant molar mass terms by (deltarho/deltac2)muM2, leading to correct molar mass (g/mol) values following determination of the density increment at constant chemical potentials of diffusible solutes, and powerfully connects the analytical sedimentation equation to the osmotic pressure concentration derivative and, in a broad complementary sense, to light, X-ray and neutron scattering experiments. Macromolecular interactions can be studied with high precision and solute-solvent interactions yield powerful information relating to "thermodynamic" hydration, closely related to hydration derived from X-ray diffraction, as well as solute-cosolute interactions. A series of examples is given to demonstrate the correctness and usefulness of the thermodynamic multicomponent system approach. It is a strange fact that in current analytical ultracentrifugation analysis the elegant and powerful multicomponent solution technology is almost totally disregarded and the classical limited validity Svedberg approach is used uniquely.