Results Explained

The movement of Edinburgh is contingent upon the outcome of the North Sea-Norway battle (i.e., North Sea would have to wind up vacant after all is said and done to allow Edinburgh to move in).  So let's leave Edinburgh aside for a moment.  You say in your post, "Norway has no unit supporting itself, only one supporting a move to the NS.  Therefore the strength of the attack is 2 to 1, and Norway would be dislodged."  The problem with that argument is that the same exact statements can be made about France's North Sea unit, so I could with the same justification ask why North Sea wouldn't be dislodged:  "North Sea has no unit supporting itself [Edinburgh -> North Sea is NOT a support of North Sea, it is the independent movement of a single unit], only one supporting a move to Norway.  Therefore the strength of the attack [on North Sea] is 2 to 1, and North Sea would be dislodged."  So you see, the movement is exactly the same on both sides: North Sea and Norway are attempting to trade places with each other, and both units have the same amount of uncut (pardon the phrase) support.  Norway bounces back to Norway and North Sea bounces back to North Sea, so Edinburgh must bounce back to Edinburgh.  I've included the diagram above to clarify the symmetry (and thus mutual negation) of the attacks.