144

Prof. Horace Lamb on

On Reciprocal Theorems in

[Jan. 12,

Dynamics.

By HORACE LAMB, M.A., F.R.S.

[Head Jan. 12th, 1888.]

In a recent paper on Least Action*, von Helmholtz has given a

reciprocal theorem of great generality, which may be stated as
follows.:
Consider any natural motion of a conservative system between two
configurations A and A' through which it passes at times t and t'
respectively, and let t't = T. Let gu gv ... be the coordinates of the
system, and ^>,, jp._, ... the component momenta, at time t, and let the
values of the same quantities at time t' be distinguished by accents.
As the system is passing through the configuration A, let a small impulse ty,. of any type be given to it; and let the consequent alteration
in any coordinate q, after the time r be denoted by Sq't. Next consider
the reversed motion of the system, in virtue of which it would, if undisturbed, pass from the configuration A' to the configuration A in the
time T. Let a small impulse Sp't be applied as it is passing through
the configuration A', and let the consequent change in the coordinate
qr) after a time r, be Sqr. The theorem in question asserts that
(1).
If the coordinates qn qt be of the same kind (e.g., both lines or both
angles), the statement of the theorem may be simplified by supposing
H1'* == fyn *n which case
In words, the change produced in the time r by a small initial impulse
of any type in the coordinate of any other (or of the same) type, in
the direct motion, is equal to the change produced in the same time
by a small initial impulse of the second type in the coordinate of the
first type, in the reversed motion.
The proof given by von Helmholtz is based on the properties of
Hamilton's " characteristic function "

(T-V)dt

(2),

where T and V are the kinetic and potential energies of the system,
* Ci-ello, t. 100, pi>. 137 and 213.

1888.]

Reciprocal Theorems in Dynamics.

145

and 8 is supposed expressed in terms of the initial and final coordinates qu qv ... and gj, q'^ ... , and the time r. Under these circumstances we have the relations
,

dS
dqr

d8
dqr

,Q\

from which, the theorem is deduced without much difficulty.

Von Helmholtz has also given a second reciprocal theorem, to which
reference will be made further on.
In searching for a more general result which should include these
theorems (and possibly others) as particular cases, I was led to
recognise that the desired generalisation is already contained in a
remarkable formula established by Lagrange in the " Mecanique
Analytique," * by way of pi'elude to his theory of the variation of
ai'bitrary constants. Starting from his equations of motion in
generalised coordinates, he proves that

where the variation-symbols o and A refer to any two slightly disturbed natural motions of the system. To call attention to this somewhat neglected theorem of Lagrange, and to some of the consequences
which flow from it, is the main object of this paper.
In the first place, integrating from t to t\ we have
2 (Sp,.. Aqr Apr. dq,.*) = 2 (J>p'r A^,Ap\.. </,.)
In this form, it may be noted, Lagrange's result follows very readily
from the Hamiltonian relations (3). Writing for shortness
JLJLO-

dqrdqs
we have

'

tZ-a

_ ,

/v

' dq,.dq',

Spr = - 2 , (r, s) oq,-^

(r, s) cq's,

with a similar expression for Ap,.. Hence

2 (fyv. A^,. Aj)r. 8qr) = 2,. 125 (r, s) dqa + 2, (?, 61') ^q'a ] A^,
+ 2, {2, (r,s) A2f + 2, (r, 6-') A;/;} ^ ,

* Bertrand's edition, t. i., pj>. 300 ot seq. 'J.'IKI tlioon-m ajtpcars to liavc liecn
first published in a memoir road to the Institute, March loth, lSO'J (Cuyley, llcport
on Theoretical Dynamics).

VOL. xix.HO. 314.

r-

(5).

146

Prof. Horace Lamb on

[Jan. 12,

The same value is obtained in like manner for the expression on the
right-hand side of (5).
The reciprocal theorem above stated is an immediate consequence
of Lagrange's. formula. For, suppose all the Sq to vanish, and likewise all the Sp with the exception of Spr, Again, suppose all the &q
to vanish, and likewise all the Ap' except Ap',. The formula (5) then
reduces to

Sp,.. Aqr = Ap',. q',,

or

2q',:8pr =

Aqr:-Ap't,

which is equivalent to Von Helmholtz's result, since we may suppose

the symbol A to refer to the reversed motion, provided we change the
signs of the Ap.
A slight extension may be given to the statement of the reciprocal
theoi'em froin the consideration that the expression
%(ty,.*q,-Apf.3qr)

(7)

is a covanant, and that the coordinate systems employed on the two

sides of (5) may therefore (if we please) be differont. To see this we
may recall Hamilton's variational equation
Bqr-'2pr.Zqr

(8),.

in which E denotes the total energy. It is known that %p . Zq is covariant,* and we may therefore suppose the initial and final coordinates in terms of which (with r) S is expressed to belong to different
systems. The relations (3) will still hold, and from these (as we
have seen) the proof of Lagrauge's formula immediately follows,
through equation (6).f
The freedom we have thus gained of using different coordinates in
the two configurations contemplated in the reciprocal theorem is of
importance in the optical applications to be referred to further on.
Some good illustrations of the theorem are afforded by the case of
a single particle. For instance, in elliptic motion about the centre,
if a small velocity 8v in the direction of the normal be communicated
to tho particle as it is passing through either extremity of the major
axis, the tangential deviation produced after a quartei'-poriod is easily
found to be Sv/fi*, where /i is the "absolute force." And it is readily
* I t is in fact = 2m (x S.c + y Si/ + z 6z), where x, y, z are the rectangular coordinates of any particle m of Iho system. Tho proof of this forma part of tho usual
investigation of Lagrango's equations of motion in generalised coordinates.
f The covariant property of (7) WEB suggested to mo as probable by Mr. J.
Larmor. It may also be established by direct transformation of coordinates, but
tho work is rathor lont^.

1888.]

Reciprocal TJieorems in Dynamics.

147

verified that a tangential velocity eJu, communicated at the extremity

of the minor axis, produces after a quarter-period an equal normal
deviation SV/JJ.^.
Again, in the corpuscular theory of light, take the case of a medium
symmetrical about an axis (e.;/., an optical system), and consider two
points P, P' on the axis, aud lot V, V' be the corresponding velocities
of light. At P let a small impulse be applied at right angles to the
axis so as to produce an augular deflection SO, and let /3' be the consequent lateral deviation at P \ In like manner, in the reversed
motion, let a small deflection SO' at P' produce a lateral deviation /3
at P. The reciprocal theorem asserts that
Th&

VSO'

that is, the " apparent distance "* of P from P' is to that of P1 from
P in the ratio of the refractive indices at P' and P respectively.
When the restriction as to symmetry about an axis is abandoned,
it is convenient to adopt independent systems of coordinates at P and
P'. Taking these points as origins of rectangular systems x, y, z and
x, y', z respectively, the axes of z, z being tangential to the ray, the
lateral deviations at P' due to impulses Sx, By at P will be given by
equations of the form
Sx' = ASx + BSy,
hj CSx + DSy.

The reciprocal theorem then shows that the deviations at P due to

impulses Sx, By' at P" will be given by
Sy BSx+DSy'.
Hence, if a be the section at P1 of a small pencil of rays proceeding
from P and forming there a solid angle w, and if <r, w' have similar
meanings with regard to a pencil from P', we shall have
a _ d (fa>, ly') _^ .n
V'w
d (Sx, Si/)

np

The same value is obtained for tr/F'V, so that, if /i, fi be the refractive indices,
~ : == F 2 : Vn n* : M'V
o)

ta

which is the theorem of " apparent distance " in its extended form.
* Gf. Lord Rayleigh, Phil. Mag., June, 188G, p. 472.
L 2

148

Prof. Horace Lamb on

[Jan. 12,

Most, if not all, of the reciprocal relations already known in

Dynamics appear to range themselves as particular cases under our
present theorem.
Thus, if the system be originally at rest, and if the time r be infinitely short, we may put
and, on account of the linearity of the relations between the momenta
and the velocities, the restriction to infinitely small impulses &pr may
be dropped. Hence the velocity of type s produced by an impulse of
type r is equal to the velocity of type r produced by an equal impulse
of type s.
Again, applying the theorem to the case of small periodic disturbances from a configuration of equilibrium, we are led to the reciprocal
relation which is discussed at length by Lord Eayleigh in his
" Theory of Sound."* This includes as particular cases the important principles of acoustical and optical reciprocity formulated long ago
by Von Helmholtz, although in the case of a continuous medium some
care is necessary to recognise the displacements and impulses of
corresponding types. The acoustical priuciple is to the effect that in
a uniform mass of air (or other gas), bounded in whole or in part by
rigid or perfectly elastic walls, the variations in density at a point P '
due to a simple soui'cc of sound at P are identical in amplitude and
phase with those produced at P by an equal sonrce at P'. " In this
theorem equal sources of sound are those produced by the periodic
introduction and abstraction of equal quantities of fluid, or something
whose effect is the same."

The statement needs modification -when

the nature of the medium is different at P and at P1; but this is of

no great interest in Acoustics.
The optical principle is as follows, in (as nearly as possible)
Von Helmholtz's own words :f" Let a ray of light from the point P
arrive after any number of reflections, refractions, &c, at the point P \
At P draw two planes a,, a3 through the direction of the ray, and at
right angles to one another. Let two similar planes a[, a'2 be drawn
through the direction of its ray at P \ The following result may then
be proved: If a quantity I of light polarised in the plane ax proceeds
from P in the direction of the ray in question, and if of this the
quantity I ' arrives at P' polarised in the plane a[; then reciprocally,
when a quantity I of light polarised in the plane a[ proceeds from P',
the same quantity I ' of light polarised in the plane c^ arrives at P . "
* T. i., 107, &c.
t Physiologischc Optik, p. 169, or GcsammcUe Wcrke, t. ii., p . 136.

1888.]

Reciprocal Theorems in Dynamics.

149

Von Helmholtz goes on to say that the light may on ita path be subject
to any amount of single or double refraction, reflection, dispersion,
and diffraction.*
The statement may perhaps be made a little more precise, if we
define I to mean the intensity of a source of light at P, polarised in
the plane a n as measured by the energy emitted per second, and J
the intensity of the component polarised in the plane a[ of the light
which arrives at P', as measured by the energy which falls per second
on unit area placed perpendicular to the ray. If T and / have
similar meanings for light proceeding from P ' to P, we have
J' : I=J:

r.

This supposes the medium to be the same at P' as at P. When this

is not the case, we are, I think, obliged to enter into some considei'ation of the mechanism by which light is propagated, although the
final result is independent of the particular theory adopted on this
point. To do this here would lead us too far; the result, whether we
adopt the elastic solid or the electro-magnetic theory of light, is (I find)
u'2 u a

i ' r -'

^'

where fi, /t' are the refractive indices at P and P', respectively. This
law, which is thus proved by purely dynamical reasoning, is identical
with that established in other ways, and under somewhat narrower
restrictions, by Von Helmholtz and Clausius.
In some farther applications of the reciprocal theorem care must
be taken that in the " reversed " motion the reversal is complete, and
extends to every part of the system. For example, if the system contain gyrostats in rotation, the rotation of each one of these must be
reversed.
Again, the propagation of sound in a moving atmosphere has been
recognisedf as a case to which Von Helmholtz's principle of acoustic
reciprocity, as above stated, does not apply. In fact, if P' be to the
leeward of P, the intensity at P' due to a source at P will, in consequence of refraction, be greater than that at P due to a source at P'
The reciprocity is, however, restored if when we transfer the source
to P* we also reverse the wind.
* Ho also includes absorption, which does not come within the scope of the
general reciprocal theorem which is the subject of this papor. It is covered, of
course, by Lord Itayleigh's principle, which does not exclude the action of dissipative forces.
t Theory of Sound, 111. ad Jin.

150

Prof. Horace Lamb on

[Jan. 12,

Another interesting example is furnished by the magnetic rotation

of the plane of polarised light. Von Helrnholtz himself called attention
to the fact that his optical principle of reciprocity does not hold when
the ray in its course traverses a medium possessing the rotatory property in virtue of magnetic influence. Now that wo have obtained a
dynamical basis for the principle, we can assert that, if tho phenomenon
is susceptible of a dynamical explanation at all, there must be some
motion in the medium independently of the luminiferous disturbance.
Also the reciprocal relation must necessarily hold if we are able to
reverse this latent motion when we transfer tbc source of light from
P to ly. As a matter of fact, it does hold if we reverse tlie magnetic
field. This indicates that the motion in question is of a dipolar
character; and the only* motion of this kind which we can associate
with the magnetic field is one of rotation about the lines of force. We
are thus led by the general theorem of dynamical reciprocity to Sir
W. Thomson's well-known argument, in a very compact form.
At the end of the paper on " Least Action," von Helmholtz has
given a second reciprocal theorem. In this the motion through the
configuration A is supposed to be varied by a slight change in the
value of one of the coordinates (say qr), the momenta being all unaltered, and the subject of the theorem is the consequent variation
tip', in any one of the momenta after the time r. In proving this
theorem, Hamilton's function

which is supposed expressed in terms of the initial and final momenta,

and the time r, is employed. This function possesses the properties
dQ_

dQ-_

>

This second reciprocal theorem, like tho former one, is an immediate

deduction from the Lagrangian formula (5). Let all the dp vanish,
and all the Sq save Sq,.. Again, let all the Ap' vanish, as also the Aq
with the exception of Aq',. The formula reduces to
&pr. $qr = Sp't. Aqt,
or

$p, : 8qr = Apr : A ? ;,

[May, 1888. This is perhaps stated too absolutely. For example, an arrangement of vortex rings whose axes are tangential to the lines of force would possess
the requisite dipolar quality, however improbable it may be on other grounds.]

1888.]

Reciprocal Theorems in Dynamics.

151

which is the theorem in question, if we make the symbol A refer to

the reversed motion by changing the sign of ApT.
As an example, consider an optical" system symmetrical about an
axis, and let F and I'1' be the principal foci. The above theorem,
applied to the corpuscular hypothesis, shows that the convergence at
F' of a parallel beam from F is to the convergence at F of a parallel
beam of equal breadth from F' in the inverse ratio of the refractive
indices at F" and F respectively. This is equivalent to Gauss's result
that the two focal lengths are to one another directly as the corresponding indices.
A third reciprocal theorem may be obtained by making all the tiq
and all the Apf to vanish, whilst all the Sp vanish save Spn and all the

Ag' save Ag,'. Under these circumstances, we have

<?i>r. Agv = %pt. Aq',,
or

dp, I $pr = Aqr : Aq,.

The optical interpretation of this is that the angular divergence at

P' of a pencil of rays from P is to its divergence at P as the breadth
at P of a parallel beam from P ' is to its breadth at P.*
The first reciprocal theorem, however, is perhaps the one most
worth preserving in a separate form. For cases which do not immediately come under it, it is best to have recourse directly to the
Lagrangian formula. As a final application of this, let P , P ' be conjugate foci of an optical system. We may then suppose the $q and the
$q all to vanish, and likewise all the hp and Sp' save those with the
suffix r. This leads to
Writing

8pr = V. Sd, ip'r = V. Iff,

A2,. = /3,

A 2 ;=/3',

where $8 and ZQ' are the divergences at P and P ' of a ray between these
points, and (5 and ft' are the breadths of conjugate images, then

v.se.p= v. w.p,
or

fxft.ZQ /x'P. 80',

which is the well-known optical law of Lagrange.

* [Provided the refractive indices at P and I" are equal.]