The Faraday Effect and Physical Theory, 1845-1873

The Faraday Effect and Physical Theory, 1845-1873
Author(s): Ole Knudsen

Source: Archive for History of Exact Sciences, Vol. 15, No. 3 (23.VII.1976), pp. 235-281
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41133451 .
Accessed: 16/06/2014 08:06
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Archive for History of Exact
Sciences.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TheFaradayEffectand PhysicalTheory,
1845-1873
Ole Knudsen
by M. J.Klein
Communicated
Contents
1. Introduction 235
2. ExperimentalResults 237
3. The PhenomenologicalApproach 240
4. The BritishApproach.Faraday 243
5. W.Thomson 244
6. The Developmentof Maxwell's VortexTheory 248
7. The ApplicationoftheVortexTheoryto the Faraday Effect 255
8. The ContinentalApproach.De la Rive 261
9. C. Neumann'sTheory 262
10. Conclusion 271
Appendix 273
1. Introduction
On September13, 1845, Michael Faraday made one of his fundamental
discoveries.Having placed a piece of heavy glass in a strongmagneticfieldhe
passed a ray of linearlypolarized lightthroughthe glass in a directionparallel
to thefieldand foundthattheplane ofpolarizationofthelightraywas somewhat
turned1.This phenomenonhas since been called by various names,such as the
magneto-opticrotationor magneticcircularpolarization,but is now known
simplyas theFaraday effect.
The discoverydid not come to Faraday out oftheblue. It had been preceded
11 yearsearlierbya seriesofattemptsto discoversomerelationbetweenelectricity
and light2.These attemptswere all fruitless, but Faraday's fundamentalbelief
in theunityofthevariousforcesofnatureremainedunshakenovertheyearsand
in August 1845 a letterfromWilliam Thomson led him to repeat his old ex-
periments 3. Stillunable to detectany action of electricity
on lighthe hit on the
idea oflookingfora magneticaction,withsuccessfollowingalmostimmediately4.
1 Michael Faraday : " On the
magnetizationof lightand the illuminationof magneticlines of
force",reprintedin M.Faraday: ExperimentalResearches in Electricity,vol. Ill, London 1855,
Dover ed. 1965,ser.XIX, §§2146-2242.
1 Faraday:
Experimental Researches,vol. I, §§ 951-955.
L. Pearce Williams : Michael Faraday, London 1965, pp. 381 et seqq. See also J.Brookes
Spencer: "On theVarietiesofNineteenth-Century Magneto-OpticalDiscovery",Isis 61(1970)34-51.
ThomasMartin, ed.: Faraday'sdiary,vol. IV, London 1933,pp. 256 etseqq.

236 O. Knudsen
He was clearlyconsciousofthegreattheoretical importance ofthenewpheno-

menonand hislegendary modesty did notprevent himfromsayingso:5
Thusis established, I thinkforthefirsttime,a true,directrelationand
dependence betweenlightand themagnetic and electricforces;and thusa
greatadditionmadeto thefactsand considerations whichtendto provethat
all naturalforces aretiedtogether, andhaveonecommonorigin.
Faraday's discovery was indeedan important one. It established a new
fundamental interaction betweenelectromagnetism, lightand matter, and the
suggestive influence of thison people'smindswas to becomedecisiveforthe
development ofelectromagnetic theory. Besidesstrengthening Faraday's belief
intheunityoftheforces ofnatureithelpedhimformtheconviction thata lineof
magnetic forcerepresents a definite physicalstatein theregiontraversed byit.
To W.Thomson and Maxwell it answered thequestionas to thenatureofthis
state:becauseoftheFaraday effect therehadtobe a stateofrotation oftheether
around the lines
of magnetic force.In thisway itled to theinvention ofthat vortex
modeloftheetherwhichMaxwell usedin hisfirst formulation oftheelectro-
magnetic theory oflight.
Besidesbeinga sourceofinspiration, however, theFaraday effect also func-
tionedas a kindoftouchstone ofelectromagnetic theories,and thislatter aspect
is perhapsnotlessimportant thantheformer. Immediately afterhisdiscovery
Faraday established theimpossibility ofproducing anyrotation ina vacuumand
he didnothesitate to drawthefollowing general conclusion: 6
The magnetic forcesdo notact on therayoflightdirectly and without
theintervention of matter, but throughthemediationof thesubstancein
whichtheyandtherayhavea simultaneous existence; thesubstances andthe
forces givingto and receiving from each other the power of acting on the light.
Becauseofthisproperty theFaraday effectwas to make heavy demands on
theoretical physics,forin dealingwith it theoreticians had to combine electro-
magnetic theorynot onlywitha theoryoflight,butalso witha modelof the
molecular constitutionofmatter. To thehistorian itis veryfortunate thatin the
fifties and earlysixtiesdetailed theoretical explanations of the Faraday effect
weregivenbyphysicists insideeach ofthe two contemporary schoolsin theoretical
physics.I believethattheexamination of Maxwell's explanation, whichwas
basedon his electromagnetic of
theory light, and of the very different treatment
by Carl Neumann, who proceeded from Continental action-at-a-distance
theories, can lead to a betterfeeling forthefundamental conceptions underlying
thetwotraditions, as wellas fortheiradvantages and disadvantages whenfaced
withthetaskofuniting thevariousbranches ofphysics intoa consistent whole.
The present study willbe concerned chiefly with the theoreticaldevelopment.
For experimental details,the readershouldconsultthe excellentsurveyby
Kristenová& Seidlerová7,whichalso givesa fullbibliography.
5 Faraday: Researches,III, § 2221.
Experimental
6 Ibid.
§2224.
7 D. Kristenová & I. Seidlerová: "The
Beginningsof Magnetooptics, Acta histonae rerum
naturalium necnontechnicarum, oftheFaraday
Special Issue,2 (1966) 3-41. A good moderntreatment
is foundin A.Sommerfeld:Optics,New York, Academic Press,1954,pp. 101-106.
effect

The Faraday Effectand PhysicalTheory 237
2. ExperimentalResults
WhenFaraday,twomonths afterhisdiscovery, presented hispaperdescribing

theneweffect to theRoyalSociety8, he had alreadyinvestigated a longlistof
transparent solidsand liquids. Most of them proved able to producetheeffect,
although withhighly varying In
intensity. thosethat were opticallyactive, whether
dextro- or levorotatory, the effectwas simplysuperimposed on thenatural rota-
tion.In gases, as wellas in a vacuum, he found it to
impossible bring anyout effect
at all.
The direction oftherotationcoincided,in all thesubstances thathe tried,
withthatoftheAmpèrean currents inthemagnet, or ofthemacroscopic current
in thehelix.It did notdependon thedirection ofthelightrayand thissignified
an essentialdifference betweenthe magneticand naturalrotation.If a rayof
light after passingthrough an optically activesubstance was reflected and made
to reverse itspaththerewouldbe no netrotation, butifthesamewasdoneinthe
magnetic case thetotalrotationwouldbe twicethatproducedin one passage.
Thus,thesamesubstancein a determinate magnetic fieldwouldchangefrom,
say,a dextrorotatory to a levorotatory behaviour whenthedirection ofthelight
ray was reversed.
As forthemagnitude oftheangleofrotation anditsdependence onthevarious
parameters involved, Faraday, wasas characteristicof him,onlypresented a
fewnotveryprecise measurements. He did state,however, that therotation seemed
to be proportional to thedistancetraversed bytherayinthesubstance, as wellas
to themagnetic fieldintensity.
The publicannouncement of Faraday's discovery appearedas a noticein
the"WeeklyGossip"columnintheAthenaeum forNovember 89 evenbefore his
paper had been read to the and
RoyalSociety, although thisnotice was very short
and misleading, a fewscientists wereable to makesenseofitandrealizetheim-
portance of Faraday's achievement. An exampleis RudolphBoettger, a
teacher ofphysics andchemistry withthePhysikalischer VereininFrankfurt a. M.,
whoon readingtheAthenaeum noticebecameveryexcitedandsentoffapaperto
Poggendorff's Annalen as soonas hehadsucceeded inrepeating theexperiment *°.
After somefurther experiments Boettgerwroteanotherpaperinwhichheinde-
pendently reached the same conclusion as Faraday, namelythatthe effect
8
Faraday, op. cit.note 1.
y
Athenœum,Nov. 8, 1845, 1080. The "gossiper thoughtthat Faraday had discoveredalso
"thatelectro-magnetic rotationsmaybe producedby theagencyof light"and wentintoecstasyover
thiswhiledevotingonlythreelinesto therealdiscovery.Faraday's paperwas readto theRoyal Society
in the meetingson November20 and 27, and a competentabstractof it was givenin the Athenœum,
Dec. 6, 1845,1176.In a letterto A. de la Rive Faraday refersto "a verygood abstract"in the Times
of Nov. 29. (L.P.Williams, ed.: The selectedcorrespondence of Michael Faraday, vol. 1, Cambridge
1971, p. 469).
1U R. Boettger: Ueber
Faradays neueste Entdeckung,die Polarisationsebeneeines Licht-
strahlsdurcheinenkräftigen Elektromagneten abzulenken".Ann.d. Phys.u. Chem.67 (1846) 290-293.
The paper is dated Dec. 21, 1845.Boettger statesthathe learntabout thediscoverythroughnotices
in the Athenaeum,Nov. 8, and in theRheinischer Beobachter,Dec. 7.

238 O. Knudsen
appearedtobe duetoa changeofstateimpressed bythemagnet on themolecules

ofthetransparent substanceratherthanto anydirectactionofmagnetism on
light11.
On theexperimental side,however, thefirst- and almosttheonly- person
beyondFaraday wasthe
to go significantly Frenchman EmileVerdetwhofrom
1854to 1863publishedfourarticlesunderthecommon "Recherches
title surles
propriétés optiquesdéveloppées dans les corpstransparents par l'actiondu
magnétisme".12 In these Verdet
articles reported the results
of a systematic
seriesofexperiments whichwas no doubtgreatlyinspiredby Biot's extensive
workonnatural andinwhichhehadmeasured
rotation13, withgreatprecision the
quantitativedependenceof therotation angle on thevariousparameters involved.
Thus,inhistwofirst (of1854and 1855)Verdetestablished
articles thattheangle
ofrotation0, producedwhena raypassesthrough a length/ofanysubstance
placedina uniform magnetic is givenby
field,
e = V'l-Hl
whereHtis thecomponent ofmagnetic forceinthedirection ofthelightray.The
quantity V,whichVerdetcalledthemagnetic rotatory powerofthesubstance, is
nowknownas Verdet'sconstant anddependsonlyonthenatureofthesubstance
andthecolourofthelight.
Thesedependences werethesubjectsof Verdet'sthirdand fourth papers.
He first
tookupa suggestion madebyde la RivethatFoughttobe proportional
totherefractiveindexofthesubstance. De la Rivehadjustified thisbymaintain-
ingthatthemagnetic forcemodified the stateofthe ether between themolecules
ratherthan thatof themolecules themselves.De la Rive's idea was that refraction
wascausedby an actionof themolecules ofthe refracting medium on theether
between them, while the Faraday effect
was due to a combination of thissame
actionof themoleculesand themagneticactionon theether14. Verdet was
originallyinclinedto agreewiththispointofview,buthisexperimental results
seemedto excludeanypossibility ofa simplerelationbetween thetwoproperties
in question15.
Bymeasuring therotatory powerofequal amountsofsolutions as a function
of thestrength ofthesolutionVerdet foundthattherotationproducedby a
macroscopicamountof the solutioncould alwaysbe conceivedas a sum of
rotationsindependently producedby theindividualmoleculesin thesolution.
In otherwords,fora solution containingsubstances 1,2,... , i,... inconcentrations
11 R.BOETTGER:"Ueber die durch einen kräftigenElektromagnetbewirkte,im polarisierten
LichtesichkundgebendeMolecularveränderung flüssigerund festerKörper". Ann.d. Phys.u. Chem.
67 (1846) 350-353.
12 EmileVerdet : " Recherchessurles propriétésoptiquesdéveloppéesdans lescorpstransparents
par l'actiondu magnétisme".Ann.de chim.etphys.,3esér.,41 (1854) 370-412; 43 (1855) 37-44; 52 (1858)
129-163; 69 (1863) 415-491. The last oftheseis subtitled:"De la dispersiondes plans de polarisations
des rayonsde diversescouleurs".
13 See E.Frankel: JeanBaptiste Biot: The Careerofa Physicistin NineteenthCenturyFrance,
Ph.D. Thesis,Princeton1972,pp. 270-286 and 367-369.
** A.delaRive: Traitéďélectricitéthéoriqueet appliquée,1.1, Fans 18S4, en. vi, particularly
pp. 555-557. Cf.§ 8 below.
13 Ann.de chim.et
phys.,3e sér.52 (1858),p. 139.

Pl9P29...9Pi9...9 Kis given by
whereyiis a quantitythatis characteristicofthemoleculeofthe¿thsubstanceand

which Verdet thereforenamed its molecularmagneticrotatorypower.16He
found,however,thatcertainsaltshad a negativevalue of y,so thatthemolecules
ofthesaltmustbe assumedto cause a rotationwhichwas in thereversedirection
of that caused by the moleculesof the water.Such salts were always foundto
contain a magnetic(i.e. para- or ferromagnetic) chemical element,but not all
salts containingmagneticelementshad negative molecular rotatorypower;
and therewas also no relationbetweenthe signof y in a salt and thequestionof
whetherthe salt itselfwas magneticor diamagnetic.All salts containingno
magneticelementhad, however,positivevalues of7 and werealso diamagnetic17.
In his last paper Verdet finallyturnedto theinvestigationofthevariationof
V withthewavelengthofthelightray.This was a difficult mattersincethevaria-
tionswerenot verygreatand well-defined spectrallines werehard to obtain,so
Verdet opened his paper witha detaileddiscussionof possible sourcesof error
and of his attemptsto eliminatethem18.Edmond Becquerel19 and Gustav
WiEDEMANN20 had previouslyworkedon thisproblem,but Verdet feltthattheir
experiments were too impreciseto warranttheconclusionsthathad been drawn
fromthem.He showed,in fact,thatalthoughBecquerel claimed to have estab-
lishedthatthemagneticrotationwas proportionalto X~2,a relationwhichBiot
had foundto be generallyvalid in thecase of naturalrotation,Becquerel's data
agreedequally well witha Ì/Xlaw21. Wiedemannhad comparedmagneticand
naturalrotationsand foundthat in a given,opticallyactive substancethe two
rotationsvariedin exactlythesame way withX,but thattheA~2-lawdid not hold
exactlyforeitherof them.Verdet used essentiallythe same experimentalset-up
as Wiedemannbutwithgreatlyimprovedprecision.He foundthatF was approxi-
matelyproportionalto X~2 and thattheproductV- X2was a monotonousand de-
creasingfunctionof X foreach of the substanceswithwhichhe worked22.He
triedto relatethe variationof V-X2in a givensubstanceto the dispersivepower
of the substance,but foundthatno simplerelationof thiskindexisted,although
therewas a certaintendencyforhighlydispersivesubstancesto show relatively
largevariationsof VX2 withX.23
The experimentalresultswhich I have discussed in this sectionare put to-
getherin the followingtable whichshows the data available to theoreticiansat
varioustimes.
16 Ibid.
pp. 140-142.
17 Ibid.
pp. 142-163.
18 Ibid. 69
(1863),pp. 420-434.
19 E.
Becquerel: "Expériencesconcernantl'action du magnétismesur tous les corps", Ann.de
chim.et phys.3e sér.,17 (1846) 437-451.
20 G. Wiedemann: " Ueberdie
DrehungderPolarisationsebene
des Lichtesdurchdengalvanischen
Strom",Ann.d. Phys.u. Chem.82 (1851) 215-232.
Z1 Ann.de chim.et
phys.3e sér.,69 (1863) pp. 415-420.
Z1 Ibid. 438.
p.
ZJ Ibid.
pp. 439-451.

240 O. Knudsen
q>=VHrl (Faraday 1845)

V=0 in a vacuum Verdet 1854-1855
V=YuPi' Viîsome >''s<0 Verdet 1858

i
V • X2constant Becquerel 1846

V- X2almostconstant Wiedemann1851
V • X2slowlydecreasingfunctionofX Verdet 1863
Fig. 1
3. The Phenomenological
Approach
The firstmathematicaltreatment oftheFaraday effectwas givenby George
Biddell Airy,BritishAstronomerRoyal from1835,who seemsto have worked
it out as soon as he heard of the discovery24. AlthoughAiry, not surprisingly,
proceededfromthe generallyaccepted theoryof lightas transversewaves in an
elasticether,his treatmentwas purelyphenomenologicalin so faras he restricted
himself to introducinga newtermin thewaveequationoflight,withoutattempting
tojustifyeitherthe existenceor theparticularmathematicalformofthistermfrom
more fundamentalpostulates.ParallellingMacCullagh's previous work on
naturalrotation,Airy provedthata rotationoftheplane ofpolarization,withthe
propertiesfoundbyFaraday, wouldfollowif,in thesimplewave equationforthe
propagationalong thez-axisoflightin emptyspace,
- ' (3>1)
c2 dt2 dz2
one introducedon therighthand side a termoftheform
fcHx ; p>« intesers^ ° <3-2)

( 8,2p-+i8z2, u)
whereH is the"magneticforce"and k is a constantdependingon thetransparent

substancethroughwhichthelightraypasses25.
An equallyphenomenological, but muchmoreextensive,analysiswas carried
out by Verdet in his paper of 1863 26. Verdet was particularlyconcernedwith
settingup a wave equation from which thequantitativeresultsofhis experiments
on thedispersivefeaturesoftheFaraday effect could be deducedto a satisfactory
of
degree approximation, and thisled him to combineAiry'sresultwithCauchy's
of
theory ordinarydispersion. Cauchy had describedthe propagationof lightin
24 G.B.Airy: "On the ". Phil. Mag.,

equations applyingto lightunderthe action of magnetism
Ser.3,28 (1846)469-477.
25 else in thisarticle,I use a modern,standardizedvectornotation,inus
Here, as everywhere
(3.2)is a generalizedversionofthetermintroducedbyAiry.In (3.1)u represents theelasticdisplacement
in theether,whilec is thespeed oflightin a vacuum.
26 Ann.de chim.et
phys.,3e sér.,69 (1863) pp. 465-476.

any homogeneousisotropiemediumby thefollowingwave equation:
ô2u /Ô2' ....

^=n6?)U' (3-3)
whose values depend on the
where(p is a polynomialwithconstantcoefficients
natureof the medium.For a plane harmonicwave withfrequencyco and wave
numberkthisleads to thedispersionrelation
(D2= (p{k2). (3.4)
Taking(3.3)ratherthan(3.1)as hisstarting
point,Verdet nowproposedthefollow-
inggeneralwave equation :
wherem is proportionalto H and ^ is a polynomialwhichis odd withrespect

to 6/6i,in accordancewith(3.2).In thespecialcase wherethedirectionofpropaga-
tion is parallel to m, the linearlyindependentharmonicsolutionsof (3.5) are
circularlypolarized waves which,dependingon theirsense of rotation,satisfy
one or theotherof thetwo followingdispersionrelations:
œ2= (p(k'2)-m'l/(œ,k'2) or œ2= cp{k"2)+ m'jj{œ,k"2). (3.6)

This means that circularlypolarized rays with the same frequencywill travel
withdifferent speeds accordingto theirsense of rotationand, therefore, that a
linearlypolarized ray will have its plane of polarizationrotatedin the required
manner.To firstorder in m one findsthefollowingexpressionforthe angle of
rotationproducedin thepassage throughunitlengthofthesubstance:
.-K-H-^-^ÍSg.
2 2k(p(k2)
(3.7)
wherek is a solutionofthe"non-magnetic"dispersionrelation(3.4) and q>'is the
derivativeofthefunctionq>.Introducingtheindexofrefraction n and thevacuum
values k and c of wave lengthand speed correspondingto thefrequencyco,from
(3.4) one finds
^4 (■>-*.£)
and,further, thisinto(3.7),
byinserting
S=m-4^{n-Xll)^k2)- (3-9)
This expressionallows one to compare any hypothesisfor the function'j/
with experimentalresults,provided n is known as a functionof k. Using his
data forcarbon disulphideand creosote,Verdet investigatedthe threesimplest

242 O. Knudsen
cases
,6í3
whenusedin(3.9),giveas results
which,
ml dn'
2n2mn2I dn'
(311)
£=piHn-Aďi)
2n2mc/ dn'
~jr~'n~Aü)'
n(X)VerdettookCauchy'sapproximation
Forthefunction
n= (3.12)
A+^+^
determining thevaluesofthethreeconstants A,B and C fromhis ownmeas-
urements ofthedispersive powerofthetwosubstances.
Of thethreeformulae in (3.11)thefirstcouldclearlynotbe madeto fitthe
approximate validityofthe¿~2-law,so thecorresponding expression for'¡/could
be immediately discarded.Closerinspection showedthatthe secondformula
in(3.11)wasdefinitely thanthethird;however,
better inthecaseofcreosoteitstill
ledtodiscrepancies whichweretoolargetobeexplained awaybyanyconceivable
sourceoferror.Verdetwas therefore forcedto concludethat'j/couldnotbe a
universalfunction butthatitsformmustdependon thenatureofthesubstance.
Henceanytheory whichled to one definite expression for'¡/mustbe,ifnotre-
jected,at leastregardedas incomplete. Since thiswas true bothofNeumann's
theory, whichimplied thefirstof the expressions (3.10),and of Maxwell's,
in
whichimpliedthesecond,Verdetcouldnot,as he perhapshad hoped,declare
oneofthementirely although
satisfactory, Maxwell's resultseemedto be prefer-
able to Neumann's.As I shallshowlater,Maxwell's explanation had rather
seriousflawsofanotherkind,whichVerdet,however, seemsnotto havenoted,
probably becauseherestricted hisdiscussiontothedependence onwavelength.
the
Despite phenomenological characterof the work of Airy and Verdet,
neitherofthemwasinanysenseofthewordpositivistic inattitude.Airyhadinthe
early183O'sbeena partisan forthewavetheory oflightagainsttheemissionists,
andVerdet,editorofFresnel's Œuvres,belongedwhollyto thegroupofpeople
whoseworkin opticswas basedon Fresnel'stheory oflightand hismolecular
conception ofetherandmatter. Thus,although Verdetdeclared thathewishedhis
analysisto be as independent as possibleofanyparticular theory ofdispersion,
hisworkwasinfactentirely based on Cauchy's theory which in turnrestedon a

pictureofmatter ofbilliard
as consisting ballmolecules scatteredamongthepoint
oftheether.LikeCauchy,Verdetneverhitupontheideathatmaterial
particles
molecules might haveinternaldegreesoffreedom whichwouldmakeitnecessary
to coupletheequationsofmotionoftheetherwithequationsdescribing relative
motionsof molecularparts.A harmonicoscillatormodelof the kindwhich
Sellmeierand othersintroduced fordispersion,and whichlaterbecamean im-
portantfeature oftheelectrontheory,would,I believe,lie welloutsidetherealm
ofVerdet'sscientific concepts.Henceit is fairto say thatcontemporary ideas
abouttheconstitution ofetherand matterhad a morerestrictive influence on
Verdet'streatment its
thanone wouldgatherfrom general character and from
Verdet'sownassessment ofit.I mayadd thatina longfootnote tohisdiscussion
ofNeumann's theoryVerdet describedhisown basic ideasin somedetail.I shall
returnto thispointin§ 9 below.
4. The BritishApproach.Faraday
By themajority ofphysicistsworking aroundthemiddleofthenineteenth

centurythe establishment of phenomenological equations,such as Verdet's
waveequation,was regarded as onlya steptowardstheultimate goal,namely
to inventa mechanical modelof theinteraction betweenmagnetism, material
molecules, and theether,fromwhichsuchequationscouldbe deduced.In the
Newtoniantradition ofLaplace and hisfollowers in Franceand Germany the
basicelements ofa mechanical modelwouldbe pointparticlesactingon each
otherwithcentralforcesacrossemptyspace,whilephysicists belonging to the
field-theoretical
British, schoolwouldtendtothinkoftheetheras a fundamentally
continuous elasticsubstancewhoseproperties wereinsomewayorothermodified
locally in the neighbourhood ofmagnetsor electriccurrents. Thus,despitethe
factthatbothcampssoughtto explaintheFaraday effect in mechanical terms,
themodelswhichtheyactuallyproducedwereradically differentinstructure and
led eventually, in thetheoriesofMaxwell and C. Neumann,to quitedifferent
expressions fortheangleofrotation. The latterpointis particularlyremarkable
sinceitis a wellknownfactthat,untilHertz performed hisfamousexperiments
on electromagnetic waves,therewasno experimentally investigated phenomenon
in thewholedomainofelectricity and magnetism forwhichtherivaltheories of
Maxwell and Weberdidnotpredict exactlyidenticalresults.As I shallshow in
thisand thefollowing theFaraday effect
sections, playeda veryimportant role
in thedevelopment offieldtheoryin Britain, becauseit providedW.Thomson
andMaxwell withthecluetoa definite mechanical representation ofthemagnetic
field;whilein Continental physics therealreadyexisteda theoretical framework
whichonlyneededa slight extension inordertobeabletoincorporate theeffect.
To Faraday himself theimportance ofhis discovery lay in thefactthatit
hadrevealeda "newmagnetic condition ofmatter"whichhe described as a state
oftensionthatgavematter thepowerofactingon lightin a newway27.He set
out immediately to findothereffects ofthisnewstateofmatterand succeeded
within twomonths in discoveringdiamagnetism in thesamepieceofheavyglass
27 Faraday:
Researches,III, § 2227.
Experimental

244 O. Knudsen
thathad first producedthemagnetic rotation28. The diamagnetic action,which

manifested itselfas mechanicalforcesor torqueson chunksof matterplaced
ina strongly inhomogeneous magneticfield,provided Faraday witha newmeans
ofexploring thismagnetic theresultbeingthathe abandonedwork
condition,
on themagnetic rotationalmostcompletely and devotedthemajorpartofhis
laterefforts to the investigationofdiamagnetic phenomena andthedevelopment
ofhisideasaboutthemagnetic 29.As reasonsforthisrather
field abrupttransition,
onemightsuggest firstthathe felthisexperiments on themagnetic rotation had
exhausted thesubject- Faraday wasneverinclined toproduceprecisenumerical
data on well-known phenomena30 - and secondthatthe diamagnetic action,
whichwaspresent inopaqueas wellas transparent bodies,promised tobe a more
powerful tool ofinvestigation, particularlyafterPlücker had drawnattention
to theintriguing diamagnetic of
properties crystals.
It was,thus,undoubtedly themagnetic rotation oftheplaneofpolarization
thatfirstdemonstrated theexistenceofthenewmagnetic condition, and which
thereby that
originated long trainofexperimental investigation and theoretical
speculation bymeansofwhichFaraday eventually convinced himself thatthe
magnetic lines of force were more than mere geometrical illustrations,thatthey
indicateda physicalstatein thespace surrounding a magnet.It is also clear,
however, thatduringthisdevelopment themechanical and electromotive effects
ofmagnetic actionwereofmuchgreater influence in shapingFaraday's field-
theoretical ideas.
To complete thestoryofFaraday's treatment ofthemagnetic rotation, one
shouldadd thathe nevertriedto workout anydetailedexplanation ofit.This
is quitecharacteristic ofhisapproachto physics.He was alwaysveryreluctant
to commithimself to any definitepictureof the molecularworld;insteadof
exemplifying hisbasicideasbyanyparticular modelanddeducingpreciseresults
fromit,he preferred to be guidedbyverygeneraland rather vaguenotionsfrom
knownphenomena to suggestionsofnewones,whoseexistence he wouldthen
tryto establish or disprove It wassucha procedure
experimentally. thatbrought
himfromthediscovery ofthemagnetic rotationto thatofdiamagnetism, and a
similarkindofreasoning gavehimtheidea ofan inverse, "photoelectric" effect
whichhe triedin vainto detectbylookingforan electromotive forceresulting
fromtheactionofpolarizedlighton different bodies31.
5. W. Thomson
modelswas notsharedbyhisprom-
molecular
Faraday'sdislikeofdefinite
inentBritish William
disciples, Thomson and JamesClerk Maxwell. To them
theuse of mechanicalmodelsbecamean important researchtool whichthey
28 Ibid.
§§2253-2274.
29 In Researches,III, at least 500 pages are devoted to these subjects,while the
Experimental
magneticrotationis dealtwithin thefirst26 pages. See also L. P.Williams: MichaelFaraday,chapters
9-10.
30
Verdet, comparing Faraday to other experimenters,said that his experimentswere
"... beaucoup plus nombreuseset plus variées,mais destinéessimplementà montrerla généralitédu
phénomène,sans prendreaucune mesure..." (Ann.de chim.et phys.,3e sér.,52 (1858),p. 129).
31 L. P. Williams: Michael
Faraday,pp. 409-411.

appliedconsciously and in a sophisticated way.In mostcasesthemodelswhich

theyproposedand analysedweremeantto be whatThomsoncalled"dynamical
illustrations"and Maxwell called "physicalanalogies".These had the dual
function of showingthata mechanicalexplanationof the phenomenaunder
investigationwas possible,and ofserving as temporary theoretical tools,helping
themindto grasprelations between phenomena and leadingto predictions that
mightbe checkedexperimentally. Sucha modeldid notamountto a "physical
hypothesis" or a "physicaltheory",in which,to quote Maxwell, "physical
"
factswillbephysically explained32,anditwasnottobethought ofas representing
thetruemolecular reality orthetrueconstitution oftheether.Nevertheless, some
ofitsfeatures might be trueinthesensethattheycouldbe shownto be necessary
elements ofanyconceivable mechanical model,in whichcase one had succeeded
inestablishing a trueproperty ofetheror matter33. Theparticular importance of
theFaraday effect in theworkofThomsonand Maxwell comesfromthefact
thatitdemonstrated to themone suchtruth:a magnetic fieldis themacroscopic
effectofrotations on themicroscopic scale.
Thisstatement was first formulated byThomsonin a paperof1856in which
he analysedbothnaturaland magnetic opticalrotations34.The paperis worth
studying, both because of itsprofound influence on Maxwell, oftenstressed in
Maxwell's laterwritings, andbecauseThomsonhereforthefirst timecombined
a "dynamical illustration" withan attempt to demonstrate a truemicroscopic
property. (Thomson's earlier work on the analogy between electrostaticsand
heatconduction35, and betweenelectromagnetism and elasticitytheory36, con-
tainsno suchattempt, and neither does Maxwell's paper" On Faraday'sLines
ofForce"37.)
Thomsonbeganhispaperbystatingthatnaturalrotation probably was due
to a spiralheterogeneousness of the opticallyactivesubstanceoverdistances
comparable to opticalwavelengths. He wenton to arguethattheFaraday effect
could onlybe explainedon theassumption thatthemediumtraversed by the
polarizedraycontained particleswhichweresetincircular motionbythemagnetic
evenwhenno lightwastransmitted;
field, andthatthesemotionscombined with
32 In his "On
Faraday's Lines of Force", reprintedin W.D.Niven, ed: The ScientificPapers of
JamesClerkMaxwell,Cambridge1890,Dover Pubi. 1965,vol. I, p. 159.
33 Maxwell's use of modelsis discussedin
greaterdetail in P.M. Heimann: "Maxwell and the
Modes ofConsistentRepresentation", Arch.Hist. Ex. Sci. 6 (1970) 171-213.See also A.F.Chalmers:
"Maxwell's Methodologyand his Applicationofitto Electromagnetism", Stud.Hist.Phil.Sci. 4 (1973)
107-164.
34 W.Thomson:
"Dynamical Illustrationsof the Magneticand the Helicoidal RotatoryEffects
of TransparentBodies on Polarized Light",Proc. Roy. Soc. 8 (1856) 150-158; Phil. Mag. 13 (1857)
198-204; reprintedin Lord Kelvin: BaltimoreLectureson MolecularDynamicsand the WaveTheory
ofLight,London 1904,pp. 569-577.
35 W.Thomson: "On the UniformMotion of Heat in
HomogeneousSolid Bodies,and its Con-
nexion withthe MathematicalTheoryof Electricity",Comb. Math. J. 3 (1842) 71-84; reprintedin
W.Thomson:ReprintofPapers on Electrostatics and Magnetism,London 1872,pp. 1-14.
36 W.Thomson:"On a Mechanical
Representationof Electric,Magnetic,and Galvanic Forces",
Camb. and Dublin Math. J. 2 (1847) 61-64; reprintedin W.Thomson: Mathematicaland Physical
Papers,vol. I, Cambridge1882,pp. 76-80.
37 J.C.Maxwell: "On
Faraday's Lines of Force", Trans.Camb. Phil. Soc. 10 (1864) 27-83, re-
printedin Papers,I, pp. 155-229.

246 O. Knudsen
the"luminiferous motions"to givethetotalmotionsoftheparticles.

Thomson's
reasoningis discussedin greater He concludedtheargu-
detailintheAppendix.
mentby thefollowing statement formis in markedcontrast
whosecategorical
to theratherguardedlanguagewhichhe had usedin thecase ofnaturalrota-
tion:38
I thinkitis notonlyimpossible to conceiveanyotherthanthisdynamical
explanation ofthefact... ; butI believeitcan be demonstratedthatno other
explanation ofthatfactis possible.Henceit appearsthatFaraday'soptical
discoveryaffords a demonstration oftherealityofAmpere'sexplanationof
theultimate natureofmagnetism ; ...
This,Thomsonarguedfurther, theresultant
suggested angularmomentum ofthe
measureofthemagnetic
motionsas thedefinite
circular moment. Having related
thecircularmotionsto themolecularvorticesin Rankine'stheoryofheat,he
addedanotherdictum:39
The explanationof all phenomenaof electro-magnetic or re-
attraction
pulsion,and ofelectro-magnetic is to be lookedforsimplyin the
induction,
inertiaandpressureofthematter ofwhichthemotionsconstitute heat.
IfThomsonthusleftno doubtabouttheexistence ofcircularmotionsin the
magnetic he was lessdefinite
field, as to thenatureofthecirculating particles.
Fromtheabovereference to heat,and fromthefactthattheFaraday effect is
foundonlyin the presenceof matter, one mightexpectthemto be material
molecules or partsofsuch.Insteadofa statement Thomsongavea
to thiseffect,
The "matter
listofpossibilities. ofwhichthemotionsconstitute heat"might, he
it mightbe "a continuous
said,be electricity, fluidinterpermeating thespaces
between molecular nuclei"or itmightitself be molecularly grouped;andfinally,
all mattermightbe continuous, molecularheterogeneousness consisting"in
finitevorticalor otherrelativemotionsof contiguouspartsof a body".The
vaguenessat thispointis characteristic of bothThomsonand Maxwell who
alwayssuffered from thelackofa definite conception oftheconstitutionofmatter
and thenatureofelectricity. It is interestingto see howmuchThomson's views
on thenatureof heatwereinfluenced by Rankine'sidea ofheatas a vortical
motionof etheratmospheres surrounding molecularnucleiand how different
theywere from Clausius' (as yetunpublished) notionsabout"thenatureofthe
motions whichwecallheat".40
38 BaltimoreLectures, 570-571.
pp.
"
Ibid.,p. 571.
40 In 1850-1851Thomson and Clausius independently formulatedequivalentversionsot the
two fundamental laws ofthermodynamicsand workedout some oftheirmathematicalconsequences.
Whileboth statedthatheat is a formof motion,the firstdetailedattemptto describethe natureof
thermalmotionswas Clausius' paper: "Ueber die Art der Bewegung,welchewir Wärmenennen",
Ann.d. Phys.u. Chem.100 (1857)353-380.Rankine's vortextheoryofheatwas publishedin twopapers
entitled"On theMechanicalActionofHeat" whichappearedin Trans.Roy.Soc. Edin.in 1850and 1853
and were reprintedin W.J.Macquorn Rankine: MiscellaneousScientificPapers, London 1881,
pp. 234-284 and 310-338. Thomson and Rankine were in close contact at least after1850 when
Rankine came to livein Glasgow.The veryterm"molecularnuclei" is takenfromone of Rankine's
papers.

A (j) B
im
Fig. 2
After thepassagesquotedabove,withtheirvisionofa completemechanical

theoryof electromagnetic, opticaland thermalphenomena,the "dynamical
illustration"whichThomsonwenton to present appearsrather limitedin scope.
He consideredthe pendulumshownin Fig.2 whereAB is a horizontalbar
rotating withconstantangularvelocity rounda verticalaxisthrough itsmiddle
point.He solvedtheequationsofmotionofthemassm withrespectto a system
ofcoordinates rotating withthebar,and showedthatbecauseoftheCoriolis
forcea possiblestateofmotionconsistsin a planevibration withthevibration
planeturning slowlyrelatively to therotatingcoordinate system.Thisillustrated
thefactthattheresultofcompounding a planevibration witha rotationwas a
slow turning of thevibration plane,and thatan explanationof the Faraday
effect alongthe lines he had indicatedwas therefore mechanically conceivable.
The idea ofmicroscopic rotationscontinued to occupyThomson'simagina-
tion.On January 6, 1858,he putdownin hisnotebooka number ofspeculations
associatedwiththisidea and withtheextentto whichthemodelofa fluidfilling
the interstices betweensolid particleswould be successful in explainingthe
knownproperties ofsensiblematter41. The entryis somewhat rambling, butits
mainthemeis thatbyassuming theparticles
torotate,therebygenerating vortices
in thefluid,Thomsonthought he couldexplaintheFaraday effect (whichwas
"whatreallybrought on thewholeattack"),thegeneration ofheatbymechanical
actionor byelectrical currents, heatconduction, theelasticity
ofsolids,liquids,
and gases,and,importantly, magnetic attraction.The latterwould resultfrom
the centrifugal forcesbetweenthe vortices,preciselyas in Maxwell's later
model."A completedynamicalillustration of magnetism & electromagnetism
seemsnotat all difficult or faroff",Thomsonremarked However,
prophetically.
he didnotallowhimself to thinkthathe wason thepointofdeveloping thefinal
theory ofetherand matter:"It does notseemprobablethata completetheory
of physicalsciencecan be foundedon sucha hypothesis". Whathe was con-
sidering was a model,a "dynamicalillustration"; hencehe deletedthe words
"explained"and "theory", replacingthemby "illustrated" and "illustration".
Still,themodelpossessedthetruefeature ofaccounting formagnetic actionin
termsof microscopic rotations, and the wholeentryis closelyrelatedto the
paperof1856.
41 The fulltextofthis "
passageis givenin my FromLord Kelvin'sNotebook: EtherSpeculations",
Centaurus16 (1972) 41-53. Unfortunately the date theregiven (on p. 47) is wrongby one year; it
should be 1858.

248 O. Knudsen
6. The Developmentof Maxwell's VortexTheory

Turningnow to Maxwell's work,I shall firsttryto determinetheextentto
whichhis developmentof the firstversionof his electromagnetic theoryof light
was directedby the Faraday effectand Thomson'sideas describedabove. For
thispurpose it is necessaryto compare Maxwell's greatarticleof 1861-1862,
"On PhysicalLines of Force"42, withhis earlierpaper of 1856,"On Faraday's
Lines of Force"43. There are importantdifferences with respect to purpose,
methodand contentbetweenthesetwo papers,even if Maxwell's ultimateaim
always consistedin the reductionof the laws of electricityand magnetismto
consequencesofthelaws ofmechanics.This reduction,as Maxwell fullyrealized,
had alreadybeen successfullycarriedout by Wilhelm Weber whosefundamental
law forthe forcebetweentwo electricalparticlescombinedwithhis Ampèrean
theoryof molecularcurrentshad enabled him to forma completemechanical
theoryof electricityand magnetism.However, by the time Maxwell read
Weber's theoryhe had alreadyimmersedhimselfso thoroughlyin Faraday's
field-theoreticalway of thinkingthat he was unable to take seriouslyWeber's
assumption of an force,dependingon relativevelocityand
action-at-a-distance
acceleration,as theultimatefoundationofelectrodynamics. In May 1855 he told
Thomson44:
I am readingWeber's Elektrodynamische MaasbestimmungenwhichI have
heard you speak of. I have been examininghis mode of connectingelectro-
staticswithelectrodynamics, induction& c & I confessI like it not at first.
and fourmonthslaterhe gave Thomsonhis finalverdicton Weber45:
I have also been workingat Weber'stheoryof ElectroMagnetismas a mathe-
maticalspeculationwhichI do not believebut whichoughtto be compared
withothersand certainlygives many true resultsat the expense of several
startlingassumptions.
If Maxwell by 1855 was convincedthat Weber's theorymustbe dismissed
and replacedby a fieldtheory46he was unfortunately not yetable even to begin
to developsucha theory.He thereforeconfinedhimself
tocarrying outtwodifferent,
tasks.In thefirstpartof"On Faraday's Lines ..." he workedout
less pretentious
a physicalanalogy,showingthatFaraday's lines of electricand magneticforce
42 J.C.Maxwell: "On
PhysicalLines ofForce", Phil.Mag. 21 (1861) 161-175,281-291,338-348;
23 (1862) 12-14, 85-95; repr.in: The ScientificPapers of James Clerk Maxwell, Cambridge 1890,
Dover Pubi. 1965,vol. I, pp. 451-513.
43 J.C.Maxwell: "On
Faraday's Lines of Force", Trans. Camb. Phil. Soc. 10 (1864) 27-83;
Papers,I, pp. 155-229.The paperwas read on December10,1855,and February11,1856.
44 Letterto W.Thomson,
May 15, 1855,printedin J.Larmor: The Originsof Clerk Maxwells
ElectricIdeas, as Described in Familiar Lettersto W.Thomson", Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 32 (1936)
695-750,p. 705.
45 Letterto W.Thomson,
September13, 1855,ibid.p. 711.
*° "Now I
thoughtthatas everycurrentgeneratedmagneticlines & was acted on in a manner
determinedby the lines throwh: it passed thatsomethingmightbe done by considering'magnetic
polarization'as a propertyofa 'magneticfield'or space and developingthegeometricalideas accord-
ingto thisview".Letterto W.Thomson,November13,1854,ibid.p. 702.

satisfied
thesamemathematical equationsas streamlinesinan idealincompress-
iblefluid.He tookgreatpainsto spelloutto hisreadersthathe did notbelieve
ofsucha fluidandthathewasnotattempting
intherealexistence togivea physical
theory ofelectric
or explanation and magnetic phenomena butmerely tryingto
assisthisownimagination,and thatofothers, bypointingto an analogy.At the
sametimeheexpressed hisbeliefthat47
a maturetheory,in whichphysicalfactswillbe physically willbe
explained,
formed by those who Nature
by interrogating can
herself obtainthe only
whichthemathematical
truesolutionofthequestions theorysuggests.
Itis veryclearfromMaxwell's statements thata physical analogyis a temporary
tool whichcan be moreor lessuseful, whilea physicaltheoryis eithertrueor
false;andalso thatthereis oneandonlyonetruetheory ofelectricity
andmagne-
tism.
In thesecondpartofhis paperMaxwell turnedto electrodynamics. Here
he did notevenhavea physicalanalogyto offer, buthe had beenimpressed by
Faraday'suseoftheconceptofan"electrotonic state"as thebasisfortheformula-
tionofthelawsofelectrodynamics. He showedthatiftheelectrotonic statewas
defined as a vectorfield,Faraday's verbaldescriptioncouldbe condensedinto
a tightmathematical formalism.He madeitquiteclearthat,sincehecouldgiveno
physicalinterpretationof the state,histheorywas a purelyformal
electrotonic
one:48
I do notthinkthatitcontainseventheshadowofa truephysicaltheory; in
fact,itschiefmeritas a temporary
instrument
ofresearchis thatit does not,
evenin appearance, accountforanything.
In theintroductionMaxwell hadsaidthatthepurposeofhispaperwas
... toshewhow... thelawsoftheattractions
andinductiveactionsofmagnets
andcurrents be
may clearly conceived,withoutmakinganyassumptionsas to
thephysicalnatureofelectricity,
or addinganything
to thatwhichhas been
alreadyprovedbyexperiment.
and further
... to avoidthedangersarisingfroma premature
theory to explain
professing
thecauseofthephenomena.49
Towardstheendofthepaperhe contrasted hisformaltheoryoftheelectrotonic
statewithWeber's"professedly physicaltheoryof electrodynamics"and tried
to defend himself
in advanceagainsttheobviousdangerthathisworkwouldbe
seenas an unnecessaryandincompleteduplicationofWeber's:50
Whatis theuse thenofimagining an electro-tonic
stateofwhichwe haveno
distinctly
physical instead
conception, of a formula
ofattraction
whichwecan
47 Maxwell:
Papers,I, p. 159.
48 Ibid. 207.
p.
49 Ibid. 159.
p.
50 Ibid. 208.
p.

250 O. Knudsen
readilyunderstand?I would answer,thatit is a good thingto have two ways

oflookingat a subject,and to admitthatthereare two waysof lookingat it.
Besides,I do not thinkthatwe have any rightat presentto understandthe
action of electricity,
and I hold thatthe chiefmeritof a temporarytheoryis,
that it shall guide experiment,withoutimpedingthe progressof the true
theorywhen it appears. There are also objectionsto makingany ultimate
forcesin naturedependon thevelocityof thebodies betweenwhichtheyact.
If theforcesin natureare to be reducedto forcesactingbetweenparticles,
the
principleof the Conservationof Force requiresthat these forcesshould be
in thelinejoiningtheparticlesand functionsofthedistanceonly.
Maxwell's defensedoes not strikeone as particularlystrong.It is not the
generalpracticeinphysicsto starton a newtheorymerelyforthesakeofdeveloping
an alternative viewofa subjectwhichis alreadyaccountedforsatisfactorily byan
existingtheory.His only real argumentagainstWeber's theory,thata velocity-
dependentforceseemsto be inconsistent withtheprincipleofenergyconservation,
would normallybe seen as callingforan attemptto eliminatethe inconsistency
ratherthan as justifying a completedismissalof the whole theory.This was the
standpointof Weber himselfand of his discipleCarl Neumann in theirdispute
withHelmholtz51, and theysucceeded to the extentthat Maxwell later had
to admitthatWeber's law is consistentwithenergyconservation52.
From the passages I have quoted Maxwell's opinion of the stateof electric
and magneticscience in late 1855 emergessomewhatas follows: in Weber's
theorywe have a completephysicaltheorycomprisingthe whole subject.This
theory,however,is false,not because thereis any empiricalevidenceagainstit,
but because it is based on the unacceptable principleof velocity-dependent
action at a distance.The truetheoryhas not yetbegun to appear; all we know
about it is thatit mustbe a fieldtheoryin whichFaraday's linesofforcemustbe
a fundamentalconcept.In this unsatisfactory situationthe methodof physical
analogies is valuable because it may assist one's imaginationin comingup with
new and fruitful ideas and, finally,because it does not prejudiceone against
acceptingthe truetheoryonce it appears.
I have alreadyemphasizedMaxwell's beliefin the truedynamicaltheoryof
electricity and magnetism.In the followingI shall argue that when Maxwell
in 1861 wrote"On PhysicalLines of Force", he was happilyconvincedthathe
had foundthistheory, or at leastthemagneticpartofit.To supportthiscontention,
let me firstquote a passage froma letterto Thomson,writtenin December 1861
whenhis workon thatarticlewas just finished:53
Since I saw you I have been tryingto develope the dynamicaltheoryof
magnetismas an affection of the wholemagneticfieldaccordingto theviews
statedbyyou in theRoyal Society'sproceedings1856or Phil.Mag. 1857vol. I
p. 199 and elsewhere.
51 This
disputeis describedin K.H.Wiederkehr: WilhelmWebersStellungin der Entwicklung
Dissertation,Hamburg1960,pp. 136-142.
derElektrizitätslehre,
52 J.C.Maxwell: A Treatiseon
Electricityand Magnetism,3rded., Oxford1891, Dover Pubi.
1954,§ 856.
53
Letter,Maxwell to Thomson,December 10, 1861; Larmor, op. cit.note44, p. 728.

Bothreferences are to Thomson'spaperof 1856whichI havediscussedabove.

The"viewsstatedbyyou"canonlybe Thomson's proofofthenecessity ofassum-
ing microscopic rotationsfortheexplanationof the Faraday effect. For my
particularpurposeitis important to notethatMaxwell speaksofthedynamical
theory ratherthanofa physical analogy.
Anothersignificant statement is foundin thearticleitself. Afterhavingre-
peatedthathe had used,in hisformer paper,"mechanicalillustrations to assist
theimagination, but not to account forthe phenomena", Maxwell went on54:
I proposenowto examinemagnetic phenomena froma mechanical point
ofview,andtodetermine whattensions in,ormotions of,a medium arecapable
ofproducing themechanical phenomena observed. If,bythesamehypothesis,
we can connectthephenomena ofmagnetic attraction withelectromagnetic
phenomena and withthoseofinducedcurrents, we shallhavefounda theory
which,ifnottrue,can onlybe provedto be erroneous byexperiments which
enlargeourknowledge
willgreatly ofthispartofphysics.
Now,in Maxwell's terminology a theory whichis bothmechanical and trueis
something to a
superior physical
infinitely analogyor a mathematical formalism.
It seemsto me difficult to interpret thispassageotherwise thanas meaning
thatMaxwell had now foundthe truemechanicaltheorywhichhe in 1855
couldonlyhopefor.Theonlywayofescapingthisconclusion wouldbebyclaiming
thathe changedhisterminology ratherdrasticallybetween1855and 1861.That
thisis not thecase,is broughtout by thefollowing passagedealingwiththe
particleswhich function as idle wheels between the vortices and themotionsof
whichareinterpreted as constituting electriccurrentsordisplacements: 55
The conception ofa particlehavingitsmotionconnected withthatofa

vortexby perfect rollingcontact mayappear somewhat awkward. I do not
bring itforwardas a mode ofconnexion existingin nature, orevenas that which
I wouldwillinglyassenttoas an electricalhypothesis. It is,however, a mode of
connexion whichis mechanically conceivable, and easilyinvestigated, and it
servesto bringout theactualmechanicalconnexionsbetweentheknown
electro-magneticphenomena; so thatI venture to saythatanyonewhounder-
standstheprovisional and temporary character ofthishypothesis, willfind
himself ratherhelpedthanhindered by it in his searchafterthetrueinter-
pretation ofthephenomena.
This passage,withits distinction betweena provisional and temporary hypo-
thesisandthetrueinterpretation,isverymuchinaccordance withtheterminology
of"On Faraday'sLines...". The completeabsenceofsimilarstatements about
thatconceptionof magnetic vorticeson whichthewholetheoryis based is a
strong,although negative,argument infavourofmycontention.
Maxwell's statements suggestthathe believedin thereality ofthemagnetic
vorticeswhilehe regarded as merely provisional theidlewheelrepresentation of
Thisviewis further
electricity. supported bytheintroduction to PartII of" On
54 Maxwell:
Papers,I, p. 452.
55
Ibid.,p. 486.

252 O. Knudsen
PhysicalLines...". HereMaxwell formulatedtwoquestionsaboutthenature

ofthemagnetic fieldandtwoaboutthenatureofitsrelation
to currents.
Thetwo
he said,56
latter,
are certainlyofa higherorderofdifficulty thaneitheroftheformer; and I
wishto separatethesuggestions I mayoffer of
byway provisional answer to
them, from the mechanicaldeductions which resolvedthe first question,and
thehypothesis ofvorticeswhichgavea probableanswerto thesecond.
Itis wellknownthatwhileMaxwell in"On Physical Lines..." madedetailed
useofthevortex cellsandidlewheelsinhisderivation ofthefundamental electro-
magnetic equationsand in hisidentification oflightwithelectromagnetic waves,
he lateralwayspreferred to workin termsofanalytical dynamics whichallowed
himtoderivetheequationswithout anyassumption aboutthedetailedmechanical
structure oftheether.Thisdoes notmean,however, thathe losthisfaithin the
vortex theory ofthemagnetic In
field. a lecture"On Action at a Distance"which
he gaveat theRoyalInstitution in 1873he summedup theknownelements of
themechanical of in
theory electromagnetism passagea which I shallquoteat
length because it at once recapitulates and confirms the views I have triedto
establishabove.Havingexplainedmuscularactionas arisingfroma stateof
stressinthemuscle,Maxwell continued57
For similarreasonswe mayregardFaraday'sconceptionof a stateof
stressin theelectro-magnetic fieldas a methodof explaining actionat a
distancebymeansofthecontinuous transmission offorce, eventhoughwe
do notknowhowthestateofstressis produced.
But one of Faraday'smostpregnant discoveries,thatof the magnetic
rotationofpolarisedlight,enablesus to proceeda stepfarther. The pheno-
menon, whenanalysedintoitssimplest elements, maybe described thus:-Of
twocircularly polarisedraysoflight,precisely similarin configuration, but
rotating thatrayis propagated
inoppositedirections, withthegreater velocity
whichrotates inthesamedirection as theelectricityofthemagnetizing current.
It followsfromthis,as Sir W.Thomsonhas shewnby strictdynamical
reasoning,thatthemediumwhenundertheactionofmagnetic forcemustbe
in thestateof rotation- thatis to say,thatsmallportionsof themedium
whichwe maycall molecular vortices, arerotating,eachon itsownaxis,the
directionofthisaxisbeingthatofthe magnetic force.
Here,then,wehavean explanation ofthetendency ofthelinesofmagnetic
forceto spreadout laterallyand to shortenthemselves. It arisesfromthe
centrifugalforceofthemolecular vortices.
The modein whichelectromotive forceactsin starting and stopping the
vorticesis moreabstruse, though it is of courseconsistent with dynamical
principles.
ThatMaxwell did notabandonthevortextheory is also shownbythefact
thatitappearsinfulldetailintheTreatise, in
namely chapter 21 ofpartIV,which
56 Ibid.,p. 468.
57 Maxwell:
Papers,II, p. 321.

bearsthetitle"MagneticActionon Light"and dealswiththeFaraday effect.

Thischapterfollowsimmediately aftertheone in whichthewaveequationof
lightis obtainedfromthegeneralfieldequations.WhileMaxwell was able to
derivetheseequations,and hencethe electromagnetic theoryof light,solely
fromLagrange'sequationsofmotion,it is evidentthatfurther specialassump-
tionswererequired fortheexplanation oftheFaraday effect. Thevortextheory
wasthusintroduced exactly atthepointwhereMaxwell couldprogress nofurther
on thebasisofhisgeneralconceptoftheetheras a mechanical system andso was
forcedto considerthedetailedstructure ofthesystem. "It is veryremarkable",
hewrotetoThomson, "that,inspiteofthecurlintheelectromagnetic equationsof
all kinds,Faraday's twistofpolarizedlightwillnotcomeoutwithout whatthe
schoolmen calledlocal motion".58 At first sight Maxwell's characterization of
hisexplanation oftheFaraday effect as "of a provisional kind"59mightlead
onetothinkthatthevortex theorywasbrought inas merely an ad hocassumption
forthesake of thisexplanation. But a closerreadingshowsthatMaxwell's
doubtsrelatedto "the detailsof themolecularconstitution of bodies"and to
"thenatureofmolecular and
vortices, the mode in which theyareaffected bythe
ofthe
displacement medium"60, not to the existence ofthe vortices. Thisis shown
bythefollowing veryexplicitpassageinthelongnoteattheendofchapter21.61
I thinkwe havegoodevidencefortheopinionthatsomephenomenon of
rotationis goingon inthemagnetic field,thatthisrotation is performed bya
greatnumberofverysmallportionsofmatter, eachrotating on itsownaxis,
thisaxis beingparallelto thedirection of themagnetic force,and thatthe
rotationsofthesedifferent vorticesare madeto dependon one anotherby
meansofsomekindofmechanism connecting them.
Maxwell hadprepared thegroundforthisstatement bygivinga directproof
oftheexistence ofinternal rotationsina medium exhibiting theFaraday effect62.
He did thisby deriving a Lagrangian equationof motionforthelightwave
andshowing thatthiswouldleadto therequired i.e.to different
results, velocities
of propagationfortwo circularly polarizedrayswithequal frequencies but
oppositedirections ofrotation, ifand onlyifthekineticenergyofthemedium
contained a termwhichwasa productoftheangularvelocity ofthelightvector
withsomeunknownangularvelocitybelongingto a rotationaroundan axis
parallelto themagnetic linesofforce.Thedetailsoftheargument aregiveninthe
Appendix.
Thisproofwas ofcoursenothing buta mathematical elaboration ofThom-
son's verbaldemonstration of 1856.In the note referred to above Maxwell
quotedThomson's"exceedingly important remark"fromthepaperof1856and
said thatthewholeof chapter21 mightbe regardedas an expansionof this
remark. He endedthenotebyrecapitulating whathadbeenestablished andwhat
wasstillunknown aboutthemechanical structure oftheether:63
58 Undated
postcard,Maxwell to Thomson; Larmor, op. cit.note 44, p. 748.
59 Maxwell:
Treatise,§ 830.
60 Ibid.
61
/¿id.,§831.
62
Ibid.,§§816-821.
63
/òíd.,§831.

254 O. Knudsen
The problemofdetermining themechanism requiredto establish a given

speciesof connexionbetweenthemotionsof thepartsof a systemalways
admitsofan infinite
number ofsolutions.Ofthese,somemaybe moreclumsy
ormorecomplexthanothers, butall mustsatisfy theconditionsofmechanism
ingeneral.
Thefollowing resultsofthetheory, however, areofhigher value: -
of
(1) Magneticforceis theeffect thecentrifugal force
of the vortices.
induction
(2) Electromagnetic of currents is the effect
ofthe forcescalled
intoplaywhenthevelocity ofthevortices is changing.
(3) Electromotive
force arisesfrom thestress ontheconnecting mechanism.
(4) Electric
displacement arisesfrom the elastic of
yielding theconnecting
mechanism.
Thus,after1861Maxwell nevergot anyfurther towardsestablishing the
completedynamical theoryof electromagnetic phenomena;in fact,his funda-
mentalconception ofthemechanical structure oftheetherremained unaltered.
The Faraday effect had providedhimwithreliableknowledge ofa partofthis
themagnetic
structure, vortices, buttheprecise nature ofthemechanism connecting
thevortices continued to eludehis efforts. His modelof 1861had represented
thismechanism bymeansoftheidlewheelparticles and theelasticskinsofthe
vortices,but it was impossible forhimto believein thereal existenceof this
clumsy machinery, norwasheeverabletoreplaceitbya moreadequatemechani-
cal device.
As we haveseen,theFaraday effect playeda decisiverolein theformation
ofMaxwell's fundamental conception themechanical
of structure oftheether
as consisting ofmolecularvortices a
and connecting mechanism. I believethat
thisconception underlies all of Maxwell's work in electromagnetism that
and
severalcharacteristic features of his can be
theory only correctly understood and
interpretedin terms ofit.As an example, letus consider theproblem of thenature
ofelectricity.It is wellknownthatMaxwell's Treatise treatsthisproblemvery
unsatisfactorily; as Hertz pointedout,oneis ledto severalmutually inconsistent
of
concepts electricity by reading the book 64.This feature can, I think, be ex-
as the
plained reflecting following fundamental difficultyin Maxwell's mechanical
conception. Fromstatements (3) and (4) in thepassagequotedaboveit follows
that,whatever electricity is, it mustbe an inseparablepartof themechanism
connecting the vortices. Since electromagnetic inductiontakesplace acrossa
vacuum,thismechanism mustextendthroughemptyspace; henceelectricity
mustbe a fundamental constituent of freeetheror vacuum.Butthephenomena
ofelectrical conduction and particularly thoseofelectrolysis, in whichdefinite
quantitiesofelectricity are alwaystransported and depositedon theelectrodes
incompany withproportional quantities ofmatter, seemtoindicate verystrongly
thatelectricityis a fundamental constituent ofthe molecules ofmatter. Maxwell
himselfacknowledged thisfact,althoughreluctantly, in histreatment ofelectro-
(Thedifficulty
lysis65. ofreconcilling Maxwell's idea ofelectricitypartofthe
as
64 Hertz' über
vol. II: Untersuchungen
analysisis foundin Heinrich Hertz: GesammelteWerke,
dieAusbreitungderelektrischen Kraft,Leipzig 1914,pp. 28-29.
e:> Maxwell: Treatise, 255-263.
§§

connecting mechanism withthephenomena of conductionis perhapsbestillus-

tratedbytheelectrical ofthe1861model;in conductors
particles theseparticles
mustbe able to movefreely amongthemoleculesoftheconductor, whilein free
ether,wherenothingseemsto stopthem,theirpositionsmustremainfixedin
space).Facedwiththisdifficulty,
Maxwell, inthefollowing passage,stuckto the
idea oftheconnecting mechanism, and so wasforcedto regardthetruenatureof
and ofelectric
electrolysis currentsas stilla completemystery in spiteofthefact
thatthesephenomena seemedto admitofa simpleand adequateexplanation in
termsofmolecularcharges66
Thistheory ofmolecularchargesmayserveas a methodbywhichwemay
remember a goodmanyfactsaboutelectrolysis. Itisextremelyimprobable that
whenwecometo understand thetruenatureofelectrolysis we shallretainin
anyformthetheory ofmolecularcharges, forthenwe shallhaveobtaineda
securebasison whichtoform a truetheory ofelectriccurrents,andso become
independent ofthese
provisionaltheories.
7. The Applicationof theVortexTheoryto theFaraday Effect

In theprecedingsectionI havediscussedthegreatinfluence oftheFaraday
effect
onthewayinwhichMaxwell's theory developed itscharacteristic
features.
I shallnowexaminein somedetailMaxwell's applicationofhistheory to the
Faraday effect.Thisexamination willshowthateveniftheexistence oftheeffect
followed fromthevortex modelas a matter ofcourse,itwasnotso easytodeduce
itsdetailsfromthetheory ina whollysatisfactory way.
Maxwell gave two different detailedtreatments of the Faraday effect,
first
in "On PhysicalLinesofForce"67and laterin theTreatise68. Theformer is
based on theprincipleof angularmomentum, whilethe latterproceedsfrom
energy inLagrangianmechanics.
considerations In bothcasesthebasicproblem
isthepropagationofa planewavethrough an elasticmedium madeup ofrotating
thedimensions
vortices, ofwhicharesmallcompared tothewavelength.
To followtheargument in "On PhysicalLinesof Force",let us introduce,
withMaxwell, a vector vwhichweconsider a smoothfunction ofspaceandtime.
vhasa dualmeaning; itrepresentsthemagnetic forceandis also,accordingtothe
basicassumption ofthevortextheory, a measureofthespeedofrotationofthe
vortices.
To be moreprecise, a vortexlocatedat positionx at timet willrotate
roundan axisinthedirection ofv(x,t)withan angularvelocity œ so that
v= 'v(x,t)'= rco
wherer is theradiusofthevortex.
Thusv is themaximumspeedofa pointon the
surfaceof thevortex.Usingpreviousresults,Maxwell finds,in prop.XVIII,
thefollowing forthetotalangularmomentum
expression L ofthevortices
con-
tainedina volumeV,
L=4^rvF' i7'1)
66
Ibid.,§260.
67 Maxwell:
Papers I, pp. 502-513.
68 Maxwell:
Treatise,§§ 806-831.

256 O. Knudsen
wherefiis a kind of mean mass densitywhichdepends on the unknowndistri-

butionof mass and velocityin a vortex,at the same timerepresenting,
macro-
scopically,themagneticpermeabilityofthemedium.
Considernow a plane wave whichwe assume to be transverse.The displace-
mentu(x, t) thensatisfies
div u=^ = 0, (7.2)
wherethecoordinatesare denotedxl , x2, x3 and theusual summationconvention

is adopted.
The equationsofmotionare
82Wí_16ti7 ._123 (13)
wherep is the densityof the mediumand the xi} are the elementsof the stress
tensorin themedium.Withoutthe vorticesthetwo last equations would lead to
the usual wave equation69,
|př-«^". (7.4)
wherea denotesthewave velocity,but in our case thereis a furthercontribution
to the stresstensor,arisingfromthe change in L caused by the displacementu.
The torqueon a surfaceelementda, withunitnormalvectorn,is x x tda, wheret
is thestresson da, givenby
=
ti Tijnj-
Thus,by theprincipleofangularmomentumwe have
= (7-5)
-jr
at sijk ix/TjkiMo"
sv
whereSv is the surfaceenclosingthe volume F, whilesijkdenotesLevi-Civita's

antisymmetric tensor.If Fis takenso smallthatthexi}maybe assumedconstant,
theintegration can be carriedout. When(7.1) is insertedon thelefthand side the
resultis thattheextracontribution to thestresstensoris antisymmetricand given
whichcorrespondsto Maxwell's expressionfor Y' in prop.XIX. The factthat

x'ijis antisymmetric shows that,macroscopically,Maxwell's mediumdoes not
satisfy theprincipleofangularmomentum.This is onlynaturalsincemacroscopic
angularmomentummay be convertedto "internal"angularmomentumin the
vortices.
The nextstepis to use a resultderivedin prop.X ofPartII 70,viz.thata macro-
scopic deformation, u, of the mediumcauses a change in the angularvelocityof
69 See I.S.Sokolnikoff: Mathematical
TheoryofElasticity,2nded.,New York 1956,p. 80.
70 Maxwell:
Papers I, pp. 480-481.

TheFaradayEffect
and Physical
Theory 257
thevortices,i.e.in thevalue ofv. Settingtheworkdone on a smallvolumeduring

a deformation, by the stressesproducingthatdeformation, equal to the change
in the internalkineticenergyof the vortices in that volume,Maxwell shows
that
(7J)
dt-Vjdxjdť
Hence
^-f^S (7-8)
and
dx'ij 'ir 93wk
I^j=~J^SijkVl^d^dt'
Whenthistermis added to therighthand side ofequation (7.4),theequationsof
motionbecome
Ifwechangeto coordinatesx, y9z withthez-axisin thedirectionofpropagation

ofthewave,we have u = u(z, i) and wz= 0, and (7.10) thengives
d2ux 2 õ2ux 'ir 93My
ò2uy= a2 õ2uy 'ir d3ux

~W ~dž2~~J^Vzdz2dť
Since vzis theprojectionoftheexternalmagneticforceon thelineofpropaga-
tionof the wave,we see thattheadditionaltermson therighthand side of(7.11)
correspondto Airy's generalterm(3.2) withp=0, q = 2, or to Verdet's wave
equation (3.5) with i^(9/9í,62/6z2)= 93/6z29ř.We can thereforeimmediately
= a2 since Maxwell does not considerdispersion,
use equation (3.7),withcpf(k2)
and getthefollowingexpressionforVerdet's constant:
( ' }
%np 2ka2 4p X2c
wherec and X are vacuum values of velocityand wave lengthof the lightwave,
and n is the indexof refraction.
Maxwell modifiedthisexpressionby adopting
Fresnel's relationbetweenp, thedensityoftheetherin thetransparentsubstance,
and 5,thedensityin vacuum,
p = s • n2
and furtherby changingto absoluteunitsofmagneticforce.His finalexpression,
at theveryend ofthepaper,correpondsto
2 s3'2cã2- (LU)

258 O. Knudsen
In his discussionof thisresultMaxwell pointedout thatit agreedwith

Verdet'sexperimental resultsof1854-1855(seethetableat theendof§ 2 above)
andthattheproportionality ofF withn/À2 also seemedtofitexperimental results,
presumably thoseofWiedemann. Furtherthedependence on r,thesize ofthe
vortices,
permitted substances
different inrotating
to differ power,sincethevalue
r to
of mightbe assumed depend on the nature of the substance. It is evident,
however, thatMaxwell found it to
difficult make histheory reproduce themain
resultof Verdet'spaperof 1858,thatthedirection of rotationin somepara-
magnetic substances was oppositeto thatin diamagnetic substances.Thisresult
requiredthe total
angularmomentum of the to
vortices point oppositedirections
in
in paramagnetic and diamagnetic substances, corresponding to the opposite
sensesof rotation,whilethevortexexplanationof magnetism givenin PartI
of Maxwell's paperrequiredthevorticesto rotatein thesamedirection, the
rotationin paramagnetics beingfaster, and in diamagnetics slower, than the
rotationin a vacuum.Maxwell triedto overcome thedifficulty as follows:71
We can no longer, considerdiamagnetic
therefore, bodiesas beingthose
whosecoefficientofmagnetic induction is less thanthatof space emptyof
grossmatter.We mustadmitthediamagnetic stateto be theoppositeofthe
paramagnetic;and that the or
vortices, at least the influential
majorityof
in
them, diamagnetic substances,revolve in the directionin which positive
revolvesin themagnetizing
electricity bobbin,whilein paramagnetic sub-
stancestheyrevolveintheoppositedirection.
He did notadd,however, thatthisnewassumption wouldimplythatthetotal
magnetic fieldinsidea diamagnetic bodymustbe directedagainst,insteadof
justbeingslightlyweakerthan,theexternal magneticfield.
Thedifficultyis brought outveryclearlybya simpleanalysisoftheexpression
(7.13).Fromtheresults summarized in thetableat theendof§ 2 aboveitfollows
thatVmustbezeroina vacuum, positive inmostsubstances andnegativeinsome
paramagnetic In
substances. (7.13) the onlyquantity which is not immediately
seento be greaterthanzerois 'i. Butintheverybeginning ofhispaperMaxwell
had unambiguously 'i as representing
identified "themagnetic inductive
capacity
ofthemedium at anypointreferred Thismeansthat'i must
to airas a standard".
necessarilybe greater thanzeroand havethevalues
Ì ,
[ paramagnetics
= 11 in I vacuum,
I><J (diamagnetics.
We see,then,thatnotonlywas Maxwell's vortextheory unableto account

behaviourof para- and diamagnetic
forthe different withrespect
substances
it
butworsestill, was
to theFaradayeffect, in obvious with
conflict thesimple
of
factoftheabsence any
and well-established in
effect a vacuum.
71 /bid., 507.
p.

The sameconflict in the Treatise

butnot so apparent,
is present, wherethe
results
vortextheory in a formula to
corresponding
Apartfromthe last term,whichMaxwell derivesby bringing in Cauchy's

theoryof dispersion,the onlysignificantdifference
comparedto (7.12) is the
replacement oftheconstantsfirby theconstantC. Maxwell discussesneither
thephysicalmeaningnorthepossiblevaluesofthisconstant. As shownin the
Appendix, it entersthetheoryas a coefficient
of an extratermin thekinetic
energyofthemedium, couplingtheethermotionofa lightwavewiththemagnetic
vortexmotionoftheether.However, thetheorygivesno indicationas to how C
dependson theproperties, magnetic or otherwise,ofthesubstance. Insteadof
comparing hisresultwithVerdet'sexperiments of 1858,whichwouldhavein-
volveda discussion
oftheconstant C, Maxwell rewrites(7.14)as
"--?H£)
andconfines himselftoa comparison ofthedependence on nandXwithVerdet's
resultsof 1863,rightlyconcluding that (7.15) agrees betterwiththeseresults
thanC.Neumann'sformula.
Maxwell's silenceabouttheconstantC, and themoresignificant lack of
anyattempt in the Treatiseat the
relating vortexexplanation of theFaraday
effect
to theWeberiantheoryofdia- and paramagnetism, probablyreflect his
failureto overcomethedifficulties inherent in his earliertreatment where,as
we haveseen,thetwosubjectsweretiedtogether the
through quantity ¡i. The
followingpassage from a letterto Thomson, written in 1868,shows thathe was
wellawareofthesedifficulties:72
I wanttoknowwhatyouthinkofT [i.e.P.G.Tait] inhisbookon Heat§ 125
wherehe saysthatVerdet'sdiscovery thatparamagnetics act oppositely on
lightfrom diamag8 constitutes
a proofthatthepolarityofbothclassesofbodies
is thesame.Thiscertainly requires explanationwhichI wouldbe gladof,for
myself & fortheHeatbook.He also givesyourproofoftheimpossibility ofa
diamagnetic acquiringitsreverse polaritygraduallylikea paramagnetic. But
Weber'sdiamagn.c hypothesis of inducedmolecularcurrents does not lead
to yourabsurdconclusionanymorethanour King'sCollegecoil could be
madea perpetual motion.
T' also speaksofthe'Fact' established byFaraday'thata diamag.takes
the same polarityas a paramag.in the same position.I cannotfindthat
Faradaythought he had establishedthisas a fact.He certainly
showedthat
thelinesofmagnetic as relatedto induction
force, ofcurrentsrunin thesame
general directioninbismuth Iron& steel(thatis,notintheoppositedirection)
buthe also showedthatin a steelmagnetplacedin theoppositedirection to
72 Letter fromJ.C.Maxwell to
W.Thomson, dated "Glenlair, Dalbeattie, 1868 July 18",
Library,MS. Add. 7342,Box 2. The quotationis takenfrompp. 7-8 oftheletter.
CambridgeUniversity

260 O. Knudsen
its naturalone the lines are as in bismuthprovidedthe dominantmagnetic

forceis strongenough compared with the steel magnet.In the Exp. Res.
Volili p528 he gives reasons against the "magnetic fluid" theoryof the
reversepolarityof Bismuthwhichdo not I thinkapply to the "induced cur-
rent"hyp.He also givesa theoryof the influenceof media whichis firstrate
and Verdet'sdiscoveryis theonlyobjectionwhichI can findagainstit. Ifyou
or T can get over VerdetI shall be much obliged to you forsimplifyingthe
of
theory magnetism.
Returningto theearlierversionofthevortextheory,let us analysethe"vacu-
um conflict"a littlefurther.Clearly,the rotationof the plane of polarization
would vanishifa plane wave could be propagatedthroughthe mediumwithout
any accompanyingchange in the total angular momentumL. Because of (7.1)
thiswould requirethatv mustbe unchangedby the displacementu, but thisis
impossiblebecause of the- universallyvalid- relation(7.7) betweend'/dtand u.
This relationhas a veryimportantfunctionin thewhole theory,because it is the
mathematicalexpressionof that mechanical connectionbetweenthe vortices
withoutwhichtherewould be no inductionof currentsin a conductormoving
in a magneticfield.The way in which such currentsare derivedconstitutesa
significant betweenmodernelectromagnetic
difference theoryand Maxwell. In
moderntheorytheelectricfieldis givenby
1 3A
and the forceon a chargedparticle,movingwith velocityw, by the Lorentz

expression
expressionsare,apartfromconstantsand signs,
Maxwell's corresponding
8A
E = wx B - gradcp,
F = <?E,
wherethe w x B termcomes directlyfrom(7.7) and wherew is the velocityof a

movingbodyas a whole.For a currenti in a conductorat rest,themoderntheory,
by identifying i with<?w,leads to a termin the electromotiveforceproportional
to i x B, and thusto an explanationof the Hall effect,whileMaxwell's theory
has no such termsince w here is to be identifiedwiththe velocityof the con-
ductorasa whole,whichin thiscase is zero. In generalterms,themoderntheory
explainstheinductionofcurrentsin a movingbody as arisingfromtheLorentz
forceon its charged molecularconstituents, therebyidentifying electromotive
forcewitha mechanicalforceon chargedparticles.Such an would
identification
be inconsistentwith Maxwell's views, because it would imply that electric
currentsmustalways be regardedas the motionof electricallychargedmaterial
particles.In Maxwell's theorythe inductionin movingbodies comes directly

fromthewx B termintheexpression forE, andtheidentification

ofelectromotive
andmechanicalforceis thereby
madeunnecessary.
We can now see thatthe conflictbetweenthe predictions of Maxwell's
vortextheoryand theempirical knowledge of theFaraday effectcomesfrom
as regardsthenatureofelectricity.
thesamesourceas Maxwell's difficulties In
can be tracedback to the mechanicalconnection
bothcases the difficulties
betweenthe magneticvortices,or ratherto the impossibilityof reconciling
Maxwell's notionofsucha mechanical connection withanyreasonablepicture
ofthemolecular ofbodies.
constitution
8. The Continental
Approach.De la Rive
On theContinent theFaraday effect did nothavethefundamental impor-
tanceitacquiredin Britain. To Frenchand Germanphysicists itdidnotbecome
a startingpointforthedevelopment ofa newkindofphysicaltheory. Theysaw
it ratheras an interestingnewphenomenon whichwouldrequirethatexisting
notionsoftheluminiferous etherand itsrelationwiththemolecules ofmatter be
extended by an additional
hypothesis in theformofa newtypeofactionon the
ether.In speculating aboutthenatureofthisnewactionthey,muchmorethan
Thomsonand Maxwell, emphasizedFaraday's observationthatthe effect
seemedtobe due,notto a directactionofmagnetism on light, butto an actionin
whichthemolecules ofmatteractedas intermediaries. Itis therefore notsurprising
thatwhenCarl Neumannsucceededin tightening such speculations into a
precisemathematical he
theory, gave this aspectof the a
phenomenon veryfull
treatment.
One ofthefirstto publishhisideason thenatureofthenewmagnetic action
was Faraday's friendand frequent correspondent, Auguste de la Rive,pro-
fessorof physicsin Geneva.Like Boettger in Germany, de la Rive learned
about Faraday's discovery fromtheAthenaeum notice.His firstreactionwas
to connecttheeffect withhis own discovery thatan oscillating magnetic field
couldsetnon-magnetic bodiesin motion, a resultwhichhe interpreted as a sign
ofa magnetic modification
ofmolecular structure73.However, inthefirst volume
ofhis Traitéď électricité,
whichappearedin 1854,he triedinsteadto relatethe
magneticrotatory powerof a substanceto its indexof refraction 74. He now
arguedthattheeffect couldnotbe due to a modification ofmolecular structure,
sinceonecouldagitatea liquid,orpasselectric currents through itinanydirection,
without disturbing theeffect.On theotherhand,theeffect did notconsistin a
directactionofmagnetism on light,sinceit appearedonlyin liquidsand solids,
butnotin gasesor in a vacuum.AdoptingFresnel'sexplanation ofrefraction
as due to a greateretherdensityin densebodies,de la Riveconcludedthatthe
effectwas causedby a magnetic actionon thesurplusofetherin a body,and
thatitmustbe thegreater themorethedensity ofetherin a substance exceeded
thedensity inair.Hencetherotatory powerought to follow theindex ofrefraction,
a hypothesis whichdela Rive foundto be confirmed by the"stillverylimited
73
L.P.Williams, ed.: The selectedcorrespondence of Michael Faraday, vol. 1, Cambridge1971,
letters316,318,326,328,and 335.
'* A. de la Rive: Traitéd électricité
théoriqueet appliquée,tomeI, Pans 1854,pp. 529-579.

262 O. Knudsen
and veryimperfect of magneticpolarization"availableto

tableof coefficients
him. As de la Rive himself laterdulyadmitted, thisspeculation did notstand
thetestofVerdet'sexperiments of185875.De la Rivealso feltthattheFaraday
mustbe somehowrelatedto diamagnetism,
effect buthad to admitthathisown
atomictheory ofdiamagnetic actiondidnotservethispurpose76:
II estvraiqu'elle[i.e.histheory ofdiamagnetism] n'explique pas la nature
particulière de l'actionde l'atomesurla lumièrepolarisée, maisellemontre
seulement que,quelleque soitcetteaction,l'influence
magnétique doitdonner
aux atomesune direction communequi faitque toutesleursactionscon-
courent, et que la molécule, parconséquent, doitagird'unecertaine manière
surl'éther interposé.
De la Rive's speculations not so muchbecauseof his un-
are interesting,
successful at a
attempts formulatingqualitative theoryoftheFaraday effect, as
forhisdemandthatsucha theory mustexplainhowthestateoftheetherwas
modified bythecombined actionofmagnetism and materialmolecules, andthat
itmustbe somehowlinkedwiththetheory ofdiamagnetism.
9. C. Neumann'sTheory
Carl Neumannfirst publishedhistheoryoftheFaraday effect in 1858,in
theformof a shortLatininauguraldissertation to theuniversityof Halle77.
Five yearslaterhe publisheda smallbook in whichhe gave a moredetailed
accountofhistheory, thoughwithout changing itsbasicassumptions78. These
assumptions came fromtwo sources.One was Weber'stheoriesof electro-
dynamicsand diamagnetism, the other,as Neumannexplicitly statedin the
preface to hisbook,washisfather's, Franz Ernst Neumann's, theory ofoptical
dispersion. F. Neumannhad in theperiodbefore1841developeda theoryof
dispersion whichdiffered from thatofCauchyinonesignificant aspect.Cauchy's
theorywas based on an assumption thatthe distance betweenetherparticles,
whichhe regarded as mass pointsinteracting distance, of the same
at a was
orderofmagnitude as thewavelength oflight.Underthisassumption thetheory
of elasticityled to a replacement of the simple,non-dispersive waveequation
(3.1),validin the case of negligible distancesbetweenetherparticles, by the
dispersive equation(3.3). This theory, whichexplaineddispersion by a modifica-
tionoftheinternal structure oftheether,wasopento theobviousobjectionthat
it did notaccountfortheabsenceofdispersion in air and emptyspace.It was
possibly forthis reason thatF. Neumann, while accepting Cauchy'sassumption,
it by
supplemented postulating that themolecules of matterexertedan elastic
forceon theparticles oftheether.Assuming thatthemassofa moleculewas so
greatthatitsdisplacement he obtainedthefollowing
couldbe neglected, equation
75 A. de la
Rive, op. cit. tome III, Paris 1858,pp. 715-719.
76 A. de la Rive,op. cit.tomeI, p. 578.
77 Carolus Neumann:
Explicare tentaturquomodofiat ut lucis planumpolarisationisper vires
eléctricasvel magnéticasdeclinetur. Halis Saxonum 1858.(In thefollowingreferred to as Dissertation.)
78 Carl Neumann: Die des Lichtes. Versucheiner
magnetische Drehungder Polarisationsebene
mathematischen Theorie.Halle 1863.(In thefollowingreferred to as MagnetischeDrehung.)

of motionforan etherparticlein a plane wave travellingin thez-direction

:
82u „ „ 32u „ ô4u

+ (9.1)
-w-CM Cl-s?-+C11?r+~.
wherethetermCu came fromthenew force,whiletheremainingtermswerealso

presentin Cauchy's equation (3.3)79. Having worked out the consequencesof
this equation and foundthemto be in tolerableagreementwithexperimental
data, F. Neumann feltthatthe theoryof the optical ethernow lacked only one
extensionin orderto be essentiallycomplete.In C. Neumann'swords80
Für die Bewegungdes Lichtäthersin einem krystallinischen oder auch
unkrystallinischen Körper wurde fast gleichzeitigvon Cauchy und von
meinemVatereine Theorieentwickelt, .... Diese Theorieumfaßtalle Körper
mitAusnahmederer,bei welcheneine Drehungder Polarisationsebenestatt-
findet.Wäre es gelungen,auch diese Körper mitin das Bereichjener Theorie
hineinzuziehen, so wäre damit die Theorie der Aetherbewegung, wenigstens
in ihrenHauptumrissen, wordensein.
nach allen Seitenhin festgestellt
The elderNeumann apparentlyneverfoundtimeto do any workalong these
he set his son, who was by thattimealso his student
lines,but in the mid-fifties
in theuniversity ofKönigsberg,to workon theproblemofderiving, fromphysical
principles,MacCullagh's phenomenologicalwave equation for an optically
activemedium.AfterworkingwithMacCullagh's equation "fora ratherlong
time",C. Neumannin 1856founda theoremwhichhe himselflatercharacterized
as81
an und fürsich von keinerbesonderenBedeutung,doch fürfernereUnter-
suchungenüberden Gegenstandvon großerWichtigkeit.
The theoremwas this:
Geht man von der Hypotheseaus, daß die relativeVerrückungeinesAether-
theilchensin Bezug auf ein anderesauf dieses letztereebenso einwirkt,wie
das Elementeines elektrischenStromesauf einen Magnetpol wirkt;so er-
geben sich aus dieser Hypotheseunmittelbarund mit Nothwendigkeitdie
MacCullagh'schenDifferentialgleichungen.
In mathematicaltermsthis means the following:Let m and rrí(Fig. 3) be two
etherparticles,(m)and (m')theirequilibriumpositionsseparatedby thevectorp,
and u and u + (5utheirdisplacements.Neumann's hypothesisis, then,thatthese
displacementscall fortha forceK on m fromm',givenby
(9.2)
K=-gm^-=-^P,(pV)u.
79 F.E.Neumann: Die Gesetze der des Lichts in comprimirtenoder ungleich-
Doppelbrechung
förmigerwärmten Körpern,Berlin1843,pp. 28-32,footnote.See also E. T. Whittaker :
unkrystallinischen
A HistoryoftheTheoriesofAetherand Electricity, vol. I, London 1951,pp. 165-167.
80 C.Neumann:
MagnetischeDrehung,p. III.
81
Ibid.,p. IV.

264 O. Knudsen
m -^
im1)
Fig.3
Bysumming thisexpression m',usinga simplesymmetry

overall particles argu-
he
ment, proved thatthis
hypothesis wouldindeed leadto a differential
equation
foru similarto thatofMacCullagh 82.
C. Neumanndidnotbotherto publishthisresultin 1856,nordidhemention
twoyearslater.However,in theMagnetische
it in his Dissertation Drehung he
inserted boththetheorem andhisproofofit,partly,itseems,to statehispriority
overClebschwhoin 1860had published a similarresultin a longpaperon the
mathematical theory activemedia83.
ofoptically
Havingthusfoundat leasta provisional solutiontotheproblem ofdescribing
thenatural Neumannwasurgedbyhisfather
rotation, tomoveontothemagnetic
rotation forwhicha similarsituation existed84:
EbensowieMacCullaghfüreineAetherbewegung, welchedernatürlichen
Drehung der Polarisationsebene entspricht,Differentialgleichungen ange-
gebenhatte,ebensowarenandererseits solcheDifferentialgleichungen von
für
Airy diejenigeAetherbewegung aufgestelltworden, welche der magneti-
schenDrehungderPolarisationsebene entspricht.Aberes warenauchdiese
Air/sehenGleichungen,ebensowiesolchesvorhin inBetreffderMacCullagh" -
sehenerwähnt wurde,nurempirische Formeln, die einerrationellenBegrün-
dungvollständigentbehrten.Es handeltesichdemnachauchhierwiederum
aufmöglichst
einetheoretische, einfacheundplausiblePrincipien begründete
Deductionderschonvorhandenen Gleichungen.
WithNeumann'sbackground theobviousprocedure wasto attempt to solve
theproblemby postulating yet another force on the etherparticles.Hence the
realproblemwas to inventa suitablemathematical expression forsuch a force,
one thatwouldbe at oncephysically reasonableand sufficientto deriveAiry's
equationmathematically.Which propertiesmust thisforcehave? First,it must
depend on theexternalmagnetic force,but only indirectly;in other words,it
mustdependon a characteristic property of moleculessubjectto a magnetic
Thisevidently
force. suggestedthattheforcemustbe producedbythemolecular
currentson whichAmpèreand Weberhad based theirsuccessful theoriesof
para-and diamagnetism, an assumption whichwas reinforced by thefactthat
82
Ibid.,pp. 80-82.
83 A.Cleôsch: Theorie der circularpolarisierenden
Medien, J. f. d. reineu. angew.Math., 57
pp. 322-324. Cf.C.Neumann: MagnetischeDrehung,p. V.
(1860) 319-358,particularly
ö* C.Neumann:
MagnetischeDrehung,p. VI.

therotationwas particularly greatin strongly bodies85.Secondly,

diamagnetic
sincethemagnetic forcecouldmodify lightgeneratedbyothersources,butcould
notbyitself producelightin a darkspace,thenewforcemustdependon a pré-
existentmotionof theetherparticleand mustvanishforan etherparticleat
rest86.
Finally,inordertoexcludea directactionfromthecurrents intheelectro-
magnet, theforcemustbe assumedto be ofveryshortrange87.
Of theseproperties thetwo firstwereanalogousto properties of Weber's
electrodynamic In
force. 1846Wilhelm Weber had his
published electrodynamic
theory,founded on thefollowingtwoassumptions88:
Io All electricand magneticphenomenaare causedby theactionsof two
fluidsone ofwhichis calledpositive,
electrical theothernegative.Thesefluids
consistofparticles whichrepelor attracteach otheraccordingto theforcelaw
Heree ande' denotethemassesoftwoelectrical particles andaretakenas positive

or negativequantities according to the natureof each particle;r is theposition
vectorofe relativeto e'' r is therelativedistanceee'' andF is theforceon e from
theparticle e'.
2° In anyelementofa linearconductorcarrying an electriccurrent, equal
amounts ofthetwoelectrical movewithequalspeedsinoppositedirections.
fluids
Since(9.3)evidently reducesto Coulomb'slaw fortwoparticlesat relative
rest,Weber'stheoryobviouslycontainedthe establishedelectrostatics as a
specialcase.Moreover, Weberwasable to provethatfromthetwolasttermsin
(9.3),andassumption 2°,onecoulddeducenotonlyAmpere's lawfortheelectro-
magnetic forcebetween twocurrent elements,butalso thelawofelectromagnetic
induction in theformin whichF. Neumannhad statedittheyearbefore89.
In 1848Weberextended histheory toaccountfordiamagnetism, byassuming
thatthemolecules ofa diamagnetic bodyhadequal amountsofthetwoelectrical
fluidsdistributedovertheirsurfaces90. The fluidswouldnormally be at rest,but
when,say,an electromagnet wasswitched on intheneighbourhood ofa molecule,
thiswouldcreatean inducedelectromotive forcewhichwouldsetthefluidsin
motionin oppositedirections roundthemolecule.In otherwords,an induced
molecularcurrentwouldarise,and sinceWeberassumedthatthe molecular
85 C.Neumann:
p. 2.
Dissertation,
80
Ibid.,p. 6.
87
Ibid.,p. 3.
88 W.Weber:
"Elektrodynamische Maßbestimmungen.Über ein allgemeinesGrundgesetzder
elektrischen Wirkung".Abh.d. Kgl. Sachs. Ges. d. Wiss.,1846,211-378. Repr. in: W.Weber: Werke,
vol. III, Berlin1893,pp. 25-214. See also K.H.Wiederkehr: WilhelmWebersStellungin derEntwick-
lungderElektrizitätslehre, Hamburg1960,eh. III.
F.Neumann: "Die mathematischenGesetze der inducirtenelektrischenStröme". Abh. d.
kgl Akad.d. Wiss.Berlin,1845.Repr.as OstwalďsKlassiker,Nr. 10,Leipzig 1889.
W.Weber: "Uber die Erregungund Wirkungdes Diamagnetismusnach den Gesetzenindu-
cirterStröme".Ann.d. Phys.u. Chem.73 (1848) 241-256. Repr. in W.Weber: Werke,vol. III, Berlin
1893, pp. 255-268. The theorywas furtherdeveloped in W.Weber: "ElektrodynamischeMaßbe-
stimmungen insbesondereüberDiamagnetismus".Abh.d. Königl.Sachs. Ges.d. Wiss.,math.-phys.
Kl. 1
(1852) 458-577. Repr.in: Werke, vol. Ill, pp. 473-554.

266 O. Knudsen
surfaceofferedno resistanceto themotionofthefluids,thiscurrentwould persist

untilan opposite electromotiveforcewas created by the electromagnetbeing
switchedoffagain. These induced molecularcurrentswould have the opposite
directionto thatof thepréexistentmolecularcurrentswhichAmpèrehad postu-
lated to account forthe behaviourof softiron,and thisexplainedwhydiamag-
neticsbehavedoppositelyto paramagneticsin a magneticfield.Averagingovera
large numberof molecules,Weber found the mean magneticmomenta of a
moleculeto be givenby
<x= fcH, (9.4)
the constantk being positive or negativefor para- and diamagneticbodies,
respectively.
Weber'sreductionofall electricand magneticphenomenato one fundamental
law offorcewas a greatachievementand F. Neumann was dulyimpressedby it,
as can be seen fromhis thoroughdiscussionof it in his second paper on electro-
magneticinduction91.It is a safeconjecturethatWeber's papers werediscussed
at KönigsbergduringC. Neumann's studentdays and that he studiedthemin
detailunderhis father'sguidance.He was laterto defendWeber's theoryagainst
Helmholtz' criticism.
Weber's theoryhelped Neumann in two ways in the search for the force
responsibleforthe Faraday effect.First,as alreadymentioned,Weber's mole-
cularcurrentswereevidently"thatmutationin thetransparent body fromwhich
our phenomenonoriginates"92.Secondly,Weber's forcelaw provideda mathe-
maticalmodelforforcesdependingon relativemotionratherthanposition.Thus,
Neumannwas led to base his theoryon thepostulatethatan electricalparticlee
exertsa forceon an etherparticlem,givenby93
r d$(r) ^ d${r) I dr'2 ÂMil2rlr
Since theforcewas to have a sensibleaction onlyon etherparticlesveryclose to

the electricalparticle,the unknownfunction<P(r)must have verylarge values
forverysmallvalues of r. For largerdistancesone mightwell assume (P(r)^r"1,
in whichcase (9.5) would become identicalto (9.3). Thus, if one supposed the
etherto consistsolely of eitherone of Weber's electricalfluids,(9.5) would be
only a modificationof Weber's fundamentalforcelaw, analogous to the modi-
ficationof Newton's law of gravitationnecessaryto account for capillary
action.94
Having thuslaid down thefoundationforhis theory,Neumann could go on
to workout its consequences.The followingoutlineof his calculationis based
on the MagnetischeDrehungwhich,however,does not differ essentiallyfromthe
earlierversion.
91 F.Neumann: "Über ein
allgemeinesPrincip der mathematischenTheorie inducirterelek-
trischerStröme".Abh.d. Königl. Akad. d. Wiss.Berlin,1848. Repr. as Ostwalďs Klassiker,Nr. 36,
Leipzig 1892,pp. 52-71.
92 C. Neumann:Dissertation, 3 : " Fluminamolecularis. . . earncorporistranslucidimutationem
p.
esse,a qua phaenomenonnostrumoriginemcapiat."
93 C.Neumann:
MagnetischeDrehung,p. 7.
94
p. 4.
Ibid.,cf.Dissertation,

' doy
Fig. 4
The firststep consistedin findingthe total forceon an etherparticle.Let us

considerfirstan infinitesimalelementda (Fig. 4) of a molecularcurrent,which
Neumann,followingWeber,treatedas a linearclosed path round the spherical
surfaceof a molecule.Let e be the amount of positiveelectricityin da, moving
withvelocityw in the directionof da. Accordingto Weber's assumption2°, a
numerically equal amount,- e, ofnegativeelectricitywillthenmovewithvelocity
- w,and thecurrent j in da will be givenby
jda = evr. (9.6)
The forcedP fromd a on an etherparticlem,movingwithvelocityv,willnow be

thesum ofthecontributions from+ e and - e. Hence
dP = F(e,w) + F(-e, -w)
whereF(e, w) is givenby (9.5). To obtain dP as a functionof w and v we must
inserttherelations
-dr = ( v
(v-w)T
and
d2r (d' dw' r - r rl2 -1
- ._ + (v-w)2 1 v-w)- .
-rr=[-
dt2 'dt dt I r r L r' r
In the followingdw/diis taken to vanish as the currentis assumed steady.We
thenfind,aftersome reduction,using(9.6)
dP=
4mG;r[(vr)(d(T.grad(^)+^vdff].
This can be transformed
to
dP = 4m Gj % v x (da x r)+ dP' (9.8)
wherethe termdP' vanisheswhen integratedround a closed curve.Integrating

(9.8) roundtheclosed path ofthecurrentand neglectingsecond and higherorder
termsin p/r,wherep is the radius of the molecule,one findsthe forceexerted

268 O. Knudsen
on mbythewholemolecular as
current
p = |dP=_vxA (9.9)
wherethevectorA is givenby
A=4Gm[{-17--){-^-)7-17v]- (910)
while
to thecentreofthemolecule,
Herer nowdenotesthepositionofmrelative
a' is themolecular moment,
magnetic givenby
a' =j kn
wherek is theplaneareaenclosedbythemolecular currentandn is a unitvector
normalto theplaneofthe current.
We mustnowfindthemeantotalforceon mbyaddingthecontributions (9.9)
fromall moleculesinsidea sphereroundm,withradiusequal to therangeof
actionoftheforceF, and byaveragingoverall etherparticles
insidea sphereof
similardimensions. the
Assuming transparent substanceto be non-crystalline,
isotropie,and uniformlymagnetizedinsidethe sphere,Neumannfoundthe
followingexpressionforthemeantotalforceon m:
mE= mLvxH (9.11)
where(9.4)has beenused to replacethemeanmagnetic momenta by H. The
coefficient
L, whichwill an
play important rolein thelater is givenby
discussion,
L=Û (9.12)
n
Herek is themagnetic the
constantdefinedby(9.4); N and n are,respectively,
numberof moleculesand etherparticlesin unitvolume;and S is a quantity
depending ofetherparticlesrounda moleculeand defined
on thedistribution
the
by following :
expression
wherethesummation is to be extended insidethesphere

overall etherparticles
ofactionofa molecular current.
It wasnowa simplematter forNeumannto add theaccelerationE, givenby
(9.11),to the hand
right side ofhis equation(9.1)andobtainthefollowing
father's
differentialequationfora planewavepropagated :
in thez-direction
^,^^,...„4 «,14,
WeneednotfollowNeumann'scalculation since(9.14)obviously
anyfurther,
corresponds ofthethreecasesinvestigated
to thefirst byVerdet;cf.equations

(3.5)and (3.10).Setting
m=-LHz,
= o),
i¡/((o,k2)
(p(k2)=C + Clk2 + C2{k2)2+ ---,
wegetfrom(3.7)thatVerdet'sconstant
in thiscase is givenby
V= (9'15)
~2k(C1+2C2k2 + -)
from(3.11)
or,equivalently,
"-è(-'£)•
It is obviousfromeitherof thesetwoexpressions thattherotationis pro-
portional L whichis relatedto themagnetic
to thecoefficient constantk through
(9.12).Neumanngavea detaileddiscussionofthispointand showedhow(9.12)
and (9.13)couldbe usedto explainVerdet'sresultsconcerning therotationin
composite substances.
His discussionwas basedon thefactthatthequantities k
and S reflected characteristic
propertiesof an individualelementarymolecule,
namely itsmagnetizability
andthedistributionofetherparticles
initsneighbour-
hood.Thus,fora substance containingin unitvolumeNa9Nb9.,., Ncmolecules
oftheelementary substancesA9B,...,C, thequantityL mustbe givenby
+ +
L_GNakgSa NbkbSb :.+NckcSc^
n
whileitsmagnetic
constant
musthavethevalue
K = Naka+ Nbkb
+ ...+Nckc. (9.18)
Sincethefunction <P(r)is a universal equation(9.13)showsthatS must
function,
alwayshavethesamesign,whileitsnumerical valuemayvaryiftheetherparticles
are distributeddifferently aroundthedifferent kindsofmolecules. As all N are
itfollows
clearlypositive, thatifall k areeitherpositiveornegative,
L andK will
havethesamesign.However, ifsomekarepositive, othersnegative,
thenumerical
valuesofSa9Sb,..., Sc maybe suchthatthesignofL becomestheoppositeto
thatofK. ThusNeumanncouldclaimthathistheory hadthefollowingimportant
consequences95:
Alle Substanzen,derenBestandtheile sämmtlich paramagnetisch sind,
drehendie Polarisationsebene in gleichem Sinne;undalle Substanzen, deren
Bestandtheile sämmtlich diamagnetisch sind,imentgegengesetzten Sinne.
Bei einerSubstanz,derenBestandtheile theilspara-theilsdiamagnetisch
sind,kannmanaus dempara-oderdiamagnetischem CharakterderSubstanz
keinenSchlussaufdenSinnmachen,in welchem die Polarisationsebenevon
derSubstanzabgelenkt wird.
95 C.Neumann:
MagnetischeDrehung,p. 77.

270 O. Knudsen
In thiswayNeumannsucceeded inestablishing relation

a theoretical between
the Faraday effect and the magneticproperties of matter,and moreovera
relationwhichhadexactly therightamountofflexibility
to accountforVerdet's
experimental results.The absenceoftheeffectin emptyspaceis, ofcourse,an
obviousconsequenceofNeumann'sbasic assumptions and is shownexplicitly
in thedependence ofL on thenumberN ofmaterialmoleculesin unitvolume.
Neumannalso discussedbriefly thedependence on wavelength, buthisdis-
cussionwas obscuredbythefactthathe gavehisresultin a formsimilarto the
approximative equation(9.15)ratherthanusinga formula like(9.16),whichis
exactregardlessofthewayin whichn dependson X.Neumann'sformula cor-
responds to
-iîfc '-£= «--^ ->

ComparingthiswithWiedemann's fewexperimental data, Neumannhad to
admitthattheagreement wasnotverygood.He concludedthatthediscrepancy
was due,eitherto the imprecision
of Wiedemann's measurements, or to the
ofhigherordertermscorresponding
influence to C3, ... in equation(9.15);and
hecontinued96
Ueberhaupt wirdmanndieFormel... nichtfrüher einerstrengen Prüfung
zu unterwerfen imStandesein,als bis überdieseAbhängigkeit sehrumfang-
reicheReihenvonBeobachtungen vorliegen.
As we haveseen,Verdetfeltthatthemeasurements reported in his 1863paper
weresufficiently preciseto serve as an experimental refutation of Neumann's
theory. That Neumann was not to
willing admit this,canbe seenfrom thefollowing
passage which to myknowledge is theonly comment on Verdet's paperthathe
everpublished97:
... das Gesetzfürdie gegenseitige Einwirkung zwischenElektricität und
. . .
Aether könnte in Zweifelgezogen werden in Folge der Verdeťschen Experi-
mentaluntersuchungen überdie bei der magnetischen Drehungder Polari-
sationsebene des Lichtsauftretende Dispersion... Was michallerdings anbe-
so ich
langt, glaube (gestützt auf nahe liegendeGründe), dass den Resultaten
von Dispersions-Beobachtungen vorläufig keineentscheidende Stimmeüber
dieRichtigkeit oderUnrichtigkeit jenes Gesetzes einzuräumen sei.
Neumann'sreluctance to giveup his theory, becauseof whathe obviously
regardedas a ratherdoubtful discrepancy, is understandable. In fact,Verdet
himself expressed visible at
regret being forced to rejectit98:
... l'ingénieuse théorieque M. CharlesNeumanna d'abordesquissée... , et
qu'il a toutrécemment développée,avec une remarquable éléganceanalyti-
que ...
96
Ibid.,p. 74.
97 C.Neumann: "Notizen zu einerkürzlicherschienenen überdie Principiender Elektro-
Schrift
dynamik".Math.Ann.1 (1869) 317-324; footnote,p. 322.
98 Verdet, Ann.de chim.et
phys.,3e sér.,69 (1863),p. 460.

Verdet reportedNeumann'ssuccessful use of Weber'smolecularcurrents to

accountforthebehaviour ofsolutions of and
para- diamagnetic salts,and added":
Toutparaîtrait doncfavorable à l'hypothèse si lesrelationsqui existententre
la rotation etla longueur d'ondene venaient la renverser.
Verdet'sbriefsummary of Maxwell's theory100 containedno similarexpres-
sions.Thereis no doubtthathissympathy laywithNeumann'stheory, and this
is further corroborated by a longfootnote in whichhe describedhow,by "a
seriesofprobableconjectures", onewouldarriveat a hypothesis likeNeumann's
fortheforceon an etherparticle.Theseideas,he said,had guidedhis ownre-
searches rightfrom thebeginning; andhenowwishedtomention thembecause101
... je croisqu'il esttoujoursutilequ'unauteurfasseconnaître la voieréelle
qu'ila suiviedanssestravaux. Si,au delà d'uncertainpoint,cettevoieparaît
se fermer pourlui,ellepeuts'ouvrirà d'autres, ou les aiderà apercevoir des
voiesparallèlesqui lesconduiront plusloin.
It is evidentthatNeumann'slineofreasoningappearedas thenaturalone
toa physicist witha background inContinental theories oflight,electromagnetism
andmatter, andthatVerdetstillretained a hopethatthiskindofreasoning could
lead to a satisfactory even
theory, if Neumann's attempt had been unsuccessful.
10. Conclusion
Oneofthepurposesofthisarticlehasbeento bringout,as clearlyas possible,
theroleplayedbytheFaraday effect in thedevelopment ofMaxwell's electro-
magnetic theory.It is obvious thatit was W. Thomson's analysisoftheFaraday
effectwhichledtotheinvention ofthevortexmodelbymeansofwhichMaxwell
first
derivedhiselectromagnetic equations.I havetriedto showthatMaxwell,
whileregarding the"idle wheel"particles as onlya crudemodelforelectricity,
wasconvinced thattheconception ofa magnetic fieldas a fieldofvortices
wasa
truedescriptionofthefactualconstitution oftheether,and thathe retained this
convictionunalteredthroughall his revisionsof the electromagnetic theory.
I havearguedfurther thatthisviewof thenatureofthemagnetic fieldforced
Maxwell to thinkof electricity as a "connecting mechanism" couplingthe
motionofthevortices, and thatthisledto hiswellknowndifficulties concerning
thenatureofelectricity. Thesedifficultieswerea majorobstacleto theunder-
standing ofelectricity as a constituentofmaterialmoleculesand thereby to the
invention ofa workablemodelfortheinteraction betweentheelectromagnetic
fieldandmatter.Thisis seennowhere moreclearly thaninMaxwell's application
ofhis theoryto theFaraday effect itself,wherethedescription was eitherin-
consistentorin seriousdisagreement withexperience.
It waspartlybecauseofthisaspectof Maxwell's theorythatW.Thomson,
whileconvinced oftheessentialcorrectness ofsomeofitsfeatures, nevergaveit
hisfullacceptance.In one ofhisBaltimore lectures
Thomsonsaid102
99
Ibid.,p. 462.
100
Ibid.,p. 475.
101
Ibid.,p. 463.
102 Kelvin: BaltimoreLectureson Molecular
Dynamicsand the Wave Theoryof Light,London
1904,p. 376.

272 O. Knudsen
Now,according to whatis without doubtreallyvalidin theso-calledelectro-

magnetic theoryof light,we mayregardas a lamp,a bar-magnet rotating
aboutan axisperpendiculartoitslength,
orhavingonepolecausedtovibrate
to andfroina straightline.
butinthesamelecturehe also declaredthat"a detailedand satisfactory
investi-
gation... mustinvolvetheconsiderationofmolecularand atomicstructures",
andhecontinued:103
Maxwell's electro-magnetic
theory molar;andtherefore
oflightwasessentially
notin touchwiththedynamics ofdispersion involvedin metallic
essentially
reflection though,outsidehis electro-magnetic
and translucency; he
theory,
was himselfone of the foremostleadingmolecularists of the nineteenth
century:...
For thisreasonThomsonfoundMaxwell's theoryoflittleuse in his own
attempt at combining thewavetheory oflightwithmolecular dynamics, and so
hechoseto disregard itandworkinsteadfrompurelymechanical models.
Thistoucheson anotherpurposeofmypaper:thatofillustrating thepower
of the action-at-a-distance theoriesagainstwhichMaxwell's theoryhad to
compete. In myanalysisofCarl Neumann'stheory oftheFaraday effect I have
triedto showthatit was an organicpartofa comprehensive of
body physical
theorywhichpossesseda highdegreeofunityand which,in contrast to Max-
well's theory, gave a clear pictureof thenature of so
electricity, that realistic
molecularmodelscould be set up and theirconsequencesworkedout with
mathematical precision. IfNeumann's results
didnotshowcomplete quantitative
agreement with Verdet's data,his oftheinteraction
description oflight,magnetic
force,and matter and he couldclaimto haveaccounted
was at leastintelligible;
foreverymainfeature
satisfactorily oftheFaraday effect.
That a magneto-optic effectshouldhave causedgreaterdifficulties forthe
electromagnetic theoryof lightthanforWeber'selectrodynamic theoryis a
curiousfactwhichmayhelpto explainwhyMaxwell's theory couldgainuni-
versalacceptanceonlyaftera longprocessinvolving important modifications
ofthetheory It illustrates
itself. themagnitude and complexity ofthetaskwhich
Maxwell leftto hissuccessors: thatofachieving a synthesisofhisdescription
oftheelectromagnetic fieldwithWeber'sconceptofelectrically chargedmaterial
as elementary
particles ofthemoleculesofmatter.
constituents
Acknowledgements
While workingon this paper I have receivedfinancialsupportfromthe Danish Council for
ScientificResearch,and fromthe Departmentof Historyof Science and Medicine,Yale University,
whereI spenta fruitful period of two months.I have had valuable discussionswith E. Frankel,
K.M. Pedersen, and M. J.Klein. The latteralso read the manuscriptand suggesteda numberof
improvements. K.H: Wiederkehrprovidedme witha copyofhisdissertation on Weber,and H. Kan-
gro helpedme obtain a copy of the "RheinischerBeobachter"noticeon the Faraday effect. I have
also benefitedfromthe workofmystudentsO. W. Nielsen, G. Riber and J.Rechendorff.
103 Ibid.

TheFaradayEffect
and Physical
Theory 273
Appendix
Thomson'sand Maxwell's Proofof theExistenceof Vortices
In §§ 5 and 6 1 have severaltimesreferred to theproof,firstoutlinedby Thom-
son in 1856 and laterworkedout in detail in Maxwell's Treatise,thattheexis-
tenceand characteristic propertiesof the Faraday effectentail the existenceof
microscopicvorticeswherevermagneticforcesare present.I have repeatedly
stressedthe importanceof Maxwell's belief,inheritedfromThomson,thatthis
was indeeda conclusiveproof,and forthisreasonI shallgivea somewhatdetailed
expositionof it,followedby a presentationof Maxwell's derivationof equation
(7.14). Because of its lengthand technicalnaturethis discussionis given as an
appendix.
Thomson'sformulation of the proofpresupposescompletefamiliarity on the
part of the readerwiththe analysisof the optical rotationin termsof circularly
polarizedrays.This analysisis givenin Maxwell's Treatise,more or less along
thefollowinglines104.
We considerfirsta linearlypolarized plane wave travellingalong the z-axis,
whichis parallelto thedirectionofa magneticfield.It entersa lumpofmagnetized
materialat z = 0, and leaves it again at z = l withits plane of polarizationturned
througha positiveangle 6. If we choose thex-axisto be in the originaldirection
ofpolarization,thewave willbe describedby
u = (2acos(-cot),0,0) at z = 0, (A.I)
u = (2acos(- cot+ cp)cos 0, 2a cos{-œt + (p)sin6,0) at z = l. (A.2)
This maybe explainedon theassumptionthatinsidethematerialleft-and right-
velo-
hand circularlypolarized waves of equal frequenciestravelwithdifferent
cities.Hence,for0 rgz ^ /we describethewave by
u = U!+u2, (A3)
ux= (a cos (^z-co t),a sin(^z-co t),0), (A.4)
u2= (a cos (k2z + cot),a sin(k2z + cot),0) (A.5)
where
kx>09 k2<0, IkJ+ l^l. (A.6)
It is easilyseen thattheseequations reduce to equation (A.I) forz = 0. For z = l
we get
ux= acos(k1l-œt) + acos(-k2l-œt) = 2acos(k0l-œt)cos(ôk'l)
( A 7^
uy= asm(kll-cot)-asin(-k2l-œt) = 2acos(k0l-œt)sm(ôk'ï)
where
*o = 2(^1-^2) and àk=±(kx+k2)
or
kx=k0+ õk and k2= -ko + ôk. (A.8)
104 Maxwell:
Treatise,§§811-817.

274 O. Knudsen
We seethatequations(A.7)and(A.2)agreefor
q>= kol (A.9)
and
9 = ôk-l. (A.10)
Thus,thesuperposition ofthetwocircularly polarizedwavesuxandu2, travelling
withthevelocities and
vx=co/k1 v2=co/'k2'9 is equivalentto a linearly
polarized
wavetravellingwiththevelocityvo= co/ko, but whoseplaneofpolarization is
turnedthroughtheangle6.
Now theessentialdifference betweenthemagnetic rotationand thenatural
rotationproducedin opticallyactivesubstances consistsinthefactthatifthe
atz = /,itwillemerge
waveisreflected atz = 0 witha rotation of29 inthemagnetic
case,butwithno netrotationin thenaturalcase. Fromthisit followsthatthe
forthevaluesoffrequency
variouspossibilities and wavenumberofa circularly
polarizedwave,givenbythegeneralexpression
u= (a cos(fez- œř),a sin(fez- œt' 0), (A.I1)
mustbe relatedas showninTable 1.
Table 1
Polarization Directionof Magneticrotation Naturalrotation

propagation
co k co k
left-hand +z +|co| +I&J +M +|fcj|

right-hand +z -'co' -|/c2| -'co' -|/c2|
right-hand -z +|co| -'kt' +'co' -'k2'
left-hand -z -|co| +|fc2| -'co' +¡^1
We seethatforthenaturalrotation thetwovaluesof|fc|arerelatedto theright-

or left-handedness ofthewave,i.e.to thesenseofrotationofthelightvectoru
relativeto thedirection ofpropagation, whileforthemagnetic rotation theyare
relatedto thesignofco,i.e.to theabsolutesenseofrotationofthelightvector.
Aftertheseconsiderations we are in a positionto understand Thomson's
paperwhichopensabruptly withthefollowing passage105.
The elasticreactionof a homogeneously strainedsolidhas a character
essentiallydevoidofall helicoidaland ofall dipolarasymmetry. Hencethe
rotationoftheplaneofpolarization oflightpassingthrough bodieswhich
eitherintrinsicallypossessthehelicoidalproperty (syrup,oil of turpentine,
quartzcrystals, &c), or havethemagnetic propertyinducedin them,must
be due to elasticreactions dependent on theheterogeneousness ofthestrain
through thespaceofa wave, or to some heterogeneousness luminous
of the
motionsdependent on a heterogeneousnessofpartsofthematterof lineal
not
dimensions infinitely smallin comparison withthewavelength.
105
W.Thomson,op. cit. note 34, pp. 569-571.

TheFaradayEffect
and Physical
Theory 275
thatthenaturalrotationis causedby
Thomsonthenarguestheprobability
an intrinsic ofthemoleculesoftheopticallyactivesubstances:
spiralstructure
... and it is certainthatanyspiralheterogeneousness ofa vibrating
medium
must, ifeither right-handedor spiralspredominate, a finite
left-handed cause
rotationof theplaneof polarization ofall wavesof whichlengthsare not
infinitelygreatmultiples ofthestepsofthestructural spirals.
It is otherwise,however, withthemagnetic rotation:
Butthemagnetic influenceon lightdiscovered byFaradaydependson the
direction ofmotionofmovingparticles. For instance, ina mediumpossessing
it,particlesin a straightlineparallelto thelinesofmagnetic force,
displaced
to a helixroundthislineas axis,and thenprojectedtangentially withsuch
velocitiesas to describecircles,willhavedifferent velocitiesaccording as their
motionsareroundin onedirection (thesameas thenominaldirection ofthe
galvaniccurrent inthemagnetizing coil),or in thecontrary direction.Butthe
elasticreactionofthemediummustbe thesameforthesamedisplacements,
whatever be thevelocities and directions oftheparticles;thatis to say,the
forceswhichare balancedby centrifugal forceof thecircularmotionsare
equal, whilethe luminiferous motionsare unequal.The absolutecircular
motionsbeingtherefore eitherequal or suchas to transmit equal centrifugal
forcesto the particlesinitially considered, it followsthatthe luminiferous
motionsare onlycomponents ofthewholemotion;and thata lesslumini-
ferouscomponent in one direction,compoundedwitha motionexisting in
themediumwhentransmitting no light,givesan equal resultant to thatofa
greater luminiferous motionin thecontrary direction
compounded withthe
samenon-luminous motion.I thinkitis notonlyimpossible to conceiveany
otherthanthisdynamical explanationof thefactthatcircularly polarized
lighttransmitted through magnetized glassparallelto thelinesofmagnetizing
force,withthesamequality,right-handed always,or left-handed always,is
propagated at rates
different according as its courseis in the directionor is
contrary to the direction in which a north magneticpole is drawn; but I
believeit can be demonstrated thatno otherexplanation ofthatfactis pos-
sible.
Thomson'sargument is,ofcourse,basedon theelasticsolidtheory oflight.
Hencethevectoru is an elasticdisplacement. For thecircularly polarizedwave
(A.ll) the end-pointsof u willlie on a helixwhich rotatesuniformly aboutthe
z-axiswithangularvelocity œ. The theoryofelasticity the
gives components of
straininthemedium as combinations ofthespatialderivativesofthecomponents
of u. The straindepends,therefore, on thevalueof k (cf.equations
essentially
(A.15) and (A.17) below).The relationbetweenœ and k,whichdetermines the
wavevelocity, mustthenbe thought ofas a dynamicalexpression ofthebalance
betweencentrifugal forces,whichdependon a>9and theelasticreactionsofthe
medium, depending on k. The gistofThomson'sargument is, thatsincein the
case ofnaturalrotationthewavevelocitydependson theconfiguration ofthe
helix(i.e.on thesignoffc),heterogeneousness ofstrainis themostobviousas-
sumption; whilein themagnetic case,wherethewavevelocity dependson the

276 O. Knudsen
senseofrotation(i.e. on thesignofco),such an explanationis out ofthequestion.

The onlypossibilityleftis thento assume thattheangularvelocityofu combines
with some pre-existent angular velocity,so that the resultingangular velocity
willhave a largernumericalvalue,whenthe two rotationsare in the same sense
thanwhentheyare in oppositesenses.
We shall now turnto Maxwell's treatment106 whichconsistsof a detailed
dynamical calculation based on Thomson's line of reasoning.Consideringfirst
the case of no magneticfield,we shall describethe dynamicsof the etherwhen
the wave (A.ll) is travellingthroughit. The kineticenergyin a volume V of the
etheris givenby
T=l±pu2dV (A.12)
v
wherep is thç densityof the etherwhich we assume constant.The potential
energyis
U=¡WdV (A.13)
v
whereW is thevolumedensityofstrainenergy.If thematerialis isotropie,which
we shall assume,W has theform
W=iA(en+e22+e33)2 + fi(efl+e222
+ el3 + 2ef2+ 2e223+2e2i3' (A.14)
whereX and 'i are elasticconstantsand theelementsof strain,eV},are definedby
Now forthecircularlypolarizedwave (A.ll) we have
T=ya2œ2K (A.16)
and theonlynon-zeroelementsof strainare
1 ¡duv duz' 1
(A.17)
1 /6ux du,' i, . „
**««»(**-«")■
«i3-T(-ã7+83f)-
Hence we have,in thiscase,
W=±fjLk2a2 (A.18)
and
U=±iik2a2V. (A.19)
For a wave ofconstantintensitytheamplitudea musthave a constantvalue.The
conditionforthisis, by Lagrange's equationsof motion,
-M-0
da da
(A.20)
106 Maxwell: I have added a fewresultsfromthetheory
Treatise,§§818-821. For clarification,
These maybe foundin Sokolnikoff,op. cit.note 69, pp. 21-22 and 85.
ofelasticity.

which,by insertionof(A.16) and (A.19),leads to

-pœ2+/i/c2=0. (A.21)
For a givenvalue of |co|,thisequation givesonlyone value forthewave number,
viz.
'k'=yï.'œ'. (A.22)
alwayshave thewell-knownvalue fortransverse
The wave velocitywilltherefore
elasticwaves
°Jë-']/1
|fe| ' P
<A-23>
independently of thesignsof k and co.
Now when the material,throughwhichthe wave travels,is magnetized,we
know thattheremustbe two different values of |fc|forany givenvalue of 'co'. In
thiscase equation (A.21) musttherefore containa termwhichis linearin eitherk
or co.It was clearlythefirstof thesealternativeswhichThomsonhad in mindas
theexplanationofnaturalrotation,and a similaropinionis foundin thefollowing
passage of Maxwell's :
The potentialenergy,[[/], ofthe systemdependson itsconfiguration, thatis,
on therelativepositionofits parts.In so faras it dependson thedisturbance
due to circularly-polarized light,it mustbe a functionof [a], the amplitude,
and [fc],the coefficientof torsion,only.It may be different forpositiveand
negative values of of
[fe] equal numerical value, and it probablyis so in the
case ofmedia whichof themselvesrotatetheplane ofpolarization.
For the case of magneticrotation,Maxwell dismissesthis possibilityand as-
sumes,withoutfurther comment,thatequation (A.21) mustcontaina termlinear
in co.That thisis indeeda necessarychoice is easilyseen,forfromthetable above
it followsthatfora definitevalue ofco,say co= + 'co',our equation musthave the
two rootsk=±'kl'9 i.e. it musthave theform
= /c2-|/c1|2=0.
+ |/c1|)
(fc-|fc1|)(/c
Hence therecan be no termlinearin k.
Since co representsan angular velocityaround the z-axis, the additional
co-termmustcome fromtheexpression(A.16) forthe kineticenergyT. We must
thereforeadd a lineartermto the right-handside of thisequation. But T must,
like any kineticenergy,be a homogeneousquadratic functionof velocities,so
thistermcan onlyhave theform
Ti = const,-co-eoi (A.24)
wherecoxmust be a quantityof the same physicalnatureas co,i.e. dinangular
velocityaround the z-axis. Furthermore,cox must vanish when the external
magneticfieldis zero, and its directionmustbe relatedto thatof the magnetic
field.Maxwell's proofis now complete,and he ends thissectionwiththe state-
ment:

278 O. Knudsen
We are thereforeled to theconclusionthatthisvelocity is an invariable

accompaniment of the magneticforcein thosemedia whichexhibitthe
magnetic rotation oftheplaneofpolarization.
In thefollowing sectionMaxwell arguesthatthevalidity ofthisconclusion
doesnotdependon"theordinary hypothesis ofmotion intheundulatory theory".
In fact,whatever lightis,thephenomena ofinterference provecompletely thatit
mustbe described bymeans of a vector,normal to the of
direction the lightray.
It is also certainthatin circularly polarized lightthisvectorhas a constant
magnitude androtatesuniformly suchas to complete intheperiodic
a revolution
timeofthewave.
and theangularvelocityof thisvectorare perfectly
The direction known,
the
though physical at a given
natureofthevectorand itsabsolutedirection
instant
areuncertain.
Thisknowledge forus to conclude,byreasoning
is sufficient similarto thatpre-
sentedinthebeginning ofthisAppendix,
... thatinthemedium, whenundertheactionofmagnetic force,somerotatory
motionis goingon,theaxisofrotation beingin the directionofthemagnetic
force;and thattherateofpropagation ofcircularly-polarized
light,whenthe
direction ofitsvibratory rotation and thedirection ofthemagnetic rotation
ofthemediumare thesame,is different fromtherateofpropagation when
thesedirections areopposite.
Theconclusion thussafely Maxwell nowpresents
established, hisfinaltheory
of the Faraday effect underthe heading:"On the Hypothesis of Molecular
Vortices"107. He firstremarks thatthemagnetic rotations mustbelongto in-
finitesimally smallpartsofthemedium. For thishe refersto an experiment, des-
cribedmuchearlierin thebook,in whicha rotation apparatusthat he had con-
structed in 1861wasusedintheattempt angularmomentum
to detectan internal
inan electromagnet withan ironcore,theresultbeingnil108.
In mathematical termsthe basic assumptionis, then,thata magnetized
medium containsa non-zero vorticityfield,
givenby
to= Vxyo (A.25)
wherev0is thecorrespondingvelocity <*0is

field.We assumethatthevorticity
to
proportional theexternal field
magnetic Ho so thatwecan set
£o= Ho. (A.26)
Ifa smalldisturbanceu(r,t)is propagated

through thiswillchange
themedium,
so thatwenowhave
thevorticity,
107 Maxwell: Treatise,§§822-829.

108
IWd.,§575.

To getany further we mustknowtherelationbetweenACand u. Maxwell, after

admittinghis ignoranceabout the nature of the vorticesand the formof this
relation,makes the simplestpossible assumption,viz. that the mediumbehaves
like a perfectliquid.By Helmholtz' vortextheoremwe thenhave
¿« = (io-F)n. (A.28)
Anothereffectof the disturbanceu is that each volume elementacquires an
angularvelocity,givenby
ß=iFxii. (A.29)
The nextstepis to assume thatthekineticenergyof themediumcontainsa term
oftheform
T^lClS-QdV. (A.30)
v
Maxwell commentsbriefly
This is equivalent to supposing that the angular velocityacquired by the
elementof the mediumduringthe propagationof lightis a quantitywhich
mayenterintocombinationwiththatmotionby whichmagneticphenomena
are explained.
In orderto obtain the equations of motion forthe mediumwe insert(A.29) in
(A.30) and performa partialintegration.
The resultis
T^CjÇ-iVxuidV
v
(A.31)
= C J(ùx{).nda + CjMFx{)d7
sv v
wheretheclosed surfaceSv is takento be at infinityso thatthefirsttermmay be
neglected in thefollowing.
At this point Maxwell makes an interestingdigression.By analogy with
(A.26) he takes£ to be thetotalmagneticfieldand uses the"Maxwell equation"
Fx{=FxH = 4tcJ (A.32)
whereJ is the densityof total current,includingdisplacementcurrent.He then
writes(A.31) as
T1=4nC'hJdV (A.33)
and says v
It appears fromthisthatour hypothesisis equivalentto the assumption

thatthevelocityofa particleofthemedium... is a quantitywhichmayenter
intocombinationwiththeelectriccurrent. . .
This illustrates
thewayin whichthevortextheoryshaped Maxwell's conception
ofthenatureof electriccurrents(cf.§ 6 above).
Returningto themain line of reasoning,we now treatthe special case where
Ho is a uniformfieldin the z-directionand u is a plane wave propagatedin the
same direction.Then,by (A.27),
VxÇ=Vx(AÇ)

280 O. Knudsen
andby(A.28)wehave
T1= C$h.{Vx(l;0-V)u)dV=C$h-l(Ç0-V)(Vxu)-]dV. (A.34)
v v
For theplanewave
u(r,í)= (wx(z,í)?Mz'ř)'°)
thisgives
=CH°l
Tl K)dV
(S"Ùy~l$ (A35)
wherewe havereplaced£0by Ho. The totalkineticenergydependent
on u is
therefore
(cf.(A.12))
T='±pù2dV+T1. (A.36)
v
polarizedwave(A.ll) wefinally
For thecircularly get
T=&pa2 œ2+ CH0 a2 k2œ) V. (A.37)
Maxwell replacesthesimpleexpression
In orderto takeaccountofdispersion,
(A.19)byonederived fromCauchy'stheory:
U=$a2Q(k2)V (A.38)
Thecondition
whereg is a polynomial. (A.20)forconstant nowgives
amplitude
pco2+ 2 CH0 k2œ= Q(k2) (A.39)
weget
ofcoand Ho. Bydifferentiation
inwhichk is a function
'lpco+ 2CH0k2+ UcH0^-4f-) |^1 àœ

(A.40)
+
[2Cť.+ (4CH.t.-^)^-]«.-0
and hence
mustvanishseparately,
Hereeachsquarebracket
6/c_ Ck2œ dk
( ' )
~dH¿~ pco+CH0k2 "6^*
we may
fieldchangesthevalueofk onlybya smallamount,
Sincethemagnetic
write
k=fco+(oîr)
'OHO/Ho = o
H°
with(A.8)and (A.10)
wherek0is thevalueofk whenHo is zero.Bycomparison
weseethat
'dH0/Ho=0 pœ dœ
to replacek0and œ bythewavelengthin a vacuumA,
relations
Usingfamiliar
n, and thevelocityof lightc, we get Maxwell's final
theindexof refraction

fortherotation
formula angle
to equation(7.14).
whichis equivalent
Historyof ScienceDepartment
UniversityofAarhus
Denmark
(ReceivedDecember13, 1975)


The Faraday Effect and Physical Theory, 1845-1873

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Faraday Effect and Physical Theory, 1845-1873

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Faraday Effect and Physical Theory, 1845-1873

Author(s): Ole Knudsen

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

He was clearlyconsciousofthegreattheoretical importance ofthenewpheno-

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

WhenFaraday,twomonths afterhisdiscovery, presented hispaperdescribing

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

appearedtobe duetoa changeofstateimpressed bythemagnet on themolecules

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

Pl9P29...9Pi9...9 Kis given by

whereyiis a quantitythatis characteristicofthemoleculeofthe¿thsubstanceand

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

q>=VHrl (Faraday 1845)

V=YuPi' Viîsome >''s<0 Verdet 1858

V • X2constant Becquerel 1846

one introducedon therighthand side a termoftheform

fcHx ; p>« intesers^ ° <3-2)

whereH is the"magneticforce"and k is a constantdependingon thetransparent

24 G.B.Airy: "On the ". Phil. Mag.,

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

any homogeneousisotropiemediumby thefollowingwave equation:

ô2u /Ô2' ....

(D2= (p{k2). (3.4)

wherem is proportionalto H and ^ is a polynomialwhichis odd withrespect

œ2= (p(k'2)-m'l/(œ,k'2) or œ2= cp{k"2)+ m'jj{œ,k"2). (3.6)

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

By themajority ofphysicistsworking aroundthemiddleofthenineteenth

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

thathad first producedthemagnetic rotation28. The diamagnetic action,which

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

appliedconsciously and in a sophisticated way.In mostcasesthemodelswhich

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

the"luminiferous motions"to givethetotalmotionsoftheparticles.

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

After thepassagesquotedabove,withtheirvisionofa completemechanical

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

6. The Developmentof Maxwell's VortexTheory

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

readilyunderstand?I would answer,thatit is a good thingto have two ways

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

Bothreferences are to Thomson'spaperof 1856whichI havediscussedabove.

The conception ofa particlehavingitsmotionconnected withthatofa

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

PhysicalLines...". HereMaxwell formulatedtwoquestionsaboutthenature

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

bearsthetitle"MagneticActionon Light"and dealswiththeFaraday effect.

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

The problemofdetermining themechanism requiredto establish a given

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

connecting mechanism withthephenomena of conductionis perhapsbestillus-

7. The Applicationof theVortexTheoryto theFaraday Effect

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM

wherefiis a kind of mean mass densitywhichdepends on the unknowndistri-

div u=^ = 0, (7.2)

wherethecoordinatesare denotedxl , x2, x3 and theusual summationconvention

82Wí_16ti7 ._123 (13)

Thus,by theprincipleofangularmomentumwe have

whereSv is the surfaceenclosingthe volume F, whilesijkdenotesLevi-Civita's

whichcorrespondsto Maxwell's expressionfor Y' in prop.XIX. The factthat

This content downloaded from 185.2.32.121 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 08:06:17 AM