Publ i s hed i n t he Bul l et i n of Indi an As s oci at i on of Phys i c s Teacher s Vol . 3, No.

5, p143- 148 ( May, 2011)

Obtaining Conservation Principles from Laws of Nature
and the other way around!

P.C.Deshmukh
1,2
and Shyamala Venkataraman
1


1) Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai 600036
2) School of Basic Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Mandi, Mandi 175001

ABSTRACT: Until Einsteins work on the interpretation of the laws of electrodynamics that
led him to formulate the special theory of relativity, it was considered natural to obtain
conservation principles from laws of nature. Subsequently, with the work of Emmily
Noether, emphasis shifted to a reversal of this process, by first examining the symmetry
considerations that have conservation principles associated with them, and then deduction of
the laws of nature from the underlying connections between symmetry and conservation
laws. This latter approach has now assumed a fundamental role in the scientific method aimed
at examining laws of nature, to both test them and/or to discover new laws. This method is
illustrated in this paper using simple examples which can be used in teaching this fascinating
approach in a first course in undergraduate physics curriculum.

Section I: Newtons Laws of Motion

The three laws of Newton provide the very foundation pillars of classical mechanics, even if
an alternative equivalent formulation based on the principle of variation exists. All physical
processes are explicable in terms of just these three laws, till one must address quantum
features. Within the classical regime, no violation of their predictions has ever been found.
It is for this range of applicability that they have an elevated status, thus known as the
universal laws of nature.
First, we discuss the process of identifying the laws of nature, beginning with Newtons I
law of mechanics. Historically, Newtons I law was in fact formulated by Galileo Galilee,
who died the same year (1642) that Newton was born. Galileos recognition of the law of
inertia was incorporated with fruitful success by Newton in his scheme of dynamics and thus
got to be known as Newtons I law. It was from careful observations, through a systematic
compilation of experimental data that Galileo arrived at this law of inertia. Galileo observed
that a ball dropped from the mast of a ship would fall at the same relative location in a ship
irrespective of the ship being anchored and stationary, or being in motion at a constant
velocity. This led him to recognise the equivalence of the state of rest, or of uniform motion
along a straight line, when motion of an object it completely determined by the initial
condition alone. It is departure from equilibrium that sought a cause, not uniform motion
determined by initial conditions. Newton recognized the departure from equilibrium as a rate
of change of momentum in a frame of reference in which Galileos law of inertia would hold,
determined solely by initial conditions. Newton identified the rate of change of momentum as
proportional to the acceleration of the object, and the constant of proportionality as the
objects inertia/mass. Newton introduced the idea of force as the very cause of
acceleration, and formulated his linear stimulus-response theory that embodies the principle
of causality and determinism, expressed succinctly in a compact mathematical form: F ma = ,
known as Newtons II law.





The states of rest and of uniform
motion both are completely
equivalent. They both provide an
interchangeable description of
equilibrium. This fact is embodied in
the Galilean principle of relativity,
namely that laws of physics remain
invariant under transformation from
one inertial frame of reference to
another. This principle is retained even
in the special theory of relativity.

It is important here to note that in the classical scheme of dynamics of mechanical systems,
the three laws of Newton are not derivable from anything more fundamental; rather they
constitute the fundamental principles from which all properties of mechanical systems related
to their temporal evolution result. As is shown in the next section, the outcome of Newtons
laws include not only the trajectories of mechanical systems with given initial conditions and
subjected to known forces, but also conservation principles that provide necessary conditions
for physical processes to take place.




Section II: Obtaining Conservation Principles from Laws of Motion that express
the physical law:
The laws of motion and the conservation principles are both of great importance in
understanding classical physical processes. Physics aims at knowing the most from the least
set of principles; it is thus heartening to underscore the fact that the conservation principles
are in fact derivable from the laws of motion. This is easiest to see in the case of conservation
of linear momentum which follows directly from Newtons III law, which makes a qualitative
and also quantitative statement about each pair of interacting objects, which exert a
mechanical force on each other. The law action and reaction are equal and opposite is
succinctly written as:
12 21
, F F =
where
12
F is the force by the first body on the second, and
21
F is that by the second on the
first. In Newtonian scheme of mechanics, this is introduced as a fundamental principle i.e.,
a law of nature.
Using now the II law, we get:
2 1
,
dp dp
dt dt

=
and hence
( )
1 2
0
d p p
dP
dt dt
+
= = , a simple equation that succinctly states the conservation of the
total linear momentum P.
We see that the principle of conservation of momentum is a direct consequence of Newtons
III law. In other words, we have obtained a conservation principle from the physical law. We
now proceed to illustrate how other conservation principles also follow from the known
physical laws which are expressed by the equation of motion. Toward this goal, we consider
the gravitational two-body problem, whose interaction is known to be given by Newtons law
of gravity.

Figure 1: Gravitational 2-body problem in classical mechanics
In the Fig.1, m
1
is the mass of the object 1 with a position vector R
1
, and the mass m
2
has
the position vector R
2
. The interaction between the two bodies can be expressed in terms of
the force of 1 on 2, or vice-versa:
1 2
_1_ _ 2 2 2 2
2 1
,
by on
mm
F m R G u
R R
= =

, where
r
u
r
= .
Likewise,
1 2
_ 2_ _1 1 1 2
2 1
.
by on
mm
F m R G u
R R
= =

Let us now consider a case wherein the mass of the second body is very small or negligible as
compared to the first, i.e. m
1
>>>m
2
, which is a typical situation as in the sun-earth and the
earth-moon two-body problems.
The position vector of the centre of mass can be written as
1 1 2 2
1 2
CM
m R m R
R
m m
+
=
+
.
From Fig.1, one can see that:
1 1 CM
r R R = , and
2 2 CM
r R R = .
Thus,
( )
1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2
1 1 2 2 1 2
( ) ( )
0.
CM CM
CM
mr m r m R R m R R
m R m R m m R
+ = +
= + + =

The acceleration of the centre of mass in this system will therefore be:
( )
( )
2 1 1 2 3
1 2 1 1 2 3
3
...where ....for ,
. .,
0,
r
r R R G m m
r
r
G m m Gm m m
r
i e
r
r
r
k k
k
= = +
= = + ~ )))
+ =

which is the equation of motion for unit mass. This equation of motion represents the
physical law, namely Newtons inverse square law for gravitational interaction. We note
here that the dimensions of k are | |
3 2
LT k

= .
By taking the dot product of the equation of motion with velocity, we get,
3
vv 0 rr
r
k
+ = ,
where v= v , i.e.:
0
2
0
lim
v
v lim 0
t
t
r
t
t r
o
o
o
k
o
o
o

+ = .
Integrating the above equation with respect to time, we get:
2
v
2
E
r
k
= ,
where the constant of integration E is readily interpreted as the specific mechanical energy
(mechanical energy per unit mass), a constant of motion representing a conserved quantity.
Thus, by merely taking the scalar product of the equation of motion with velocity, we obtain
the principle of conservation of energy.
Likewise, by taking the vector cross-product of the equation of motion with the position
vector r , we obtain the principle of conservation of angular momentum. In the system of
units we have used, in fact we obtain the conservation of specific angular
momentum v
l
H r

= = , which is just the angular momentum per unit mass.

Finally, by taking the cross product of the equation of motion with H , and a little bit of
simple vector algebra, we obtain another constant of motion
( )
v A H e

k = , so that
0,
dA
dt
= since (i) 0
dH
dt
= and (ii) the force per unit mass is given by
2
v
-
d
e
dt

k

= . The
vector Awhich is the conserved quantity that we have obtained now obviously represents a
conserved quantity, when the central field force is an inverse square force, which is a
necessary and sufficient condition for it to be a conserved quantity. This vector is known as
the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector [2]. For the Kepler problem, it maintains a constant direction
from the focus of the ellipse toward the perigee, and the constancy of this direction ensures
the fact that the ellipse does not undergo a precession, thereby generating a rosette motion
and fill up the space as would be expected from Bertrands theorem [2] for other central field
forces. We note, for completeness, that one often arrives at essentially the same physical
conclusions by dealing with the angular momentum l r p H = = rather than the specific
angular momentum H . Correspondingly, the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector is often defined as
( )
v

H
p l
e e


k k

= rather than
( )
v H e

k , the difference being only in the

scaling factor.





The central field symmetry of a potential only ensures that motion is restricted to a plane. The
trajectory would however fill up the space unless the force is given by the inverse square law
which fixes the ellipse through the constancy of the Laplace-Runge-Lenz vector which is
directed from the focus to the perigee of the ellipse.


In essence, we find that there is a straight forward mechanism to obtain conservation laws
from the equation of motion that expresses the physical law.
We now ask: is it possible to get the laws of physics from the conservation (symmetry)
principles? The answer is, again, yes. We illustrate it this by considering the classical two-
body gravitational attraction.
Section III: Obtaining Physical Laws from Symmetry and Conservation
Principles:

We have seen in Section II that the principle of conservation of momentum follows from the third
law of Newton. The physical law itself is considered as a fundamental principle. It is not derived
from any other consideration, but considered as the first principle from which all else in
mechanics can be derived. It is a tribute to Galileo-Newton that the three laws of mechanics
provide a complete framework for tackling all problems in classical mechanics.
Now, classical mechanics can be built on an alternative formalism, without using the Newtonian
scheme of cause-effect linear response. This alternative scheme rests on Hamiltons principle of
variation [2], but in this article, we shall not follow that thread. Rather, we shall see in this
Section that one can invert the line of argument in the previous section by considering the
connection between symmetry and conservation laws as the first principle, and deduce laws of
physics from this consideration. We shall not, in this Section, treat Newtons III law as a
foundation level principle, i.e. one that is not deducible from anything deeper. Instead, we
present an alternative perspective, which has for its foundation a different, new principle, and
from which Netwons III law can actually be deduced. This alternative principle will thereby
illustrate to us a pathway to discover a law of nature, which the III law is, along with the first two
laws of Newton.
The alternative principle mentioned above is the principle of translational invariance in
homogenous space. What this means is that if we consider a system of N particles in a medium
that is homogenous; a displacement S o of the entire N-particle system through this medium
would result in a new configuration that would find itself in an environment that is completely
indistinguishable from the previous one. This invariance of the environment of the entire N
particle system following a translational displacement is a result of translational symmetry in
homogenous space.
There are four essential considerations that need to be spelled out to underscore the present
specific context:
(i) To begin with, we consider each particle of the system to be under the influence only
of all the remaining particles; the system is isolated and there are no external forces
acting on any of its particles.
(ii) It is the entire N-particle system that is deemed to have undergone simultaneous
displacement, leaving the inter-particle separation and orientations invariant.
(iii) The medium in which the system undergoes such a translational displacement is
essentially homogeneous, spanning the entire system both before and after the
displacement.
(iv) The displacement the entire system under consideration is deemed to take place at a
certain instant of time. The implication is that it is only a virtual displacement, which
is a only a mental thought process; real physical displacements would require a
certain time interval over which the displacements would occur virtual
displacements can be thought of to occur at an instant of time and subject to the
constraint specified in (i). The displacement considered being virtual, it is redundant
to seek information on what agency has caused it. All the constraints as well as the
forces acting upon the system remain unchanged before and after the virtual
displacement them being instantaneous, the question of during the time interval
that the displacement takes place becomes irrelevant.
Now, the internal forces do no work in this virtual displacement, and we must therefore have the
work done by the internal forces in the virtual displacement that is effected, called virtual work
as zero:
1 1 1,
th
0 ,
where is the force on the particle by the , and is the force on the
pa
N N N
k ik
k k i i k
th
ik k
th
W F s F s
F k i F
k
o o o
= = = =


= = - = -
` `
)
)

rticle due to the remaining -1 particles. N

The mathematical techniques involving the principle of virtual displacement and that of virtual
work were developed by Jean le Ron d'Alembert (1717 1783). The above relation can hold well
if either of the two vectors participating in the scalar (dot) product is a null vector, or if the angle
between the two is 90
0
. Since we have considered the displacement s o to be an arbitrary one,
we must conclude that
1 1 1
0 .
= = =

= = = =
`
)

N N N
k
k
k
k k k
dp d dP
F p
dt dt dt

We thus discover from the above relation that the time derivative of the total momentum
vanishes, and hence it is conserved. We have arrived at this conclusion *NOT* from Newtons III
law, as in eq.(I.3), but from the properties of translational symmetry in homogenous space. In
fact, if we write the above relation for just two particles interacting with each other, we get:
2 1
12 21
0,
. ., ,
which gives , the .
=
=
=
d P
dt
d p d p
i e
dt dt
F F III law of Newton

This is really amazing, since it suggests a path to discover the laws of physics by exploiting the
connection between symmetry and conservation laws!
Likewise, if, in the two body Kepler problem, we begin with the consideration that ellipse
traced in the two-body interaction does not precess and is fixed, then by searching for the
necessary and sufficient condition that would fix the ellipse, could we not have deduced that
the interaction between the two masses must be governed by a
2
1
r
force even if we were
unaware of Newtons law of gravity? Does that not show a mechanism to deduce a law of
physics by studying the connection between symmetry and conservation principles? In
modern physics, this reversed approach, of placing symmetry and conservation principles
ahead of laws of physics has become a powerful technique toward the search of fundamental
laws of physics. This approach began with Einstein, and sharpened by Noether and Wigner
and has now emerged as one of the important corner stones [1-5] of theoretical physics. The
discussion in the present article, we trust, will provide an early introduction to undergraduate
students to these powerful techniques based on simple well studied Newtonian principles, so
that when they meet some advanced applications at the very frontiers of physics, they would
have already met the idea before.
References:
[1] P. C. Deshmukh and J. Libby, Symmetry Principles and Conservation Laws in Atomic and
Subatomic Physics, Resonance, September page 832, and October page 926, (2010)
[2] H. Goldstein, Classic Mechanics, Second Edition, Addison-Wesley, 1980.
[3] Moore, Thomas A., `Getting the most action out of least action: A proposal', Am. J. Phys. 72:4
p522-527 (2004)
[4] Hanca, J.,Taylor, E.F. and Tulejac, S., `Deriving Lagrange's equations using elementary calculus',
Am. J. Phys. 72:4, p510-513 (2004)
[5] Hanca, J. and Taylor, E.F., `From conservation of energy to the principle of least action: A story
line', Am. J. Phys. 72:4, p.514-521 (2004)