2.

ON T H E A B E R R A T I O N OF L I G H T *

G.G. STOKES

The general expanation of the phenomenon of aberration is so

simple, and the coincidence of the valu of the velocity of light
thence deduced with that derived from the observations of the
eclipses of Jupiter's satellites so remarkable, as to leave no doubt
on the mind as to the truth of the expanation. But vvhcn vveexamine the cause of the phenomenon more closcly, it is far from
being so simple as it appears at first sight. On the theory of emissions, indeed, there is little difficulty; and it would seem that the
more particular expanation of the cause of aberration usually
given, which depends on the consideraron of the motion of a telescope as light passes from its object-glass to its cross vvires. has
reference especially to this theory; for it does not apply to the
theory of undulations, utiless we make the rather startling hypothesis that the luminiferous ether passes freely through the sides of the
telescope and through the eatth itself. The u n d u l a t o r y theory of
light, however, explains so simply and so bcautifully the most
complicated phenomena, that we are naturally led to regard aberration as a phenomenon unexplained by it, but not incompatible
with it.
* Reprinted from G. G. Stokes, Maih. and Phys. Papers, 1, 134-40. The
first part is unchanged from original (1845) publication in Pll. Afag., 27,
9; The "Additional Note" was substituted in 1880 as an unprovement pf the
1845 argument to the same end.

136

STOKES: ON THE ABERRATION OF LIGHT

137

The object of the present communication is to attempt an explanation of the cause of aberration which shall be in accordance
with the theory of undulations. I shall suppose that the earth
and the planets carry a portion of the ether along with them so
that the ether cise to their surfaces is at rest relatively to those
surfaces, while its velocity alters as we recede from the surface,
till, at no great distance, it is at rest in space. According to the
undulatory theory, the direction in which a heavenly body is seen
is normal to the fronts of the waves which have emanated from
it, and have reached the neighbourhood of the observer, the ether
near him being supposed to be at rest relatively to him. If the
ether in space were at rest, the front of a wave of light at any instant
being given, its front at any future time could be found by the
method explained in Airy's tracts. If the ether were in motion,
and the velocity of propagation of light were infinitely small, the
wave's front would be displaced as a surface of particles of the
ether. Neither of these suppositions is, however, rue, for the ether
moves while light is propagated through it. In the following investigation I suppose that the displacements of a wave's front in an
elementary portion of time due to the two causes just considered
take place independently.
Let w, v, w be the resolved parts along the rectangular axes of
x, y, z, of the velocity of the particle of ether whose co-ordinates
are x, y, z, and let V be the velocity of light supposing the ether
at rest. In consequence'of the distance of the heavenly bodies, it
will be quite unnecessary to consicler any waves except those
which are plae, except IT so lar as they are distorted by the motion of the ether. Let the axis of z be taken in, or nearly in the
direction of propagation of the wave considered, so that the equation of a wave's front at any time will be

V..'.-- - .',

z = c+K/+t,

"

, (i)

C being a constant, / the time, and f a small quantity, a function

10

138

NINETr.ENTH-CENTURY AETHER THEORIES

of x, y and /. Since u, v, w and f are of the order of the aberration,

their squares and producs may be neglected.
Denoting by a, /?, y the anglcs which the normal to the wave's
front at the point (x, y, z) makes with the axes, we have, to the
first order of approximation,
.
jy
eos a = j- , eos R = -^- , eos y 1 ; (2)
7X

/V

and if we take a length V dt along this normal, the co-ordinates

of its cxtremity vvill be

,'
%

x-~Vdt,
dx

y~Vdt,
dy

z+Vdt.

If the ehcr were at rest, the locus of these extremilies would be

tiie wave's front at the time t + d, but since it is in motion, the
co-ordinates of those extremities must be further increased by u dt,
vdl, wd(. Denoting then by x', v', z the co-ordinates of the point
of the wave's front at the time t-\-dt which corresponds to the
point (x, ;', z) at the time /, we have
\

-y
dt, y' =
dx) -

and eliminating x, y and z from these equations and (1), and denoting C by/(x, >, /), we havefor the equation to the wave's front
at the time t + dt,

z'-(w-\-V)dt = C4-K/

or, expanding, neglecjtinjg dt- and the square of the aberration, and
suppressing the accents of x, y and z,
"
,,

z = C+Vt + t + (w+ y) di.

(3)

STOKESI ON THE ABERRATION OF LIGHT

139

But from the definition of C it follows that the equation to the

wave's front at the time -\-dt will be got from (1) by putting
+ dl for /, and we have therefore for this equation
(4)

Comparing the identical equations (3) and (4), we have

= w.

This equation gives C = ' vv//; but in thesmall term C we may

*/
replace

w dt by

wdz -r V: this comes to taking the approxi-

mate valu of zgiven by the equation z = C+Vt instead of /

for the parameter of the system of surfaces formed by the wave's
front in its successive positions. Henee equation (1) becomes

z = C+Vt-tJLf \v dz.

v)

- Combining the valu of C just found with equations (2), we get,

to a first approximation,
7t

dw

'dw

(5)

equations which might very easily be proved directly in a more

geometrical manner.
If random vales are assigned to u, v and v, the law of aberration
resulting from these equations will be a complicated one; but if
w, v and u> are such thut'ifdx+vdy + wdz is an exact differential,
we have,
dw __ du
dw
dv

dx
dz ' dv ~ dz

140

NINETEENTH-CENTURY AETHER THEORIES

whence, denoting by the suffixes 1, 2 the vales of the variables

belonging to the frst and second limits respectively, we obtain

If the motion of the ether be such that u dx -f v dy -I- w dz is an

exact difTerential for one system of rectangular axes, it is easy to
prove, by the transformaron of co-ordinates, that it is an exact
difTerentia for any other system. Henee the formula; (6) will
hold good, Tiot merely for light propagated in the direction frst
considered, but for lght propagated in any direction, the direc-

tion of propagation being taken in each case for the axis.of z. If

we assume that u dx 4- v dy+ w dz is an exact difTerential for that
part of the motion of the ether-which is due t'o the motion of translation of the earth and planets, it does not therefore follow that the
same is truc for that part which depends on thcir motions of rotation. Moreover, the diurnal aberration is too small to the detected
by observation, or at least to be measured with any accuracy, and
I shall therefore neglect it.
It is not difficult to shew that the formula? (6) lead to the known
law of aberration. In applying therrt to the case of a star, if we begin
the integrations in equations (5) at a point situated at such a distance from the earth that the motion of the ether, and consequently the resulting change in the direction of the light, is insensible, we shall have z/i = O, Vi = 0; and if, moreover, we take the
plae xz to pass through the direction of the earth's motion, we
shall have
t>2 = 0, 'Pz-Pi = 0,
j
and

. . . .

<x 2 -a 1 = 2

that is, the star will.appear displaced towards the direction in

which the earth is moving, through an angle equal to the ratio of

STOKES: ON THE ABERRATION OF LIGHT

141

the'velocity of the earth to that of light, multiplied by the sine of

the angle between the direction of the earth's motion and the line
joining the earth and the star.
;
Additional Note

[In what precedes waves of light are alone considered, and the
course of a ray is not-investigated, the investigaron not being
required. Therc follows iri the original paper an investigaron
having for object to shew that in the case of a body like the moon
or a planet vvhich is itself in motion, the effect of the distortion of
the waves in the neighbourhood of the body in altering the apparent
place of the body as determined by observation is insensible. For
this, the orthogonal trajectory of the wave in its successive positions
from the body to the observer is considered, a trajectory which in
its main part will be a straight line, from which it will not differ
except in the immediate neighbourhood of the body and of the
earth, where the ether is distorted by their respective motions.
The perpendicular distance of the further exremity of the trajectory
from the prolongation of the straight line which jt forms in the
intervening quiescent ether is shewn to subtend at the earth an
angle which, though not actually O, is so small that it may be disregarded.
.

The orthogonal trajectory of a wave in its successive positions

does not however represent the course of a,ray, as it would do if
the ether were at rest. Some remarks made by Professor Challis
in the course of discussion suggested to me the examination of
the path of a ray, which in the case in which udx + vdy-\~ wdz is an
exact difTerential proved to be a straight line, a result which I had
not foreseen when I wrote the above paper, which I may mention
was read before the Cambridge Philosophical Society on the ISth
of May, 1845 (see Philosophical Magazine, vol. xxix, p. 62). The
rectilinearity of the path of a ray in this case, though not expressly
mentioned by Professor Challis, is virtually contained in what he

142

NINETCENTH-CENTURY AETHER THEOR1ES

wrote. The problem is rather simplificd by introclucing the consideration of rays, and may be treatccl from the bcginning in the
following manner.
The notation in other respects bcing as befor, let a', /?' be'the
small angles by which the direction of the wave-normal at the
point (,v, y, z) deviates from that of Oz tovvards Ox, Oy, respectively, so that a', fl' are the complements of a, /?, and let a,, /?, be
the inclinations to Oz of the course of a ray at the same poinl.
By compounding the velocity of propagaton through the ether
with the velocity of the ether we easily see that

,='+, /.=/*'+.
s

Let us now trace the.changes of a,, fl, during the time dt. These
depend first on the changes of a', /?', and secn el ly on those of
w, v.
As regards the change in the direction of the wave-normal, \ve
notice that the seat of a small element of the wave in its successive
positions is in a succession of planes of particles nearly parallel
to the plae of x, y. Consequently the direction of the element
of the wave will be altered during the time di by the motion of the
ether as much as a plae of particles of the ether parallel to the
plae of the wave, or, which is the same to the order of small
quantities retained, parallel to the plae xy. Now if we consider
a particle of ether at the time / having for co-ordinates x, y. r,
another at a distance dx parallel to the axis of A% and a third at a
distance dy parallel to the axis of v, we see that the displacements
of these three particles parallel to the axis of z during the time dt
will be

j
wdl,

, dt,
j
{w +, -r- dx]

j
[w+-rdyj \ dt\

and dividing the relative displacements by the relation distances,

we have dwd.\-df, dw/dy-clt for the small angles by which the

STOKCS: ON THE ABERRATION OF LIGHT

143

normal is displaced, in the planes of xzt yz, from the axes x, v, so

that
, /
dw ,
,.,,
dw ,
/a = r- dt, dp = -T- dt.
dx
dy
We have seen already that the changes of //, r are du/dz. V dt,
dv/dz. Vdi, so that _ l^u
'
\dz

dw\
dx)

'

_ (du
\dz

dw\
dy]

Henee, provided the motion of the ether be such that

....

udx+ vdy-{-wdz

..

is an exact differential, the change of direction of a ray as it travels

along is ////, and therefore the course of a ray is a straight line
notwithstanding the motion of the ether. The rectilinearity of
propagation of a ray of light, which a priori would seem very likely
to be interfered with by the motion of the ether produced by the
earth or heavenly body moving through it, is the tacit assumption
made in the explanation of aberration given in treatises of Astronomy, and provided that be accounted for ihe rest follows as
usual.* It follows further that the angle subtended at the earth
by the perpendicular distance o'f the point where a ray leaves
a heavenly body from the straight line prolonged which represents
its course through the intervening quiescent ether, is not merely
too small to be observed, but actually ////.]

t To make this explanation quite complete, vve should properly, as Professor

Challis remarks, consider the light coming from the wires of the observing
telescope, in company with the light from the heavenly body.