Treatise on light — Key Ideas to Explore

(1 User reviews)   176
In Category - Light Heat
Huygens, Christiaan, 1629-1695, Thompson, Silvanus P. (Silvanus Phillips), 1851-1916 [Translator] Project Gutenberg 2005
Wave theory of light; Refraction, Double Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition en

Edition facts

Words: 40,981
Reading time: 179 min
Text sections: 6
Huygens' 1690 treatise on light, translated by Silvanus P. Thompson, explains reflection, refraction, and the strange refraction of Iceland crystal using wave theory. The preface reveals the author's delay in publishing and his method of verifying principles through conclusions.
Share
Editorial Edition Score 4.7/5

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

Edition quality

Read the Text

CHAPTER I. On Rays Propagated in Straight Lines.

That Light is produced by a certain movement.

That no substance passes from the luminous object to the eyes.

That Light spreads spherically, almost as Sound does.

Whether Light takes time to spread.

Experience seeming to prove that it passes instantaneously.

Experience proving that it takes time.

How much its speed is greater than that of Sound.

In what the emission of Light differs from that of Sound.

That it is not the same medium which serves for Light and Sound.

How Sound is propagated.

How Light is propagated.

Detailed Remarks on the propagation of Light.

Why Rays are propagated only in straight lines.

How Light coming in different directions can cross itself.

CHAPTER II. On Reflexion.

Demonstration of equality of angles of incidence and reflexion.

Why the incident and reflected rays are in the same plane perpendicular to the reflecting surface.

That it is not needful for the reflecting surface to be perfectly flat to attain equality of the angles of incidence and reflexion.

CHAPTER III. On Refraction.

That bodies may be transparent without any substance passing through them.

Proof that the ethereal matter passes through transparent bodies.

How this matter passing through can render them transparent.

That the most solid bodies in appearance are of a very loose texture.

That Light spreads more slowly in water and in glass than in air.

Third hypothesis to explain transparency, and the retardation which Light suffers.

On that which makes bodies opaque.

Demonstration why Refraction obeys the known proportion of Sines.

Why the incident and refracted Rays produce one another reciprocally.

Why Reflexion within a triangular glass prism is suddenly augmented when the Light can no longer penetrate.

That bodies which cause greater Refraction also cause stronger Reflexion.

Demonstration of the Theorem of Mr. Fermat.

CHAPTER IV. On the Refraction of the Air.

That the emanations of Light in the air are not spherical.

How consequently some objects appear higher than they are.

How the Sun may appear on the Horizon before he has risen.

That the rays of light become curved in the Air of the Atmosphere, and what effects this produces.

CHAPTER V. On the Strange Refraction of Iceland Crystal.

That this Crystal grows also in other countries.

Who first-wrote about it.

Description of Iceland Crystal; its substance, shape, and properties.

That it has two different Refractions.

That the ray perpendicular to the surface suffers refraction, and that some rays inclined to the surface pass without suffering refraction.

Observation of the refractions in this Crystal.

That there is a Regular and an Irregular Refraction.

The way of measuring the two Refractions of Iceland Crystal.

Remarkable properties of the Irregular Refraction.

Hypothesis to explain the double Refraction.

That Rock Crystal has also a double Refraction.

Hypothesis of emanations of Light, within Iceland Crystal, of spheroidal form, for the Irregular Refraction.

How a perpendicular ray can suffer Refraction.

How the position and form of the spheroidal emanations in this Crystal can be defined.

Explanation of the Irregular Refraction by these spheroidal emanations.

Easy way to find the Irregular Refraction of each incident ray.

Demonstration of the oblique ray which traverses the Crystal without being refracted.

Other irregularities of Refraction explained.

That an object placed beneath the Crystal appears double, in two images of different heights.

Why the apparent heights of one of the images change on changing the position of the eyes above the Crystal.

Of the different sections of this Crystal which produce yet other refractions, and confirm all this Theory.

Particular way of polishing the surfaces after it has been cut.

Surprising phenomenon touching the rays which pass through two separated pieces; the cause of which is not explained.

Probable conjecture on the internal composition of Iceland Crystal, and of what figure its particles are.

Tests to confirm this conjecture.

Calculations which have been supposed in this Chapter.

CHAPTER VI. On the Figures of transparent bodies which serve for Refraction and for Reflexion.

General and easy rule to find these Figures.

Invention of the Ovals of Mr. Des Cartes for Dioptrics.

How he was able to find these Lines.

Way of finding the surface of a glass for perfect refraction, when the other surface is given.

Remark on what happens to rays refracted at a spherical surface.

Remark on the curved line which is formed by reflexion in a spherical concave mirror.

ON RAYS PROPAGATED IN STRAIGHT LINES

As happens in all the sciences in which Geometry is applied to matter, the demonstrations concerning Optics are founded on truths drawn from experience. Such are that the rays of light are propagated in straight lines; that the angles of reflexion and of incidence are equal; and that in refraction the ray is bent according to the law of sines, now so well known, and which is no less certain than the preceding laws.

The majority of those who have written touching the various parts of Optics have contented themselves with presuming these truths. But some, more inquiring, have desired to investigate the origin and the causes, considering these to be in themselves wonderful effects of Nature. In which they advanced some ingenious things, but not however such that the most intelligent folk do not wish for better and more satisfactory explanations. Wherefore I here desire to propound what I have meditated on the subject, so as to contribute as much as I can to the explanation of this department of Natural Science, which, not without reason, is reputed to be one of its most difficult parts. I recognize myself to be much indebted to those who were the first to begin to dissipate the strange obscurity in which these things were enveloped, and to give us hope that they might be explained by intelligible reasoning. But, on the other hand I am astonished also that even here these have often been willing to offer, as assured and demonstrative, reasonings which were far from conclusive. For I do not find that any one has yet given a probable explanation of the first and most notable phenomena of light, namely why it is not propagated except in straight lines, and how visible rays, coming from an infinitude of diverse places, cross one another without hindering one another in any way.

I shall therefore essay in this book, to give, in accordance with the principles accepted in the Philosophy of the present day, some clearer and more probable reasons, firstly of these properties of light propagated rectilinearly; secondly of light which is reflected on meeting other bodies. Then I shall explain the phenomena of those rays which are said to suffer refraction on passing through transparent bodies of different sorts; and in this part I shall also explain the effects of the refraction of the air by the different densities of the Atmosphere.

Thereafter I shall examine the causes of the strange refraction of a certain kind of Crystal which is brought from Iceland. And finally I shall treat of the various shapes of transparent and reflecting bodies by which rays are collected at a point or are turned aside in various ways. From this it will be seen with what facility, following our new Theory, we find not only the Ellipses, Hyperbolas, and other curves which Mr. Des Cartes has ingeniously invented for this purpose; but also those which the surface of a glass lens ought to possess when its other surface is given as spherical or plane, or of any other figure that may be.

It is inconceivable to doubt that light consists in the motion of some sort of matter. For whether one considers its production, one sees that here upon the Earth it is chiefly engendered by fire and flame which contain without doubt bodies that are in rapid motion, since they dissolve and melt many other bodies, even the most solid; or whether one considers its effects, one sees that when light is collected, as by concave mirrors, it has the property of burning as a fire does, that is to say it disunites the particles of bodies. This is assuredly the mark of motion, at least in the true Philosophy, in which one conceives the causes of all natural effects in terms of mechanical motions. This, in my opinion, we must necessarily do, or else renounce all hopes of ever comprehending anything in Physics.

And as, according to this Philosophy, one holds as certain that the sensation of sight is excited only by the impression of some movement of a kind of matter which acts on the nerves at the back of our eyes, there is here yet one reason more for believing that light consists in a movement of the matter which exists between us and the luminous body.

Further, when one considers the extreme speed with which light spreads on every side, and how, when it comes from different regions, even from those directly opposite, the rays traverse one another without hindrance, one may well understand that when we see a luminous object, it cannot be by any transport of matter coming to us from this object, in the way in which a shot or an arrow traverses the air; for assuredly that would too greatly impugn these two properties of light, especially the second of them. It is then in some other way that light spreads; and that which can lead us to comprehend it is the knowledge which we have of the spreading of Sound in the air.

We know that by means of the air, which is an invisible and impalpable body, Sound spreads around the spot where it has been produced, by a movement which is passed on successively from one part of the air to another; and that the spreading of this movement, taking place equally rapidly on all sides, ought to form spherical surfaces ever enlarging and which strike our ears. Now there is no doubt at all that light also comes from the luminous body to our eyes by some movement impressed on the matter which is between the two; since, as we have already seen, it cannot be by the transport of a body which passes from one to the other. If, in addition, light takes time for its passage--which we are now going to examine--it will follow that this movement, impressed on the intervening matter, is successive; and consequently it spreads, as Sound does, by spherical surfaces and waves: for I call them waves from their resemblance to those which are seen to be formed in water when a stone is thrown into it, and which present a successive spreading as circles, though these arise from another cause, and are only in a flat surface.

To see then whether the spreading of light takes time, let us consider first whether there are any facts of experience which can convince us to the contrary. As to those which can be made here on the Earth, by striking lights at great distances, although they prove that light takes no sensible time to pass over these distances, one may say with good reason that they are too small, and that the only conclusion to be drawn from them is that the passage of light is extremely rapid. Mr. Des Cartes, who was of opinion that it is instantaneous, founded his views, not without reason, upon a better basis of experience, drawn from the Eclipses of the Moon; which, nevertheless, as I shall show, is not at all convincing. I will set it forth, in a way a little different from his, in order to make the conclusion more comprehensible.

Let A be the place of the sun, BD a part of the orbit or annual path of the Earth: ABC a straight line which I suppose to meet the orbit of the Moon, which is represented by the circle CD, at C.

Now if light requires time, for example one hour, to traverse the space which is between the Earth and the Moon, it will follow that the Earth having arrived at B, the shadow which it casts, or the interruption of the light, will not yet have arrived at the point C, but will only arrive there an hour after. It will then be one hour after, reckoning from the moment when the Earth was at B, that the Moon, arriving at C, will be obscured: but this obscuration or interruption of the light will not reach the Earth till after another hour. Let us suppose that the Earth in these two hours will have arrived at E. The Earth then, being at E, will see the Eclipsed Moon at C, which it left an hour before, and at the same time will see the sun at A. For it being immovable, as I suppose with Copernicus, and the light moving always in straight lines, it must always appear where it is. But one has always observed, we are told, that the eclipsed Moon appears at the point of the Ecliptic opposite to the Sun; and yet here it would appear in arrear of that point by an amount equal to the angle GEC, the supplement of AEC. This, however, is contrary to experience, since the angle GEC would be very sensible, and about 33 degrees. Now according to our computation, which is given in the Treatise on the causes of the phenomena of Saturn, the distance BA between the Earth and the Sun is about twelve thousand diameters of the Earth, and hence four hundred times greater than BC the distance of the Moon, which is 30 diameters. Then the angle ECB will be nearly four hundred times greater than BAE, which is five minutes; namely, the path which the earth travels in two hours along its orbit; and thus the angle BCE will be nearly 33 degrees; and likewise the angle CEG, which is greater by five minutes.

But it must be noted that the speed of light in this argument has been assumed such that it takes a time of one hour to make the passage from here to the Moon. If one supposes that for this it requires only one minute of time, then it is manifest that the angle CEG will only be 33 minutes; and if it requires only ten seconds of time, the angle will be less than six minutes. And then it will not be easy to perceive anything of it in observations of the Eclipse; nor, consequently, will it be permissible to deduce from it that the movement of light is instantaneous.

It is true that we are here supposing a strange velocity that would be a hundred thousand times greater than that of Sound. For Sound, according to what I have observed, travels about 180 Toises in the time of one Second, or in about one beat of the pulse. But this supposition ought not to seem to be an impossibility; since it is not a question of the transport of a body with so great a speed, but of a successive movement which is passed on from some bodies to others. I have then made no difficulty, in meditating on these things, in supposing that the emanation of light is accomplished with time, seeing that in this way all its phenomena can be explained, and that in following the contrary opinion everything is incomprehensible. For it has always seemed tome that even Mr. Des Cartes, whose aim has been to treat all the subjects of Physics intelligibly, and who assuredly has succeeded in this better than any one before him, has said nothing that is not full of difficulties, or even inconceivable, in dealing with Light and its properties.

But that which I employed only as a hypothesis, has recently received great seemingness as an established truth by the ingenious proof of Mr. Römer which I am going here to relate, expecting him himself to give all that is needed for its confirmation. It is founded as is the preceding argument upon celestial observations, and proves not only that Light takes time for its passage, but also demonstrates how much time it takes, and that its velocity is even at least six times greater than that which I have just stated.

For this he makes use of the Eclipses suffered by the little planets which revolve around Jupiter, and which often enter his shadow: and see what is his reasoning. Let A be the Sun, BCDE the annual orbit of the Earth, F Jupiter, GN the orbit of the nearest of his Satellites, for it is this one which is more apt for this investigation than any of the other three, because of the quickness of its revolution. Let G be this Satellite entering into the shadow of Jupiter, H the same Satellite emerging from the shadow.

Let it be then supposed, the Earth being at B some time before the last quadrature, that one has seen the said Satellite emerge from the shadow; it must needs be, if the Earth remains at the same place, that, after 42-1/2 hours, one would again see a similar emergence, because that is the time in which it makes the round of its orbit, and when it would come again into opposition to the Sun. And if the Earth, for instance, were to remain always at B during 30 revolutions of this Satellite, one would see it again emerge from the shadow after 30 times 42-1/2 hours. But the Earth having been carried along during this time to C, increasing thus its distance from Jupiter, it follows that if Light requires time for its passage the illumination of the little planet will be perceived later at C than it would have been at B, and that there must be added to this time of 30 times 42-1/2 hours that which the Light has required to traverse the space MC, the difference of the spaces CH, BH. Similarly at the other quadrature when the earth has come to E from D while approaching toward Jupiter, the immersions of the Satellite ought to be observed at E earlier than they would have been seen if the Earth had remained at D.

Now in quantities of observations of these Eclipses, made during ten consecutive years, these differences have been found to be very considerable, such as ten minutes and more; and from them it has been concluded that in order to traverse the whole diameter of the annual orbit KL, which is double the distance from here to the sun, Light requires about 22 minutes of time.

The movement of Jupiter in his orbit while the Earth passed from B to C, or from D to E, is included in this calculation; and this makes it evident that one cannot attribute the retardation of these illuminations or the anticipation of the eclipses, either to any irregularity occurring in the movement of the little planet or to its eccentricity.

If one considers the vast size of the diameter KL, which according to me is some 24 thousand diameters of the Earth, one will acknowledge the extreme velocity of Light. For, supposing that KL is no more than 22 thousand of these diameters, it appears that being traversed in 22 minutes this makes the speed a thousand diameters in one minute, that is 16-2/3 diameters in one second or in one beat of the pulse, which makes more than 11 hundred times a hundred thousand toises; since the diameter of the Earth contains 2,865 leagues, reckoned at 25 to the degree, and each each league is 2,282 Toises, according to the exact measurement which Mr. Picard made by order of the King in 1669. But Sound, as I have said above, only travels 180 toises in the same time of one second: hence the velocity of Light is more than six hundred thousand times greater than that of Sound. This, however, is quite another thing from being instantaneous, since there is all the difference between a finite thing and an infinite. Now the successive movement of Light being confirmed in this way, it follows, as I have said, that it spreads by spherical waves, like the movement of Sound.

Huygens opens his Treatise on Light with a preface recounting its composition during his stay in France twelve years prior, and its communication to the Royal Academy of Science in 1678. He names Cassini, Römer, and De la Hire as witnesses, and notes that only conjectures on Iceland crystal and a new observation on rock crystal were added later. This framing establishes the work as long-meditated, with Huygens explicitly stating his demonstrations do not produce geometric certitude: “the Principles are verified by the conclusions to be drawn from the.” The reader is thus alerted to a deductive method where hypotheses are tested against observed phenomena.

The Preface as a Methodological Statement

Huygens’ preface is not merely a personal note but a methodological declaration. He admits to writing “rather carelessly” in French, intending a Latin translation for greater attention, and delaying publication due to “the pleasure of novelty being past.” This candor reveals his awareness of the work’s provisional nature. He distinguishes his approach from geometry: “whereas the Geometers prove their Propositions by fixed and incontestable Principles, here the Principles are verified by the conclusions to be drawn from the.” This inversion—deriving principles from consequences—is central to the treatise. Readers should watch for this pattern: Huygens often presents a hypothesis (e.g., spheroidal waves) and then tests it against known refraction phenomena, such as the perpendicular ray’s behavior in Iceland crystal.

The Wave Model and Its Geometric Consequences

In the excerpted middle section, Huygens develops his wave theory for double refraction. He introduces “spheroidal waves besides the spherical ones” to explain the irregular refraction of Iceland crystal. The reasoning is geometric: he takes a perpendicular ray incident on a crystal surface and considers the wavefront RC parallel to AB. Instead of hemispherical partial waves, he posits “hemi-spheroids” with oblique axes. The key insight is that the common tangent NQ of these ellipses is parallel to AB but not directly opposite, meaning “the light does not spread along lines perpendicular to its waves, as in ordinary refraction, but along lines cutting the waves obliquely.” This geometric deduction is typical of Huygens’ method: he visualizes wave propagation through construction of tangents to secondary waves.

The Role of Ethereal Matter and Particle Texture

Huygens addresses a potential objection to his wave theory: that the interstices between particles of a crystal might be too small to transmit light waves. He resolves this by supposing the particles are “of a very rare texture, or rather as composed of other much smaller particles, between which the ethereal matter passes quite freely.” This follows from an earlier demonstration about “the small quantity of matter of which the bodies are built up.” The passage illustrates Huygens’ willingness to adjust his model to fit physical constraints, and his reliance on a subtle ether as the medium for light waves. Readers should note how he uses the concept of ethereal matter to bridge the gap between macroscopic crystal structure and microscopic wave propagation.

The Symmetry of Crystal Faces and Spheroid Orientation

Huygens notes that all six faces of the Iceland crystal produce “precisely the same refractions.” He then considers a parallelopiped AFB with an obtuse solid angle C contained between three equal plane angles. This geometric description is used to infer the orientation of the spheroids within the crystal. The text breaks off before the conclusion, but the method is clear: by analyzing the symmetry of the crystal’s faces, Huygens deduces the shape and position of the spheroidal waves. This section exemplifies his interplay between experimental observation (the identical refraction from all faces) and mathematical modeling (the spheroid’s axis orientation). The reader is left to see how this leads to a full explanation of double refraction.

Huygens’ Treatise on Light rewards a reader who attends to his geometric constructions and methodological asides. The preface sets the tone for a work that is both personal and rigorous, while the later sections demonstrate a step-by-step derivation of wave behavior from first principles. Pay particular attention to how Huygens uses tangents to secondary waves to predict refraction, and how he modifies his model to account for material properties. The incomplete excerpt on crystal symmetry hints at the treatise’s culminating achievement: a unified wave explanation of Iceland crystal’s strange refraction.

There was something intimate in Huygens’ slow preface, a man finally letting go of work he’d held for years. It reminded me of another quiet voice, one that traces the same patient thread from wave to world, without ever rushing. I keep that one on the shelf beside the crystal and light. Physics — Background and Themes sits there, worn at the spine, like an old conversation waiting to continue gently.

Amelia Thompson
1 month ago

4
4 out of 5 (1 User reviews )

Add a Review

Your Rating *
There are no comments for this eBook.

Reader reflection

Record your reading impressions

A brief reflection can help important ideas stay with you longer.

Your progress 0 / 10
1

What is your current status with this title?

2

What was your overall reaction to the book?

3

Would you encourage someone else to read it?

4

How much effort did this book require?

Related eBooks