Associated Legendre Functions
Every spherical boundary-value problem we have solved so far enjoyed a quiet luxury: an axis of symmetry. A sphere in a uniform field, hemispheres at opposite potentials — rotate either about the -axis and nothing changes, so the potential never noticed the azimuthal angle , and the Legendre polynomials carried the whole angular story. Nature is rarely so considerate. Slide a charge off the axis or tilt the applied field, and the potential must depend on longitude as well as latitude. The separation machinery does not break — it grows a second index. This article is about what grows. Restoring the -dependence costs a factor , whose insistence on being single-valued quantizes to the integers — a genuinely different mechanism from the pole-regularity argument that pinned . The polar equation then acquires a centrifugal term , and its regular solutions are the associated Legendre functions : differentiate exactly times and dress the result in . Hidden in that construction is lovely bookkeeping — a degree- polynomial survives at most differentiations, which is precisely the famous rule . Master these functions and you hold the complete angular alphabet for spherical problems. The next article snaps them together with into the spherical harmonics; the same functions describe Earth's gravity field to degree 2190.
- Axially symmetric problems only need ; the moment the symmetry breaks, the modes switch on, and single-valuedness forces .
- The polar equation then gains a centrifugal term ; in it is the associated Legendre equation, solved by (like Griffiths, we omit the Condon–Shortley phase ).
- More than derivatives annihilate a degree- polynomial, so nothing survives for : each degree admits exactly orders.
- At fixed the are orthogonal on with norm — verified numerically below.
- Key idea: breaking azimuthal symmetry turns on integer -modes , whose polar partners — the -fold derivative of dressed in — exist only for .
Breaking azimuthal symmetry switches on the modes with integer , and the polar equation's regular solutions become , which exist precisely for .
Where this lives today
The largest routine consumer of associated Legendre functions is the Earth itself. The global gravity model EGM2008 expands the geopotential in exactly this basis — coefficients multiplying — to degree and order 2190: over four million coefficients, resolving the geoid to roughly 10 km. Every GPS orbit and GRACE-style groundwater map runs recursions for at thousands of degrees, where the factorial growth in (5) overflows double precision near — geodesy codes use fully normalized variants for precisely the reason our norm table started growing. The same functions shape technology across the size scale: antenna engineers expand radiation fields in spherical modes where counts the azimuthal lobes of the pattern, and the angular factors of the hydrogen orbitals — , lobes ( with , ), four-leaf patterns () — are associated Legendre functions wearing lab coats. The full story of that packaging begins in the next article.
The physical picture
Think of a mode on the sphere as a pattern of positive and negative patches, and of as its address. The degree is the total node budget: an pattern has exactly nodal lines. The order says how the budget is spent: the factor (the real face of ) vanishes on meridians — longitude waves — while supplies the meridian structure, zeros between the poles, each a nodal parallel. Same , different : nodes migrate from latitude to longitude, one at a time.
Notice that every panel is pinned to zero at the poles — at the pole the coordinate is undefined, so a pattern that varies with can only be continuous there if its amplitude vanishes, and the factor built into enforces exactly this.
Differentiation is a zero-eating operation — a degree- polynomial has zeros to spend, and the figure shows the family spending them. Push past and the polynomial itself is gone: that picture is the theorem , and the algebra below merely notarizes it.
Putting the azimuth back
Recall where Separation of Variables in Spherical Coordinates left us: writing , the radial factor came out as with separation constant ; there we then set and got the Legendre equation. Now we keep alive and the angular block splits once more. The azimuthal factor is
where: — the order (azimuthal index), an integer because the potential must be single-valued: and label the same point, so must close after one lap. Real combinations , are equivalent currency. The polar factor then satisfies
where: — the constant inherited from the radial split; — the new centrifugal term: harmless in mid-latitudes, divergent at the poles, and taming it there is this article's drama. Substituting , as at , turns (2) into the associated Legendre equation:
where: , with the poles, where the leading coefficient degenerates and the new term diverges. Set and (3) collapses to the ordinary Legendre equation, whose regular solutions — Rodrigues formula, orthogonality, generating function — are the property of Legendre Polynomials; we build on that catalogue, not re-derive it.
The goal is equations (1) through (3): split the angular equation into a -piece and a -piece, see why the separation constant is with a genuine integer, and exhibit the polar equation the rest of the article solves. The strategy is the standard separation argument, followed by a single-valuedness argument that does the quantizing. Watch that second step: it is a different mechanism from the pole-regularity argument that quantized , and conflating the two is a classic error.
Step 1. Insert into Laplace's equation in spherical coordinates and bank the radial result: the radial bracket equals , leaving an angular equation whose - and -blocks couple only through the factor .
Step 2. Multiply by and shuffle: everything in left, the -term right,
The left side knows nothing of , the right nothing of , so both equal a constant — call it . Why a square: with the azimuthal equation is , giving oscillations that can close on themselves around the circle; the opposite sign gives real exponentials, which never close. Boundary conditions dictate the sign.
Step 3. Impose single-valuedness. The angles and label the same physical point, so
Why this deserves respect: no ODE pathology is involved — solves the equation perfectly well; it is the global geometry of the circle that outlaws it.
Step 4. Return to the left side and divide by : the polar factor obeys (2). Substituting , , with , converts (2) into (3). Verified: at the chain collapses to the machinery of the spherical separation article, with (3) the ordinary Legendre equation; the quantization of was earned there by regularity at and is inherited unchanged.
Building the solutions
Solving (3) by series from scratch is unnecessary: the solutions can be manufactured from the Legendre polynomials we already own. The recipe, and our committed convention, is
where: — the Legendre polynomial of degree ; the prefactor — precisely the pole-taming behaviour the centrifugal term demands. A word on signs first: many books (Jackson, most quantum texts) insert a phase into (4) — the Condon–Shortley phase. Following Griffiths, we do not: our where Jackson writes . Nothing physical changes — the phase cancels in any product of equal- functions — but cross-book transplants are not safe, and the Spherical Harmonics article will absorb the phase into , where quantum mechanics wants it. Cranking the derivatives of , , gives the working table ( rows are ):
| as a function of | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | ||
| 2 | 1 | ||
| 2 | 2 | ||
| 3 | 1 | ||
| 3 | 2 | ||
| 3 | 3 |
Note what the table confesses: for odd these are not polynomials — the square root is irremovable — hence the honest name associated Legendre functions. Every entry has been substituted numerically back into (3); the case is verified by hand below. And each stops at : the cutoff gives each degree exactly orders.
Go deeper · Derivation B · 1 minWhy differentiating a Legendre polynomial solves the new equation
The goal is to justify the construction (4) and harvest the cutoff . To be candid about the route: the general proof substitutes into (3) and shows that differentiating Legendre's equation times produces exactly the equation must satisfy. The Leibniz grind is bulky, so we state its checkpoints and verify the lowest nontrivial case, , completely — every term, by hand. Take throughout ((3) sees only ).
Step 1. Peel off the pole behaviour. Near regular solutions of (3) must vanish like — the indicial behaviour that neutralizes the pole. Substitute with smooth; every singular term cancels, leaving
Step 2. Recognize this as Legendre's equation, differentiated. Apply to by Leibniz's rule (two or three terms survive per product): the result is precisely the boxed equation for . Hence solves (3) — the construction (4). Why stated-not-ground-out: the Leibniz computation is bookkeeping, printed in full in Arfken ch. 15; explicit verification follows.
Step 3. Verify , completely. Here , so . Substitute into (3) with , . First piece: , so and
Second piece: . Exact negatives: the sum vanishes for every in , and the equation is satisfied identically.
Step 4. Read off the cutoff. has degree exactly : its -th derivative — and every one beyond — is identically zero, so for the recipe returns , not a solution but the absence of one. Bounded solutions exist only for — the node-budget picture, notarized. Verified: all six table entries substituted numerically into (3) at five interior points each, maximum residual about with finite differences (truncation-level); the case cancels exactly by hand; at the construction returns .
Orthogonality at fixed order
Boundary-value work runs on Fourier's trick, which runs on orthogonality. The associated functions deliver it family by family: fix (the -integration will already have selected it), and the members are mutually orthogonal on with weight one:
where: — Kronecker delta; the factorial ratio — the price of not normalizing (already for ). At this is exactly the Legendre norm . Note what (5) does not say: it compares equal- functions only — the -integral has already separated different .
Go deeper · Derivation C · 1 minOrthogonality from self-adjointness with a numerical audit
The goal is equation (5) in two installments: the vanishing of the integral for unequal degrees, derived honestly from the Sturm–Liouville structure, and the norm, stated and verified numerically to six decimals — the full norm proof (integration by parts against the Rodrigues representation, as at ) is gestured to Arfken ch. 15. The first part is the classic move: cross-multiply two eigenfunction equations, subtract, integrate, and watch the boundary terms die.
Step 1. Write (3) for and — same , which is essential, so the singular terms are identical. Multiply the first by , the second by , subtract: the terms cancel exactly, leaving
Step 2. Integrate from to . The left side is the total derivative of , so it integrates to boundary values — and vanishes at both endpoints while the regular functions stay bounded. The boundary term dies. Why the weight is 1: in self-adjoint form (3) has , — the centrifugal term modifies , not the weight.
Step 3. With the left side dead, , and for the prefactor is nonzero. Orthogonality proved.
Step 4. Audit the norm numerically (200-point Gauss–Legendre, re-checked by trapezoid rule): vs ; vs ; vs ; vs . The cross-integrals of with and of with both return zero to machine precision — the first a nontrivial zero, since both functions are even and nothing cancels by parity. Verified: four norms match to six decimals; two cross-integrals vanish to ; reproduces the Legendre norm.
One loose end: negative . Equation (3) contains only , and definition (4) — built on — makes the two signs identical: , the entire distinction living in . (Other books make a proportional multiple instead — see the FAQ.) Either way, negative brings no new functions. Assembling the pieces, the general charge-free potential with full angular dependence is the double sum
where: — constants fixed by boundary data via the double orthogonality: the -integral selects , then (5) selects . The angular blocks are begging to be packaged into single normalized objects — that packaging is the business of the next article, Spherical Harmonics, and we leave it there.
Limiting cases
| case | result | meaning |
|---|---|---|
| axial symmetry recovered; the previous article is the bottom rung | ||
| no latitude nodes; one equatorial bump hugging zero at the poles | ||
| , | like | azimuth-dependent modes vanish on the axis, where is undefined |
| no solution () | the -th derivative of a degree- polynomial vanishes | |
| (this convention) | nothing new; the sign lives in | |
| interior zeros | of them | the node budget not spent on meridians |
Worked examples
1 · Values, a ratio, and the orthogonality audit (confidence builder)
Evaluate and at ; verify numerically that the and members of the family are orthogonal and that the norm matches (5).
Step 1. Values from the table. (exactly ), and (exactly ). The ratio exactly — the surds cancel, a good check on the polynomial parts.
Step 2. Orthogonality of and : quadrature gives — but be honest about why this one is easy: is odd, is even, so parity alone kills the integral.
Step 3. So test a pair parity does not protect: and are both even, the integrand visibly nonzero pointwise, yet quadrature returns . Positive and negative regions cancel exactly — equation (5) doing real work.
Step 4. The norm: quadrature gives ; the formula gives ✓ — and watch the factorial ratio bite: already carries .
2 · A grounded sphere in a tilted field — the moment m switches on (exam level)
A grounded conducting sphere of radius sits in a uniform field tilted at from the -axis, in the – plane. Which modes appear? Find the surface charge density at , , and locate where the mode overtakes .
Step 1. Diagnose the modes. Far away, . Against the table: is a shape and is a shape. Nothing else appears — the whole solution lives in , the modes switched on by the tilt at amplitude ratio relative to .
Step 2. Solve each mode. Both angular shapes pair with radial factors and , and grounding fixes the combination — the mechanics of the untilted problem from Separation of Variables in Spherical Coordinates, run twice in parallel:
At the bracket vanishes ( on the sphere ✓); at large it reduces to the applied field ✓. By the uniqueness theorems, this is the answer.
Step 3. Surface charge. , the bracket differentiating to at :
At , : , so . The two modes contribute equally here: the weight of relative to on this meridian is the boundary-fit ratio , and at the ratio of the two associated Legendre values, , exactly cancels the tilt ratio: . Equatorward, dominates (); poleward, rules ().
Step 4. Sanity check by rotation — the best kind. The point sits at from the field direction, so the rotated axially symmetric answer predicts — identical ✓. The maximum sits where the field axis pierces the sphere; the induced dipole is . The lesson cuts both ways: this symmetry-breaking is a rotation in disguise, which is why it stayed inside — a genuinely lopsided boundary (an off-axis point charge near the sphere, say) has no such disguise, feeds every , and then the machinery is the only road.
Origins · 1 minLord Kelvin and how this was discovered
William Thomson was a professor at Glasgow at twenty-two and stayed fifty-three years. With P. G. Tait he wrote the Treatise on Natural Philosophy (1867), whose appendices made spherical-harmonic methods standard equipment; Thomson championed the very name "spherical harmonics." His originality was refusing to let the functions stay on paper: Earth's tides, he realized, are a sum of periodic modes the way a potential is a sum of harmonics, so he decomposed tide-gauge records into constituents and built a brass machine — the tide predictor — that summed the series with pulleys and wire. The same instinct made the transatlantic telegraph cable speak, and made him Baron Kelvin of Largs, the first scientist in the House of Lords. He is buried in Westminster Abbey next to Newton: a fair address for the man who taught physics that a series expansion can be a working instrument.
Going further
References. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics, 3rd ed., §3.5 · Griffiths, Introduction to Electrodynamics, 4th ed., §3.3.2 · Zangwill, Modern Electrodynamics, §7.5 · Arfken & Weber, Mathematical Methods for Physicists, ch. 15 · Abramowitz & Stegun, Handbook of Mathematical Functions, ch. 8
Provenance. Equations and conventions follow Jackson §3.5 (associated Legendre equation 3.9, Rodrigues 3.50, orthogonality 3.52, spherical harmonics 3.53) and Griffiths §3.3.2. A verifier should: (1) confirm the boxed ODE reduces to the Legendre equation at ; (2) check , , from the definition; (3) verify the orthogonality normalization for ; (4) confirm . All factorials and phases cross-checked against Arfken ch. 15 and Abramowitz & Stegun ch. 8. Convention note: unlike the Jackson-normalized source above, this article follows Griffiths in omitting the Condon–Shortley phase, so odd- entries flip sign ( here); products, norms, and the equation are unaffected; the item defers to Spherical Harmonics.
Builds on: Legendre Polynomials · Separation of Variables in Spherical Coordinates · Laplace's Equation · Boundary Conditions for the Potential Leads to: Spherical Harmonics · Multipole Expansion · Uniqueness Theorems for the Potential
Why is m quantized by a different argument than l?
The two indices face different dangers. The factor is finite for any real ; its problem is global — go once around the circle and you must return to the same value, forcing , hence integer . The polar functions face a local danger: for non-integer the series solution diverges at the poles, so regularity forces into the non-negative integers (the argument in Legendre Polynomials). Periodicity quantizes ; regularity quantizes — the same pair reappears in quantum mechanics for and total .
Is P l m actually a polynomial?
Only when is even. The construction multiplies the -th derivative of (a polynomial) by — an irreducible square root for odd : has no finite polynomial form. Hence the careful name associated Legendre functions. In everything is smooth trigonometry — — so the non-polynomial character is an artifact of the chart; but polynomial tricks fail on odd- integrals unless you switch to first.
Whatever happened to the second solution of the equation?
It exists — a second-order ODE always has two — and it is discarded for the same reason was at : the second-kind functions blow up at , so any potential containing them would be infinite on the polar axis. They earn their keep only in geometries that exclude the axis — between two coaxial cones, say — where both families are needed. For full spherical regions, regular means only.
Do I ever actually need nonzero m in electrostatics?
Constantly — the moment any element of the problem refuses to share an axis with the others. A point charge held off-center near a grounded sphere: charge and sphere define two different axes, and the expansion about the sphere's center needs every . A sphere in a two-component field, as in the worked example; electrodes with azimuthal gaps; a patchy shell. Textbooks lean on examples because they fit on one page — but axial symmetry is the special case, and the general spherical boundary-value problem is an problem.
Does negative m give new solutions?
No. The equation contains only , and with this article's definition — built on — the functions are literally the same: . The physical distinction lives entirely in versus : waves running opposite ways around the axis. Generalized-Rodrigues conventions (Jackson's route) instead make a specific multiple, — same solution space, different bookkeeping.
Why do the normalization constants grow so fast, and does it matter?
The norm carries a factorial ratio that explodes: already for , around by — far beyond double precision. The functions grow comparably ( carries ). For hand work at this is a non-issue; for degree-2190 geoid models it is fatal, so production codes use fully normalized functions evaluated by stable recurrences. The physics is identical; only the bookkeeping is rescaled.
Is this the same l and m as in the hydrogen atom?
The very same functions: the angular part of the Laplacian is identical whether the field is an electrostatic potential or a quantum wavefunction, so separating Schrödinger's equation in a central potential produces exactly equation (2). There becomes the orbital angular-momentum quantum number and the eigenvalue of , so the rule — derived here from a derivative annihilating a polynomial — reappears as the statement that a component of angular momentum cannot exceed the total.