Dodgy step in the Far field approximation


by Loro
Tags: approximation, dodgy, field, step
Loro
Loro is offline
#1
Dec16-12, 03:36 PM
P: 61
The Fresnel diffraction integral is:

[itex] A(x_0 , y_0 ) = \frac{i e^{-ikz}}{λz} \int \int dx dy A( x , y ) e^{\frac{-ik}{2z} [(x - x_0)^2 + (y - y_0)^2]} [/itex]

When we want to obtain the Fraunhofer diffraction integral from here, we need to somehow convert it to:

[itex] A(x_0 , y_0 ) = \frac{i e^{-ikz}}{λz} \int \int dx dy A( x , y ) e^{\frac{+ik}{z} [x x_0 + y y_0]} [/itex]

So I thought we should do it as follows:

[itex] \frac{-ik}{2z} [(x - x_0)^2 + (y - y_0)^2] = \frac{-ik}{2z} [x^2 + x_0^2 + y^2 + y_0^2 - 2x x_0 - 2y y_0 ] [/itex]

And then it seems that we should neglect: [itex] x^2 + x_0^2 + y^2 + y_0^2 [/itex] since they're all much smaller than z.
Then we get the correct solution.

But I don't see why we could do that, and leave out the [itex] - 2x x_0 - 2y y_0 [/itex]. After all they are of the same order... Please help!
Phys.Org News Partner Physics news on Phys.org
The hemihelix: Scientists discover a new shape using rubber bands (w/ video)
Mapping the road to quantum gravity
Chameleon crystals could enable active camouflage (w/ video)
sam_bell
sam_bell is offline
#2
Dec16-12, 10:43 PM
P: 67
There might be an assumption that the aperture is small compared to the image space (x0,y0). Considering this is a far-field approximation, that tends to make sense.
Loro
Loro is offline
#3
Dec17-12, 06:10 AM
P: 61
Thanks,

It does, but then we couldn't neglect [itex] x_0^2 + y_0^2 [/itex]

mfb
mfb is offline
#4
Dec17-12, 09:27 AM
Mentor
P: 10,861

Dodgy step in the Far field approximation


Those terms do not depend on the integration variables, it is possible to pull them out of the integral. They give a prefactor, which might be irrelevant, or accounted for in some other way.
Loro
Loro is offline
#5
Dec17-12, 11:57 AM
P: 61
They're just a part of a phase! Got it. Thanks :)
Loro
Loro is offline
#6
Dec17-12, 05:06 PM
P: 61
Hold on, but wouldn't that mean that Fraunhofer approximation works best away from the optical axis - where we're allowed to say: [itex] x_0 , y_0 >> x , y [/itex] ? (I don't think that's the case)


Register to reply

Related Discussions
The molecular field approximation Atomic, Solid State, Comp. Physics 2
Jefimenko B-field approximation Advanced Physics Homework 5
Dodgy Dialler Computing & Technology 2
The weak field approximation Special & General Relativity 3
dodgy trig question Precalculus Mathematics Homework 12