Absorption coefficient and Linear Optical Susceptibility

PhysicsTruth
Messages
117
Reaction score
18
Homework Statement
For a complex refractive index ##n^*=n+ik##, establish the relationship between the absorption coefficient and linear optical susceptibility. Take ##(n+ik)^2 = \epsilon = 1 + \chi##
Relevant Equations
##(n+ik)^2 = \epsilon = 1+ \chi##
##I=I_0 e^{-\alpha z}##
##\alpha = \frac{4\pi k}{\lambda}##
##\alpha## is considered to be the absorption coefficient for a beam of light of maximum intensity ##I_0##. It's related to the complex part of the refractive index as we have shown above. Now, I have a doubt. Should I solve for ##k## from the quadratic equation in terms of the linear optical susceptibility ##\chi## directly, or should I assume a complex form of ##\chi## and separate the real and imaginary terms and then proceed?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
PhysicsTruth said:
Homework Statement:: For a complex refractive index ##n^*=n+ik##, establish the relationship between the absorption coefficient and linear optical susceptibility. Take ##(n+ik)^2 = \epsilon = 1 + \chi##
I've (extremely) limited knowledge of this topic. But, since no one else has answered yet, see if this helps...

First note that:
##(n+ik)^2 = \epsilon = 1 + \chi##
should be:
##(n+ik)^2 = \epsilon_r = 1 + \chi##

The equation tells you that susceptibility, ##\chi##, and relative permittivity, ##\epsilon_r##, are being treated as complex quantities.

PhysicsTruth said:
... or should I assume a complex form of ##\chi## and separate the real and imaginary terms and then proceed?
That sound like the way to go. It only requires simple algebra to express the real and imaginary parts of ##\chi## in terms of ##\alpha## (along with ##n## and ##\lambda##).
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and PhysicsTruth
Yeah, I've done that thankfully. Thanks for the heads up!
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Steve4Physics
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top