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 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top