Beam-splitter transformation matrix

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the transformation matrix for a beam splitter, focusing on its properties, particularly the conditions for unitarity and energy conservation in the context of lossless optical devices. Participants explore the implications of the transformation matrix and its relation to the amplitude transmission and reflection coefficients.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the transformation matrix for a beam splitter and questions whether the unitarity of the matrix is assumed or derived from the condition that the sum of the squares of the transmission and reflection coefficients equals one.
  • Another participant explains that energy conservation necessitates the condition for a lossless optical device, leading to the requirement that the transfer matrix must be unitary.
  • A later reply discusses the specific case of a beam splitter with a dielectric reflective coating, detailing how phase shifts affect the derivation of the transfer matrix.
  • One participant seeks clarification on the notation used for complex conjugation and the Hermitian adjoint, questioning whether the symbols used are interchangeable.
  • Another participant clarifies the distinction between the symbols for the Hermitian adjoint and complex conjugation, explaining their respective meanings in the context of matrices and complex numbers.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the importance of energy conservation in defining lossless optical devices and the necessity for the transfer matrix to be unitary. However, there is some uncertainty regarding the notation used for complex conjugation and the Hermitian adjoint.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions regarding the definitions of lossless optical devices and the specific conditions under which the transformation matrix is derived remain unresolved. The discussion also touches on the implications of phase shifts in the context of specific beam splitter designs.

roam
Messages
1,265
Reaction score
12
TL;DR
Why is the transformation matrix of a beam splitter unitary?
The transformation matrix for a beam splitter relates the four E-fields involved as follows:

$$
\left(\begin{array}{c}
E_{1}\\
E_{2}
\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
T & R\\
R & T
\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}
E_{3}\\
E_{4}
\end{array}\right)
\tag{1}$$

Here, the amplitude transmission and reflection coefficients are given by ##T=|T|e^{i\theta}## and ##R=|R|e^{i\varphi}##. In various textbooks we are told that for a lossless beam splitter these two quantities are subject to:

$$|T|^2 + |R|^2 =1 \tag{2}$$

I used to believe that this is because ##T^2## and ##R^2## represent transmittance and reflectanace respectively, so in the presence of loss (e.g. absorptance ##A##), one would have ##T^2 + R^2 + A = 1##.

However, according to this, the reason is because the matrix is unitary, which means that we can write:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}
T & R\\
R & T
\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}
T^{*} & R^{*}\\
R^{*} & T^{*}
\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0\\
0 & 1
\end{array}\right) \tag{3}$$

Indeed one of the two relations you get from the above is equation (2). So, how did they know that the transformation matrix must be unitary? Did they assume equation (2) to be true in advance? Or, is equation (2) a consequence of the fact that the matrix is unitary?

Any explanation would be greatly appreciated.
 
Science news on Phys.org
The most simple explanation is energy conservation. Note that the ##E_j## are components of the incoming and outcoming electric field, written in the usual complex notation. A lossless optical device is defined as one where there's no energy loss regarding the em. field, but the energy density is given by
$$u \propto \vec{E}^{\dagger} \cdot \vec{E}.$$
Now in order to have ##u_{\text{out}}=u_{\text{in}}##, the requirement for some optical element to be lossless, with ##\vec{E}_{\text{out}}=\hat{T} \vec{E}_{\text{in}}## you must have for any (!) in-field
$$\vec{E}_{\text{out}}^{\dagger} \vec{E}_{\text{out}} = \vec{E}_{\text{\in}}^{\dagger} \hat{T}^{\dagger} \hat{T} \vec{E}_{\text{in}} \stackrel{!}{=} \vec{E}_{\text{in}} ^{\dagger} \vec{E}_{\text{in}}.$$
This can hold only for all (!) in-fields if
$$\hat{T}^{\dagger} \hat{T}=\hat{1},$$
which means that ##\hat{T}## must be unitary to be a transfer matrix describing a linear lossless optical component.

For the special beam splitter built with a dielectric reflective coating, it's quite easy to understand also from classical electrodynamics (Fresnel equations for reflection and refraction of em. waves at dielectrica). It's built such that the reflected beam coming from one side gets a phase shift of ##\pi##, while the reflected beam coming from the other side doesn't get such a phase shift (because the phase shift occurs only if the beam is reflected on the boundary of the optically thicker medium coming from the optically thinner medium). In this case you can derive the beam-splitter transfer matrix to be
$$\hat{T}=\exp(\mathrm{i} \varphi) \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix} 1 & -1 \\ 1 & 1 \end{pmatrix},$$
where for an arbitrary phase shift ##\varphi## obviously ##\hat{T}^{\dagger} \hat{T}=\hat{1}## (just check it by doing the matrix multiplication explicitly).

For more details, see

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beam_splitter#Phase_shift
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Paul Colby and roam
Thank you so much @vanhees71

That makes perfect sense now.

P.S. Do symbols ##\dagger## and ##^*## really mean different things in this context, or can they be used interchangeably? I thought they both represented the conjugate transpose, but in the document I linked to, they are using both.
 
##\hat{T}^{\dagger}## is the usual notation for taking the (Hermitean) adjoint of a complex matrix, i.e., you transpose it (i.e., you write the columns of the original matrix as the lines of the new matrix) and take the complex conjugate of all these entries. The usual physicists' notation for complex conjugation of a number ##z=x+\mathrm{i} y## (with ##x,y \in \mathbb{R}##) is ##z^*=x-\mathrm{i} y##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: roam

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K