Calculating Optical Cycles in Ultrashort Pulses

  • Thread starter Thread starter johnroberts
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Optical
AI Thread Summary
To calculate the number of optical cycles in an ultrashort pulse with a central wavelength of 585 nm and an RMS width of 6 femtoseconds, one can convert the pulse duration into a distance by multiplying it by the speed of light. This distance can then be divided by twice the wavelength to determine the number of cycles. The discussion highlights confusion about measuring width in time rather than length, but acknowledges that the problem may require neglecting specific frequency considerations. Ultimately, the approach involves understanding the relationship between time duration and wavelength to find the solution. This method effectively addresses the calculation of optical cycles in ultrashort pulses.
johnroberts
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
If an ultrashort optical pulse has a complex wavefunction with central frequency corresponding to a wavelength = 585 nm and a Gaussian envelope of RMS width of 6 femtoseconds, how can I calculate how many optical cycles are contained in the pulse width?

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


Not too sure where to begin. I don't understand how a width can be measured in seconds. If it had been provided as a length, I would assume that one needs to simply divide that length by two times the wavelength to get the amount of cycles.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
When you say of something "in two minutes drive from here", you refer to a distance in terms of time.
 
So then I suppose I can multiply it by the speed of light to get a distance, and then divide accordingly to get the answer?
 
That sounds right. The only issue is that with this sort of duration one cannot really talk of a particular frequency, but I guess that's what the problem wants you to neglect.
 
Sounds good. Thanks for the help.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top