Complex Degree of Coherence (Cittert-Zernike)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on deriving the complex degree of coherence using the van Cittert-Zernike theorem for a light source consisting of two parallel wires emitting thermal light. The expression for the complex degree of coherence is established as γ = cos(πWΔx/λl), where Δx represents the separation between points on the observation screen. Observations on the screen indicate that due to the random phases of light emitted from the wires, no distinct interference fringes appear; instead, the intensity distribution resembles two overlapping Gaussian profiles, diminishing outward from the wires.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the van Cittert-Zernike theorem
  • Familiarity with Fourier transforms in optics
  • Knowledge of thermal light sources and coherence
  • Basic concepts of interference and diffraction patterns
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the van Cittert-Zernike theorem in detail
  • Learn about the properties of thermal light sources
  • Explore Fourier optics and its applications in coherence analysis
  • Investigate interference patterns produced by different source configurations, such as pinholes
USEFUL FOR

Students and researchers in optics, physicists studying coherence phenomena, and anyone interested in the applications of the van Cittert-Zernike theorem in experimental setups.

phil44
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A light source consists of two long thin parallel wires, separated by a distance, W. A current is passed through the wires so that they emit light thermally. A filter is placed in front of the wires to only allow a narrow spectral range, centred at λ to propagate to a screen, a distance l from the wires.

123002.jpg


i) Obtain an expression for the complex degree of coherence using the van Cittert-Zernike theorem.

ii) Describe what would be observed on this screen.

Homework Equations



Cittert-Zernike theorem:
Complex degree of coherence γ is given by the normalised Fourier transform of the source intensity function.


The Attempt at a Solution



Ok so the first part is straight forward enough, treating the source intensity as a double delta function, the normalised Fourier transform of which is just a cosine function, specifically:

γ=cos \frac{πWΔx}{λl} , where Δx is the separation between two points in the horizontal axis of the observation screen. Note that I'm ignoring the vertical axis at this stage.

It's the intensity seen on the screen that's confusing me. With just the double delta source directly onto a screen, I would be tempted to say the intensity distribution on the screen simply varies in a cosine fashion, as the two wire thermal sources (which are cylindrical wave sources?) interfere according to the coherence function. I feel like I might be missing something however.

Any help to clarify this would be greatly appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Hmm, the edit button seems to have disappeared, so sorry for the double post.

Having thought about it a bit more, what I've said might not make a whole lot of sense. The light source essentially would have random phases at each point (I think, I don't see any reason why they would be in phase across the length of the wires). So there's no real overall coherence between the two sources which can be visibly seen in the form of interference fringes. Certainly interference fringes such as those seen in diffraction wouldn't be seen I imagine. You would therefore simply see a sum of the two intensity distributions on the observation screen. I think this would physically look like two long bars in the vertical direction of maximum intensity, which diminishes outwards (gaussian?), and sums in the overlapping regions between the two wires.

Now if you were to have two pinholes as a diffraction grating, THEN the appearance of interference fringes would depend on the spacing between them, according to the coherence function mentioned in my first post. This was actually the next scenario given in the question, but I think I understand that pretty well.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K