Does Unpolarized Light Cancel Out Due to Mixed Angles?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kidphysics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light Optics
Kidphysics
Messages
164
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Hello, I am reading an intro book on optics and it is discussing the polarization of light and unpolarized light. My question is with unpolarized light I quote:

"This sinusoidally varying electric field can be thought of as a length of rope held by two children at opposite ends. The children begin to displace the ends in such a way that the rope moves in a plane, either up and down, left and right, or at any angle in between."

So with this in mind I think well if most light is naturally unpolarized then wouldn't a mix of all of the different angles eventually end up cancelling each other out? I'd like to think of polarized light as coming in two orthogonal basis and then all others combinations of the two, are all polarized light vectors the sum of basis components like force vectors? I'm still beginning so I appreciate the input.


Homework Equations



not sure

The Attempt at a Solution



looked at the wikipedia article and another website which is how I obtained the quote
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's a good question, and the reason the fields don't cancel each other is that light intensity goes as the square of the electric field vector.

And so a randomly varying field vector will produce intensities proportional to the square of the magnitude of the field, irrespective of orientation. And since the direction is random you can't find a second field vector of equal but opposite magnitude source to cancel the first, because on average their total field would increase by sqrt(2) and their intensity double.

If daylight or lamp light were polarized we'd be in big trouble though, since then two oppositely directed field vectors would cancel and give zero light. That's why interference works, and needs polarized light to happen.
 
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