Explaining Surface Plasmon Excitation by Light

  • Thread starter Thread starter geo_alchemist
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Surface
geo_alchemist
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Surface Plasmons ?

Well, to begin with, I am not a physicist and therefore please don't redirect me to some physics tutorials.
now the question:
Why is it necessary for surface plasmon exitation by light that the incident light must have component normal to the surface?
I know that this condition can be fulfilled only in case of p-polarized light. but my questioin is about necessity of normal component.
Pls, if anyone can explain this to me, I would be much obliged.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Isn't it just conservation of momentum?
If you want plasmons to be generated to the left of a surface then the light coming in from the right must reflect to the right.
 


Sorry, I can't follow the point.
may be for you it looks as A, B, C, but for me it's far more complex.
can you tell me in more details, what you mean by "If you want plasmons to be generated to the left of a surface then the light coming in from the right must reflect to the right"?
 


Inside the metal, all electric fields are very small, as conductivity is high. Now from the Maxwell equations there arise two different boundary conditions for the electric field parallel and normal to the surface. The electric field component parallel to the surface has to be continuous, while normal to the surface, D has to be continuous. Now even if E normal to the surface inside the metal is small, D=E*epsilon is much larger as the absolute value of epsilon is high (roughly equal to the conductivity of the metal).
Roughly speaking, the electric field parallel to the surface approximately vanishes due to the high mobility of the charges parallel to the surface. In direction normal to the surface, the mobility of the charges is hindered (by the surface) so that higher fields can build up, at least outside the metal.
 
From the BCS theory of superconductivity is well known that the superfluid density smoothly decreases with increasing temperature. Annihilated superfluid carriers become normal and lose their momenta on lattice atoms. So if we induce a persistent supercurrent in a ring below Tc and after that slowly increase the temperature, we must observe a decrease in the actual supercurrent, because the density of electron pairs and total supercurrent momentum decrease. However, this supercurrent...
Hi. I have got question as in title. How can idea of instantaneous dipole moment for atoms like, for example hydrogen be consistent with idea of orbitals? At my level of knowledge London dispersion forces are derived taking into account Bohr model of atom. But we know today that this model is not correct. If it would be correct I understand that at each time electron is at some point at radius at some angle and there is dipole moment at this time from nucleus to electron at orbit. But how...
Back
Top