Fourier Analysis's relation to diffraction

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between Fourier analysis and diffraction patterns, particularly in the context of how Fourier transforms relate to the representation of wave functions and their behavior in diffraction scenarios. Participants explore theoretical connections and practical implications in physics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about how the Fourier transform of a series of vertical lines relates to diffraction patterns observed in transmission electron microscopy (TEM).
  • Another participant notes that the relationship works under the far-field approximation and explains that integrating the incoming wave over the aperture shape corresponds to performing a 2-dimensional Fourier transform.
  • A third participant describes the Fourier transform as a method to extract a weighted set of values from the Fourier series, emphasizing the utility of breaking a function into frequency components due to differing time skews in dispersive functions.
  • A later reply adds that the integrals involved in diffraction calculations are identical to those in Fourier analysis, suggesting a practical coincidence rather than a deeper theoretical connection.
  • This participant also shares a personal experience of deriving a similar relation in a different context, highlighting the utility of using Fast Fourier Transforms (FFT) in numerical simulations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the nature of the connection between Fourier analysis and diffraction. While some propose practical similarities, others hint at deeper theoretical implications, leaving the discussion open-ended.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not resolve the underlying assumptions about the conditions under which the Fourier transform applies to diffraction patterns, nor does it clarify the scope of the relationship between the two concepts.

know
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
My advisor recently asked me a series of questions that made me realize I don't fully understand how the Fourier transform of, let's say series of vertical lines, produces a diffraction pattern like those seen in a TEM. To get a better understanding I re-read Hecht's short little chapter on Fourier series, integrals, and their corresponding graphs in k-space. I understand that Fourier series allow us to write any equation in terms of a series of sines and cosines, and that calculating the related coefficients tells us how each frequency of each of the sines and cosines is weighted into the representation of the equation. I'm not, however, seeing how taking the Fourier series, Fourier transform, or diffraction patterns are related. Could anyone help with the missing link?
 
Science news on Phys.org
It only works in the far-field approximation. Represent the incoming wave as

[tex]E_0 e^{i\vec k \cdot \vec x}[/tex]

To find the total amplitude at a screen a large distance away, what do you have to do? You have to integrate the above thing over the shape of your aperture.

Which, if you notice, is the same thing as taking a 2-dimensional Fourier transform.
 
A Fourier transform of a particular function is the procedure that produces a weighted set of values taken out of the Fourier Series that is equivalent to the function when summed. The Fourier Series is the "basis" for the representation of the function.

It's very useful to break a function or wave into separate frequency components because any dispersive function will have a different time skew for each frequency.
 
Just to add to what Ben Niehoff has already written, the connection simply comes from the fact that the integrals/sums have you to calculate when working with diffraction just happens to be identical to the integrals/sums you do in Fourier analysis.
Of course one could argue that there is a deeper connection but from a practical point of view you might as well just see it as a lucky "coincidence".

This type of of integral is quite common in physics, a few years ago I "accidentally" derived the same relation when working on something completely different (no connection to light).
Fortunately I realized what is was and it saved me a lot of time since it meant I could use an FFT in my numerical simulations.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K