Fresnel Coefficient for Unpolarised Light

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the Fresnel coefficient for an unpolarised light wave, specifically focusing on the electric field vector representation of the wave and its relation to s and p-polarised components. The original poster attempts to derive the coefficients based on previous work with polarised light.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster considers averaging the Fresnel coefficients for s and p-polarised light as a method to address the problem. Some participants question the validity of this approach, suggesting that a more robust method may be necessary.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the original poster's assumptions and attempts. Some have provided guidance on how to combine the polarised components more effectively, indicating a productive direction in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted concern regarding the terminology of "unpolarised light," with some participants emphasizing that unpolarised fields do not exist in the context of this problem. The original poster acknowledges an error in their initial representation of the electric field vector.

Ikaros
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement

A homework problem asks me to find the Fresnel coefficient for a linearly polarised plane wave, which is incident under an angle theta, whose electric field vector can be given as:

E=Ecos\hat{s}+Esin\hat{p}

\hat{s} and \hat{p} are the unit vectors for s-polarised and p-polarised waves.

The attempt at a solution

The previous question on my homework sheet asked me to derive the Fresnel equations for s and p-polarised waves, which I did starting with the bondary conditions. Here, I believe I have an unpolarised wave. My initial assumption was to take the average of both s and p-polarised light that I worked out previously.

For example,

r(\thetai)=(rs+rp)/2

and

t(\thetai)=1-r(\thetai)

However, I'm concerned this is an oversimplification and a more robust approach is in order. I'd love a nudge in the right direction or a thumbs up if my initial approach looks fine.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For your purposes (this question) unpolarized fields do not exist. You may combine the polarizations; such as what piece of film or a camera does. But there is no unpolarized light.
 
Antiphon said:
For your purposes (this question) unpolarized fields do not exist. You may combine the polarizations; such as what piece of film or a camera does. But there is no unpolarized light.
A poor choice of word by me, but I did account for the polarisation components due to the wave's orientation by averaging the Fresnel coefficients in my attempt above.

I note an error in my opening post as the wave should be E=Ecos\alpha\hat{s}+Esin\alpha\hat{p}.

The wave is alinged by \alpha with the two terms representing the relevant polarisation component projections. Therefore, the s and p-polarised components could be expressed by their own Fresnel equations - I just need to combine them. I'm just not sure how (I should have taken a Maths minor...) I'd appretiate any help.
 
Last edited:
Averaging fields in not ideal; you should combine them by summing squares (and perhaps taking the root of the sum) because the two polarizations cannot interfere but their separate powers would add.

This is what an "unpolarized detector" would measure as the reflection.
 
Antiphon said:
Averaging fields in not ideal; you should combine them by summing squares (and perhaps taking the root of the sum) because the two polarizations cannot interfere but their separate powers would add.

This is what an "unpolarized detector" would measure as the reflection.
Thanks for the tip. That looks like the way to go.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
25K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
12K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K