Gaussian beam in a Fabry-Perot interferometer

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of Gaussian beams within a Fabry-Perot interferometer (FPI). It establishes that for a stable cavity, the radius of curvature of the Gaussian beam must match that of the mirrors, which poses a challenge when using flat mirrors, as they have an infinite radius. The conversation highlights that while FP cavities with flat mirrors exist, the Gaussian beam does not conform to the stability conditions typically expected. The analysis of the electric field and transmitted irradiance of Gaussian beams through an FPI reveals distortions in the energy profile and shifts in peak positions, particularly for intermediate beam waists.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Gaussian beam properties
  • Familiarity with Fabry-Perot interferometer design
  • Knowledge of resonator stability diagrams
  • Basic principles of laser cavity physics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the stability conditions for Fabry-Perot interferometers with curved mirrors
  • Explore the mathematical derivation of electric fields in optical cavities
  • Investigate the impact of beam waist on transmitted irradiance in FPIs
  • Learn about nonnormal incidence effects in Gaussian beam transmission
USEFUL FOR

Optical engineers, physicists studying laser systems, and researchers interested in the behavior of light in resonant cavities will benefit from this discussion.

Malamala
Messages
348
Reaction score
28
Hello I am reading some introductory laser cavity stuff and I am a bit confused about the existence of gaussian beams in the Fabry-Perot interferometer. If you solve the stability condition for a cavity (i.e. asking for the q parameter to reproduce itself after one round trip) you get that in order to obtain a stable cavity you need that the radius of curvature of the gaussian beam at each of the 2 mirrors should be the same as the radius of the mirrors. In general this is easily achievable (for stable cavities) by placing the beam waist at the right place. However in the case of Fabry-Perot interferometer, the radius would be infinity, while the gaussian beam has radius infinity just at the waist, and it is not possible to make it has infinite radius at 2 points. Does this mean that Fabry-Perot interferometer is not stable for gaussian beams? Yet it appears on the list of stable resonators. Can someone explain this to me? (I am sorry if the question is dumb, it is my first encounter with the topic). Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I suppose that the stable FP cavity mentioned in the list refers to the one using curved coupling mirrors, whose radius is finite.
 
wcghha said:
I suppose that the stable FP cavity mentioned in the list refers to the one using curved coupling mirrors, whose radius is finite.
Yes, I understand that case. But FP cavities with flat mirrors (i.e. almost infinite radius) exist in practice. I am not sure I understand how does the field looks inside the cavity, as a Gaussian beam doesn't make sense.
 
Malamala said:
Hello I am reading some introductory laser cavity stuff and I am a bit confused about the existence of gaussian beams in the Fabry-Perot interferometer.

Interesting point. If you have seen a 'resonator stability diagram', you will find that planar resonators are "conditionally stable", but it's unclear if there are Gaussian modes for a planar resonator. Here's a link to the worked-out problem:

(Abstract):
The transmission of a Gaussian beam through a Fabry–Perot interferometer (FPI) has been investigated. The equation for the electric field of the transmitted beam was derived and then the transmitted irradiance was numerically calculated for different selected parameters of both the FPI and the beam. The results show that the energy profile of the transmitted beam has been distorted to different degrees depending on the various parameters of the Gaussian beam and the FPI. Moreover the results show that the positions of the peaks of the transmitted beam are shifted, especially for intermediate waists for which the arctan term is nonlinear. The results also show that for nonnormal incidence successive transmitted beams are spatially separated and are not interfering appreciably with each other.

https://www.osapublishing.org/ao/abstract.cfm?uri=ao-33-18-3805
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
597
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K