Group delay with Gaussian pulse

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving an expression for a Gaussian pulse propagating through a dispersive medium, emphasizing the need to include both the first and second derivatives of the dispersion relation. The initial Gaussian waveform is defined, and its Fourier transform is presented, leading to an integral expression for the pulse at a generic time t. Participants highlight that neglecting higher-order derivatives simplifies the analysis but may overlook important dynamics, particularly in cases of anomalous dispersion. References to historical papers by Sommerfeld and Brillouin are provided for further reading. The conversation also touches on challenges in relating the amplitude evolution of the wave to the Schrödinger equation, indicating a need for clarity in the derivation process.
EmilyRuck
Messages
134
Reaction score
6
Hello!
Starting from a gaussian waveform propagating in a dispersive medium, is it possible to obtain an expression for the waveform at a generic time t, when the dispersion is not negligible?

I know that a generic gaussian pulse (considered as an envelope of a carrier at frequency k_c) can be expressed for t = 0 as

g(x) = e^{ - \frac{1}{2} \left( \frac{x - x_0}{\sigma_x} \right)^2} e^{i k_c (x - x_0)}

and its Fourier transform is

G(k) = \displaystyle \frac{\sigma_x}{\sqrt{2 \pi}} e^{- \frac{(k - k_c)^2 \sigma_x^2}{2}} e^{-i (k - k_c)x_0}

Then, the pulse at a generic time t can be obtained as

G(x,t) = \displaystyle \int_{-\infty}^{+\infty} G(k) e^{i(kx - \omega(k) t)} dk

with \omega(k) = \omega(k_c) + (k - k_c) \displaystyle \left. \frac{d \omega}{dk} \right|_{k = k_c} + (k - k_c)^2 \left. \frac{d^2 \omega}{dk^2} \right|_{k = k_c}.

The first derivative is known as the group velocity. Note that the second derivative is considered too.

I don't know how to proceed in order to obtain an explicit form for G(x,t) which can show its evolution during time, showing the velocity of propagation of the pulse and its possible broadening. With a simple substitution of \omega(k) and solution of the integral I did not get such an explicit form. Is there anyone who can help, or anyone who does know a site/document dealing with this topic?
Thank you anyway,

Emily
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To neglect the 2nd higher derivatives of the dispersion relation is, of course, only an approximation. You can improve by keeping the 2nd order. Going beyond usually leads to cases, which cannot be integrated analytically anymore. See, e.g.,

http://nptel.ac.in/courses/112105165/lec8.pdf

Sometimes, it's necessary to consider the exact expression, e.g., in the interesting case of anomalous dispersion. There are famous historical papers on the subject by Sommerfeld and Brillouin. For a good introduction, see Sommerfeld, Lectures on theoretical physics, vol. 4 (Optics).
 
vanhees71 said:
To neglect the 2nd higher derivatives of the dispersion relation is, of course, only an approximation.

Yes, of course, in fact in my post I wrote the 2nd derivative has to be considered.

vanhees71 said:
You can improve by keeping the 2nd order. Going beyond usually leads to cases, which cannot be integrated analytically anymore.

Ok, I understand.

vanhees71 said:

Thank you. Did you follow the whole procedure? I can't get how he obtains a Schrödinger equation describing the amplitude of the (8.7) (page 5).

vanhees71 said:
Sometimes, it's necessary to consider the exact expression, e.g., in the interesting case of anomalous dispersion. There are famous historical papers on the subject by Sommerfeld and Brillouin. For a good introduction, see Sommerfeld, Lectures on theoretical physics, vol. 4 (Optics).

Thanks for this one too.

Emily
 
Concernig Eq. (8.5), isn't this just the substitution ##k=k_0+\xi## in (8.4) and then cancelling the factor ##\exp(\mathrm{i} k_0 x)## on both sides of the equations?
 
Yes, of course it is (as explained in the document): this is straightforward. Anyway I can't get how "the evolution of the amplitude A(x,t) of the harmonic wave e^{i (k_0 x - \omega (k_0) t)} in (8.7) is governed by the" Schrödinger equation (page 5).
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top