Intensity of p-polarized light through stack of plates

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the intensity of p-polarized light as it interacts with a stack of 10 plates with a refractive index of 1.5. The Fresnel equations for reflected and refracted p-polarized light were applied, yielding a best-fit equation for reflected intensity, while the fit for refracted intensity was poor. The analysis indicates that multiple reflections complicate the application of the Fresnel equations, as they typically apply to single dielectric interfaces. The data suggests that the transmission through the plates is high, but normalization of intensity rather than absolute transmittance may have skewed results.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Fresnel equations for p-polarized light
  • Knowledge of optical properties of materials, specifically refractive index
  • Familiarity with experimental data analysis and curve fitting techniques
  • Basic principles of light transmission and reflection at dielectric interfaces
NEXT STEPS
  • Investigate the impact of multiple reflections on light intensity using advanced optical modeling software
  • Learn about the Brewster angle and its significance in p-polarized light transmission
  • Explore methods for accurately measuring absolute transmittance in optical experiments
  • Review the application of Fresnel equations in multilayer systems and their limitations
USEFUL FOR

Optical physicists, experimental researchers in photonics, and engineers working with optical systems who seek to understand the behavior of p-polarized light in multilayer materials.

sergiokapone
Messages
306
Reaction score
17
As one know, the intensity Fresnel equations
for the reflected p-polarized light
\begin{equation}\label{a}
\frac{I_{p_{refl}}}{I_{0p}}=\frac {\tan^{2}(i-r)}{{\tan^{2}(i+r)}}
\end{equation}

and for the refracted one is

\begin{equation}\label{b}
\frac{I_{p_{refr}}}{I_{0p}}=1 - \frac {\tan^{2}(i-r)}{{\tan^{2}(i+r)}}
\end{equation}

where $i$ - angle of incidence, $r$ - angle of refraction, $I_{op}$ -intensity of incident p-polarized light.

Suppose, we sent p-polarized light to a stack of plates (10 plates with $n = 1.5$).
I expected the intensity of reflected p-polarized light subject to equation (1) and also the intensity of p-polarized light passed across stack of plates subject to equation (2) with some downgrading due to absorption.

I get an experimental data in picture:
989f09e890de2fd9ff83db9050b15ea6.png


%====================================
\begin{filecontents}{plate.dat}
angle refracted reflected
7 8 10
5.5 8 20
6 7 30
11 3.5 40
11.5 2 45
12 1 50
12 0.6 52
10.5 0 56
8.3 1 60
3 3 65
\end{filecontents}The best fit reflected p-polarized light (blue line) is

\begin{equation}\label{fita}
\frac{I_{p_{refl}}}{250}=\frac {\tan^{2}(i-r)}{{\tan^{2}(i+r)}}
\end{equation}

It seems reasonable.
But fit with equatuion (2) looks bad (red line) :
\begin{equation}\label{fitb}
\frac{I_{p_{refr}}}{1/n\cdot 250}=1 - \frac {\tan^{2}(i-r)}{{\tan^{2}(i+r)}}
\end{equation}

I have no idea how to explain it.
 
Science news on Phys.org
Multiple reflections are somewhat difficult to take into account using these equations, but the transmitted intensity for 10 plates should be approximately ## \tau_{ten}=\tau_{single}^{10} ##.(This equation is only a rough approximation and doesn't take the transmission from multiple reflections into account.) From looking at your data, I don't think absorption losses account for a tremendously high percentage. Instead, the transmission through the 10 plates at and near the Brewster angle appears to be quite high (near 100%), but I think you normalized the intensity rather than displaying absolute transmittance. ## \\ ## Editing: I would also suggest you check the equations and how they might apply. The Fresnel equations are normally for a single dielectric interface. If you have 10 plates, that could be as many as 20 air/material dielectric interfaces, rather than 10.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

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