- #1

sergiokapone

- 302

- 17

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:

%====================================

\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.

I have no idea how to explain it.