Normal incidence of EM wave - p & s polarization convention?

  • I
  • Thread starter IcedCoffee
  • Start date
  • #1
15
1
Hi. I'm reading a paper "Transmission of light through a single rectangular hole in a real metal" and the author refers to the incident light shown below as "p-polarized" without further specification.

upload_2018-8-24_22-14-30.png


Note that ax > ay. Is there any convention in regarding a certain polarization as p-polarized in the case of normal incidence?
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-8-24_22-14-30.png
    upload_2018-8-24_22-14-30.png
    13.1 KB · Views: 608

Answers and Replies

  • #2
950
418
Hmmm ... that is strange. I’ve never seen anybody use S and P to mean anything other than the relation of the electric field to the plane of incidence. They shouldn’t be defined at normal incidence.

Also, since they have a well established meaning used a million places I don’t really believe we can excuse using them some other way.

However, playing devil’s advocate, S and P come from the German words for perpendicular and parallel, so I suppose if there is something to be parallel or perpendicular to other than the plane of incidence one might use that labeling. I’d be particularly accepting of that from a German speaker.

On the other hand your diagram has the electric field perpendicular to the long axis of the rectangle and still calls it P polarized, so they get no linguistic benefit of the doubt from me. This just appears to be wrong.
 
  • #3
15
1
Hmmm ... that is strange. I’ve never seen anybody use S and P to mean anything other than the relation of the electric field to the plane of incidence. They shouldn’t be defined at normal incidence.

Also, since they have a well established meaning used a million places I don’t really believe we can excuse using them some other way.

However, playing devil’s advocate, S and P come from the German words for perpendicular and parallel, so I suppose if there is something to be parallel or perpendicular to other than the plane of incidence one might use that labeling. I’d be particularly accepting of that from a German speaker.

On the other hand your diagram has the electric field perpendicular to the long axis of the rectangle and still calls it P polarized, so they get no linguistic benefit of the doubt from me. This just appears to be wrong.

I guess they just picked the notation rather randomly and then expected readers to figure it out from the... figure.

Also, I think what you said would make more sense, that the direction perpendicular to the slit, or whatever structure that has some sort of axis, should be called s-polarized. Thank you!
 

Related Threads on Normal incidence of EM wave - p & s polarization convention?

  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
0
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
679
  • Last Post
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • Last Post
Replies
4
Views
57K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
912
  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
440
Replies
5
Views
10K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
770
Top