Undergrad Overlap Integrals: Understand & Learn from a Source

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ahmed123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integrals Overlap
Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the concept of overlap integrals in optics, particularly how they relate to light coupling into fiber optics. The overlap integral quantifies how well the light field overlaps with the fiber's mode field, determining the amount of light that can be transmitted through the fiber. A simplified explanation involves normalizing the functions representing the light beam and the fiber's mode, multiplying them, and integrating to find the fraction of light that passes through. The conversation also highlights the importance of using the fields rather than just intensity for accurate calculations. References for further reading on this topic are requested to deepen understanding.
Ahmed123
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Hi
I study optics and many times i found a term called (Overlap integral ) as attached pictures .. I can't understand from where these expression comes (mathematically) and what these functions means in particular ( even from mathematical point of view)
I can't understand the nature of multiplying the two functions then integrating or making the integrals of individual functions then multiplying.. So I ask if anyone can help me to find a source for reading to understand .. or explain these expressions for me .. thank you in advance .
 

Attachments

  • (1).png
    (1).png
    86.5 KB · Views: 723
  • (2).png
    (2).png
    26.4 KB · Views: 851
Physics news on Phys.org
If you have light focused down so it is imaged into a small spot on the tip of a fiber, this expression answers the question “how much of the light will go into the fiber?” (However this isn’t the only place in physics you will find an “overlap integral”). This function is a correlation of how well the field of the imaged spot (“light field”) overlaps the shape of the field the fiber can propagate (“mode field”).

The easiest way to describe it is to start with something simpler. Suppose you had a beam of light that made a perfectly circularly uniform spot on the wall. (Uniform intensity “top hat” profile). And suppose you had a circular window. In this scenario, all the light that hits the window goes through. If the circular beam partially overlaps the circular window, part of the beam goes through.
Mathematically how would you calculate how much gets through? One way to do it would be to write a function that describes the beam in some coordinate system: a constant value inside the circle, zero outside. Normalize this to one (divide by the integral of the function). Now in the same coordinates describe the window with a similar normalized function. If you multiply the two functions together and integrate you get the fraction of light that goes through the window. It’s how much gets through because the multiplied function is nonzero only where both functions are nonzero. (the “overlap”) It’s the fraction because the two functions are normalized to 1.
Of course you might have come up with a simpler geometric expression for that particular case, but this recipe is more generally useful. Suppose the beam isn’t uniform, but has a Gaussian intensity distribution. Same recipe: describe the intensity shape, normalize, multiply by the normalized window shape and integrate. Finally suppose the window isn’t completely transparent everywhere but has some pattern of transparency. You still use the same recipe.

One caveat, the simplified description above contemplates using the intensity throughout, but, really, when it comes to mode coupling, you overlap the fields. The intensity is proportional to the square of the field, and that is why your expression has all those conjugate squares.

So now let’s apply this to your expression. The light incident on the fiber tip has some field profile. Integrating the conjugate square of the field gives the total intensity. Dividing the field by the square root of the integrated conjugate square gives the normalized field. The fiber has a mode distribution that it can propagate. Dividing the description of the mode field by its integrated conjugate square gives the normalized mode field. Multiplying the two fields gives the field coupling: how much of the incident field couples into the fiber mode. Taking the absolute square of the whole expression puts this in terms of coupled intensity. The normalizers are real, so they just get squared and are once again intensities rather than fields.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes Bart Bas, Nazon, Ahmed123 and 1 other person
Cutter Ketch said:
If you have light focused down so it is imaged into a small spot on the tip of a fiber, this expression answers the question “how much of the light will go into the fiber?” (However this isn’t the only place in physics you will find an “overlap integral”). This function is a correlation of how well the field of the imaged spot (“light field”) overlaps the shape of the field the fiber can propagate (“mode field”).

The easiest way to describe it is to start with something simpler. Suppose you had a beam of light that made a perfectly circularly uniform spot on the wall. (Uniform intensity “top hat” profile). And suppose you had a circular window. In this scenario, all the light that hits the window goes through. If the circular beam partially overlaps the circular window, part of the beam goes through.
Mathematically how would you calculate how much gets through? One way to do it would be to write a function that describes the beam in some coordinate system: a constant value inside the circle, zero outside. Normalize this to one (divide by the integral of the function). Now in the same coordinates describe the window with a similar normalized function. If you multiply the two functions together and integrate you get the fraction of light that goes through the window. It’s how much gets through because the multiplied function is nonzero only where both functions are nonzero. (the “overlap”) It’s the fraction because the two functions are normalized to 1.
Of course you might have come up with a simpler geometric expression for that particular case, but this recipe is more generally useful. Suppose the beam isn’t uniform, but has a Gaussian intensity distribution. Same recipe: describe the intensity shape, normalize, multiply by the normalized window shape and integrate. Finally suppose the window isn’t completely transparent everywhere but has some pattern of transparency. You still use the same recipe.

One caveat, the simplified description above contemplates using the intensity throughout, but, really, when it comes to mode coupling, you overlap the fields. The intensity is proportional to the square of the field, and that is why your expression has all those conjugate squares.

So now let’s apply this to your expression. The light incident on the fiber tip has some field profile. Integrating the conjugate square of the field gives the total intensity. Dividing the field by the square root of the integrated conjugate square gives the normalized field. The fiber has a mode distribution that it can propagate. Dividing the description of the mode field by its integrated conjugate square gives the normalized mode field. Multiplying the two fields gives the field coupling: how much of the incident field couples into the fiber mode. Taking the absolute square of the whole expression puts this in terms of coupled intensity. The normalizers are real, so they just get squared and are once again intensities rather than fields.
Woooow ,, then these denominator comes from normalization of these functions !
I can't describe how your answer is great and helpful ..
 
  • Like
Likes Cutter Ketch
Hi, can you provide a reference for the first image you provided? Thank you so much for your help
 
Topic about reference frames, center of rotation, postion of origin etc Comoving ref. frame is frame that is attached to moving object, does that mean, in that frame translation and rotation of object is zero, because origin and axes(x,y,z) are fixed to object? Is it same if you place origin of frame at object center of mass or at object tail? What type of comoving frame exist? What is lab frame? If we talk about center of rotation do we always need to specified from what frame we observe?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K