Polarization of light after being totally reflected

Zolo
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A circularly polarized light hit the boundary between 2 regions at 45 degree and is totally reflected. What is the polarization state of the reflected beam?





Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


Since both s and p component are totally reflected, the polarization state of reflected beam should be the same as the incident beam?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There is a phase shift associated with reflection which may affect how the s and p components are combined in the reflected beam vs the incident beam. However that phase shift depends also on whether the boundary is one of increasing vs decreasing index of refraction. You'll have to study up on these issues and see if your reasoning still holds.

For example if, IF it is valid to view the reflected beam as the mirror image of what the incident beam would look like if it continued unreflected, then it would be the mirror image of a Left circular polarized beam and thence be a Right circular polarized beam (or vice versa). But is that a valid analysis? I think this question is intended to have you explore these issues. I haven't thought through the question fully myself, but rather am bringing up issues I would double check before answering. Some may be irrelevant in the final analysis. So don't assume I'm hinting at a specific answer, yours may be right, I just don't think you argument is quite sufficient to be sure.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top