Polarization of Scattered Radiation, motivating definition?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the polarization of scattered radiation, particularly in the context of unpolarized light interacting with a small dielectric sphere. It explains how to calculate the differential cross sections for both parallel and perpendicular polarizations of incident electric fields, emphasizing the need to average the results for unpolarized light. The participants debate the appropriate choice of polarization vectors for the scattered wave and the incoming wave, noting that the scattered radiation's polarization must be perpendicular to the direction of scattering. The conversation highlights the mathematical derivation from Jackson's work and the conceptual challenges in reconciling the chosen vectors with the physical scenario. Understanding these vector choices is crucial for accurately describing the scattering process.
PhDeezNutz
Messages
849
Reaction score
556
Homework Statement
First I'd like to say that this post is going to be a mixture of passages and derivations from two different books (Jackson and Zangwill)

According to Jackson and Zangwill (I've been primarily using Zangwill) the definition of Polarization of Scattered Radiation is

##\Pi \left(\theta \right) = \frac{\frac{d \sigma_\perp}{d \Omega} - \frac{d \sigma_\parallel}{d \Omega}}{\frac{d \sigma_\perp}{d \Omega} + \frac{d \sigma_\parallel}{d \Omega}} = \frac{\sin^2 \theta}{1 + \cos^2 \theta}##

I was able to reconcile the definitions/formulas for ##\frac{d \sigma_\perp}{d \Omega}## and ##\frac{d \sigma_\parallel}{d \Omega}## and of course I could just plug them into the formula given for ##\Pi \left( \theta \right)## and recover the formula above but I'm trying to understand it on a conceptual level. Which vectors are being projected onto which vectors?

(See picture below)
Relevant Equations
From Zangwill we have for polarized light

##\frac{d \sigma}{d \Omega} = r_e^2 \left(1 - \left|\hat{k} \cdot \hat{e}_0 \right|^2 \right)##

Where ##r_e## is the classical electron radius.
Figure from Jackson, the ##0## subscripts indicate incident waves whereas the lack of subscripts indicate the scattered wave.
Image 5-27-20 at 8.17 AM.jpg


Figure from Zangwill, the hat ##\hat{e}## vectors are for the incident electric field. We are dealing with unpolarized light so we have two orthogonal polarization vectors. Likewise the ##0## subscript indicates the incident wave and the lack of subscripts indicate the scattered wave.

Image 5-27-20 at 7.58 AM.jpg
In order to find ##\frac{d \sigma}{d \Omega}_{unpolarized}## we merely take a statistical average of the##\frac{d \sigma}{d \Omega}## for the two polarization vectors.

##\frac{d \sigma}{d \Omega}_{unpolarized} = \frac{1}{2} \left(\frac{d\sigma_{\perp}}{d \Omega} + \frac{d \sigma_{\parallel}}{d \Omega} \right) = \frac{\left( r_e^2 \right)}{2} \left[\left( 1 - \left| \hat{k} \cdot \hat{e}_{\perp} \right|^2\right) + \left( 1 - \left| \hat{k} \cdot \hat{e}_{\parallel} \right|^2 \right)\right] = \frac{1}{2} \left[ r_e^2 + r_e^2\left( 1 - \sin^2 \theta \right)\right] = \frac{r_e^2}{2} \left( 1 + \cos^2 \theta \right)##

So finding the differential cross sections for both the parallel and perpendicular incident E-field was easy enough but the next step is confusing. Carrying out the math is easy enough but reconciling the concept is difficult for me.

In Jackson's figure to find the numerator which vector do we want to project ##\vec{\varepsilon_1}## onto?
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
PhDeezNutz said:
In Jackson's figure to find the numerator which vector do we want to project ##\vec{\varepsilon_1}## onto?

For scattering from a small dielectric sphere, Jackson derives $$\frac{d \sigma}{d \Omega} = k^4a^6 \left( \frac{\varepsilon_r - 1}{\varepsilon_r + 2} \right) \left|\vec \epsilon^{\,*} \cdot \vec \epsilon_0 \right|^2$$

Here, ##\vec \epsilon## corresponds to the polarization direction of the scattered wave and ##\vec \epsilon_0## corresponds to the polarization direction of the incoming wave. You need to decide what to choose for these vectors.

In general, ##\vec \epsilon_0## can point in any direction in the x-y plane of Jackson's figure. Thus, if ##\vec \epsilon_0## makes an angle ##\phi## to the x-axis, then ##\vec \epsilon_0 = \cos \phi \, \vec \epsilon_0^{(1)} + \sin \phi \, \vec \epsilon_0^{(2)}##. For unpolarized incoming radiation, you will need to eventually average over all angles ##\phi##.

For ##\large \frac{d \sigma_{\perp}}{d \Omega}##, you want ##\vec \epsilon## to correspond to the scattered radiation being polarized perpendicular to the ##\hat n##-##\hat n_0## plane in Jackson's figure. So, choose ##\vec \epsilon## to be ##\vec \epsilon^{(2)}## in Jackson's figure. Then, ##\left|\vec \epsilon^{\,*} \cdot \vec \epsilon_0 \right|^2 = \left|\vec \epsilon^{(2)} \cdot \vec \epsilon_0 \right|^2##

Note that ##\hat n## and ##\hat n_0## both lie in the x-z plane. Vectors ##\vec \epsilon_0^{(1)}## and ##\vec \epsilon^{(1)}## also lie in the x-z plane.

For ##\large \frac{d \sigma_{\parallel}}{d \Omega}##, you want ##\vec \epsilon## to correspond to the scattered radiation being polarized parallel to the ##\hat n##-##\hat n_0## plane. So, what vector in Jackson's figure would you choose for ##\vec \epsilon## when finding ##\large \frac{d \sigma_{\parallel}}{d \Omega}## ?
 
  • Like
Likes PhDeezNutz and Delta2
TSny said:
For dΩdσ∥dΩ\large \frac{d \sigma_{\parallel}}{d \Omega}, you want ϵ⃗ ϵ→\vec \epsilon to correspond to the scattered radiation being polarized parallel to the n̂ n^\hat n-n̂ 0n^0\hat n_0 plane. So, what vector in Jackson's figure would you choose for ϵ⃗ ϵ→\vec \epsilon when finding dΩdσ∥dΩ\large \frac{d \sigma_{\parallel}}{d \Omega} ?


We'd chose ##\vec{\varepsilon}## to be equal to ##\vec{\varepsilon}_0^{(1)}## if I followed your logic correctly. But to me that would mean the polarization is both the same before and after the scattering. How can that be?
 
PhDeezNutz said:
We'd chose ##\vec{\varepsilon}## to be equal to ##\vec{\varepsilon}_0^{(1)}##
No, the polarization of the scattered radiation must be perpendicular to ##\hat n##.
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top