Regarding the wavevector spread.

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter otaKu
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of wavevector spread in the context of nano optics, specifically addressing the maximum possible spread in the wavevector component k when light converges towards a focus, such as behind a lens. Participants are seeking clarification on the relationship between the wavevector and its spread, as well as the implications of numerical aperture in this context.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the substitution of 'k' into 'Δk' as presented in the text, suggesting it may be questionable.
  • Others express understanding of equation 1.2 but seek clarification on the reasoning behind the substitution of k into Δk.
  • One participant notes that the maximum possible spread in the wavevector component k is constrained by the magnitude of the vector, which cannot exceed k or be less than zero.
  • It is proposed that the actual spread will be less than the maximum value and will depend on the angle of the cone of light, as determined by the numerical aperture of the lens.
  • Participants reference a footnote in the text, indicating it does not provide relevant clarification on the matter.
  • Some express a general dissatisfaction with parts of the book, while noting that other chapters seem clearer.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the constraints of the wavevector spread but express differing views on the appropriateness of the substitution in the equations presented in the text. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the justification for this substitution.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved questions regarding the assumptions made in the text, particularly about the substitution of k into Δk and the implications of numerical aperture on the wavevector spread.

otaKu
Messages
26
Reaction score
2
So I was reading THIS book on nano optics. It says that the maximum possible spread in the wavevector component k(The spread can occur for instance when the light field converges towards a focus, e.g. behind a lens.) is the total length of the free space wavevector k=2π/λ.
Can anyone please explain this to me?! Thanks.
 
Science news on Phys.org
Here's the screenshot of the text if the google link doesn't work.
Untitled.png
 
otaKu said:
So I was reading THIS book on nano optics. It says that the maximum possible spread in the wavevector component k(The spread can occur for instance when the light field converges towards a focus, e.g. behind a lens.) is the total length of the free space wavevector k=2π/λ.
Can anyone please explain this to me?! Thanks.

What are you struggling with? Do you understand how to get eqn 1.2? The text seems to simply substitute 'k' into 'Δk', which is questionable, but if you like you should be able to determine Δk (start with writing down dk/dλ) and go from there.
 
Andy Resnick said:
What are you struggling with? Do you understand how to get eqn 1.2? The text seems to simply substitute 'k' into 'Δk', which is questionable, but if you like you should be able to determine Δk (start with writing down dk/dλ) and go from there.
I understand equation 1.2. What I don't understand is the reason why the author substituted k into Δk.
 
otaKu said:
I understand equation 1.2. What I don't understand is the reason why the author substituted k into Δk.

Does footnote 1 say anything relevant? That specific sentence seems to be the crux of the matter, and I don't quite understand it either.
 
Andy Resnick said:
Does footnote 1 say anything relevant? That specific sentence seems to be the crux of the matter, and I don't quite understand it either.
No it doesn't. It says "for real lens this must be corrected by the numerical aperture.'
 
otaKu said:
No it doesn't. It says "for real lens this must be corrected by the numerical aperture.'

Blech. The rest of the book seems to be better- chapter 2 was straightforward, chapter 3 is also reasonable (although I objected to a few things here and there).
 
The component along a direction cannot be larger than the magnitude of the vector. And cannot be less than zero. So the interval of values for any component of the vector k is from zero to k (magnitude). This is the maximum possible "spread" he is talking about.
The actual spread will be less that this maximum value and will depend on the angle of the cone of light. Which is given by the numerical aperture of the lens.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: otaKu and Andy Resnick
nasu said:
The component along a direction cannot be larger than the magnitude of the vector. And cannot be less than zero. So the interval of values for any component of the vector k is from zero to k (magnitude). This is the maximum possible "spread" he is talking about.
The actual spread will be less that this maximum value and will depend on the angle of the cone of light. Which is given by the numerical aperture of the lens.
Thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 74 ·
3
Replies
74
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K