Rigorous Coupled Wave Analisys - help

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding the derivation of equations related to the Rigorous Coupled Wave Analysis (RCWA) for diffraction grating efficiencies, specifically from Soifer's book. The user seeks clarification on how to transition from equations 3.138 and 3.139 to 3.140 and 3.141, noting discrepancies in their own derivation. Additionally, there is confusion regarding the origin of equation 3.150 and the validity of assumption (3.127) in the context of modulation zones. The user emphasizes a desire for comprehension rather than simply seeking solutions, indicating a deep engagement with the material. Assistance is requested to resolve these specific mathematical concerns.
Krzysztow
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Recently I'm trying to understand some explanation of RCWA, which introduces to computational analysis of diffraction grating efficiences. For explanation I use Soifer book, but cannot understand or don't agree with it. I tried to understand the derivation, not to write it straightforward into Matlab but understand as well. And I found that my derivation doesn't agreefully with the book. Can You explain to me:
1) how one can get from the set of equations 3.138 & 3.139 to the set 3.140 & 3.141. I got something for 3.140 like in equation (*).
2) where did He get set 3.150 from? It seems as if assumption (**) or (3.127) is not valid anymore. However then He shouldn't write 3.152.
If assumption (3.127) is valid for modulation zone, then result for coefficients is given by (***)

Please, help me. It's not I want anyone to do my work. I just dwell for too long on it. Thank in advance!
 

Attachments

  • DSCN6430.JPG
    DSCN6430.JPG
    34.5 KB · Views: 476
  • DSCN6431.JPG
    DSCN6431.JPG
    26.5 KB · Views: 468
  • DSCN6432.JPG
    DSCN6432.JPG
    30.6 KB · Views: 499
Physics news on Phys.org
More attachements
 

Attachments

  • DSCN6433.JPG
    DSCN6433.JPG
    31 KB · Views: 446
  • DSCN6434.JPG
    DSCN6434.JPG
    30.7 KB · Views: 501
  • DSCN6435.JPG
    DSCN6435.JPG
    26.4 KB · Views: 454
7th, 8th and 9th pages
 

Attachments

  • DSCN6438.JPG
    DSCN6438.JPG
    30.8 KB · Views: 459
  • DSCN6437.JPG
    DSCN6437.JPG
    30.2 KB · Views: 463
  • DSCN6436.JPG
    DSCN6436.JPG
    32.8 KB · Views: 499
10th and 11th and (*)
 

Attachments

  • DSCN6439.JPG
    DSCN6439.JPG
    31 KB · Views: 461
  • DSCN6440.JPG
    DSCN6440.JPG
    33.3 KB · Views: 481
  • T.jpg
    T.jpg
    8.2 KB · Views: 419
(**) and (***)
 

Attachments

  • Assumption.jpg
    Assumption.jpg
    7.8 KB · Views: 427
  • Result.jpg
    Result.jpg
    4.6 KB · Views: 418
Consider an extremely long and perfectly calibrated scale. A car with a mass of 1000 kg is placed on it, and the scale registers this weight accurately. Now, suppose the car begins to move, reaching very high speeds. Neglecting air resistance and rolling friction, if the car attains, for example, a velocity of 500 km/h, will the scale still indicate a weight corresponding to 1000 kg, or will the measured value decrease as a result of the motion? In a second scenario, imagine a person with a...
Scalar and vector potentials in Coulomb gauge Assume Coulomb gauge so that $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A}=0.\tag{1}$$ The scalar potential ##\phi## is described by Poisson's equation $$\nabla^2 \phi = -\frac{\rho}{\varepsilon_0}\tag{2}$$ which has the instantaneous general solution given by $$\phi(\mathbf{r},t)=\frac{1}{4\pi\varepsilon_0}\int \frac{\rho(\mathbf{r}',t)}{|\mathbf{r}-\mathbf{r}'|}d^3r'.\tag{3}$$ In Coulomb gauge the vector potential ##\mathbf{A}## is given by...
Dear all, in an encounter of an infamous claim by Gerlich and Tscheuschner that the Greenhouse effect is inconsistent with the 2nd law of thermodynamics I came to a simple thought experiment which I wanted to share with you to check my understanding and brush up my knowledge. The thought experiment I tried to calculate through is as follows. I have a sphere (1) with radius ##r##, acting like a black body at a temperature of exactly ##T_1 = 500 K##. With Stefan-Boltzmann you can calculate...
Back
Top