Wavelength and Image Resolution

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the relationship between wavelength and image resolution, specifically how the diffraction limit affects the ability to resolve details smaller than the wavelength of light. The diffraction limit is defined as approximately 0.67 times the wavelength divided by the numerical aperture (NA) of the imaging system, with a practical maximum NA of about 1.4. The resolution is fundamentally linked to the spatial frequency spectrum of the light field, which is influenced by the aperture size and the propagation characteristics of spatial frequencies in a vacuum. The derived resolution limit for diffraction is established as λ/2, where λ is the wavelength of light.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of wave optics and diffraction principles
  • Familiarity with Fourier transforms and spatial frequency concepts
  • Knowledge of numerical aperture (NA) in imaging systems
  • Basic grasp of wave propagation in vacuum and dispersion relations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of diffraction and its impact on imaging systems
  • Learn about Fourier optics and the role of spatial frequency in image resolution
  • Explore advanced imaging techniques that overcome diffraction limits, such as super-resolution microscopy
  • Investigate the effects of numerical aperture on resolution in various imaging modalities
USEFUL FOR

Physicists, optical engineers, and anyone involved in imaging technology or research requiring a deep understanding of resolution limits in wave-based systems.

chingkui
Messages
178
Reaction score
2
I have been trying to find the explanation why the wavelength of a wave is the limit of the resolution of an image (i.e. one cannot see the detail smaller than the wavelength), which is sited as the reason why we cannot see an atom using visible light. I don't think I really understand why this is so. can someone please explain to me the physics behind resolving detail with wave and the reason behing this limit? Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Firstly, the diffraction limit is wavelength/2 (approximately) - actually a more precise formula is 0.67*wavelength/NA where NA is the numerical aperture of the imaging apparatus and has a practical maximum of about 1.4.

When we image something, the light we collect is spatially modulated. That means if I measured the field as a function of distance, in the x direction for example - call it E(x), E(x) would vary with x, as opposed to being a constant. The best resolution we can get actually depends on the Fourier transform of E(x) - what is sometimes called the spatial frequency spectrum in the direction of x, and the label we give to spatial frequency is k (so the Fourier transform E(x), would be E'(k_x) since we are concerned with the x direction only).

To further illustrate the above point - take transmission through an aperture at z = 0. E(x) will be a rectangular function at z = 0, and it's spatial frequency spectrum, E'(k_x) will be a sinc function. If we decrease the width of the aperture, the width of the spatial frequency spectrum increases. This is because higher spatial frequency components are needed to "resolve" smaller objects.

So where does the diffraction limit come from? It comes from the fact that only a certain range of spatial frequencies can propagate in a vacuum. Take the dispersion relation of free space;

c = f\lambda

which can also be written

c = \omega k

Where omega is the angular frequency and k is the wavevector. If we rearrange the previous equation thus;

k^2 = \frac{c^2}{\omega^2}

Remember that k is a vector and can be broken down into its constituent components;

\frac{c^2}{\omega^2} = k^2 = k_x^2 + k_y^2 + k_z^2

Only components of k that are real will reach the far-field. Imaginary components result in evanescent waves that die off exponentially with distance and thus do not reach the far-field. From the above equation, it is easy to see that;

-\frac{c}{\omega} < k_x < \frac{c}{\omega}

The resultant image of a sub-wavelength object (obtained by taking the inverse Fourier transform of E'(k_x)) is therefore the Fourier transform of the rectangular function of half-width c/\omega, which is a sinc function of width \pi.c/\omega. It is then noted that;

\frac{\pi c}{\omega} = \frac{\pi f \lambda}{2\pi f} = \frac{\lambda}{2}

Which is the resolution limit for diffraction. To get the more precise expression, one needs to simply repeat the above process with the 2D case.

Claude.
 
Last edited:
In sci-fi when an author is talking about space travellers or describing the movement of galaxies they will say something like “movement in space only means anything in relation to another object”. Examples of this would be, a space ship moving away from earth at 100 km/s, or 2 galaxies moving towards each other at one light year per century. I think it would make it easier to describe movement in space if we had three axis that we all agree on and we used 0 km/s relative to the speed of...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K