- #1

Adeimantus

- 113

- 1

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter Adeimantus
- Start date

- #1

Adeimantus

- 113

- 1

- #2

- 7,725

- 2,629

In fact, simply reversing the orientation of a planoconvex lens will result in radically different amounts of spherical aberration.

- #3

lzkelley

- 277

- 2

segment of an ellipse

- #4

Adeimantus

- 113

- 1

In fact, simply reversing the orientation of a planoconvex lens will result in radically different amounts of spherical aberration.

Yes that's a good point. In practice the ray model is not good enough, and you can't realize the zero aberration ideal. I guess I'm asking more of a mathematical question then, but it is optics-related so I posted it here. I was thinking that the specific term 'spherical aberration' was included in the theory of ray optics, so that's why I reasoned that the ideal lens shape in the ray model must not be spherical. I am imagining a plano-convex lens with light coming from infinity, being focused to a point on the axis of the lens.

I was wondering if it was a conic section. I tried to work this out when I was in high school but gave up after a while.lzkelley said:segment of an ellipse

- #5

lzkelley

- 277

- 2

- #6

- 7,725

- 2,629

Yes that's a good point. In practice the ray model is not good enough, and you can't realize the zero aberration ideal. I guess I'm asking more of a mathematical question then, but it is optics-related so I posted it here. I was thinking that the specific term 'spherical aberration' was included in the theory of ray optics, so that's why I reasoned that the ideal lens shape in the ray model must not be spherical. I am imagining a plano-convex lens with light coming from infinity, being focused to a point on the axis of the lens.

Yes, the term 'spherical aberration' was introduced by recognizing that spherical refracting surfaces all have a particular aberration- as the height of a ray (travelling parallel to the optic axis) increases, the distance between the lens and the location where the ray crosses the optical axis changes. That is, focus changes with aperture.

The way aberrations are discussed in ray optics is very artifical, IMO. Ray tracing involves linear and higher-order approximations to the sine function- linear optics has no aberrations, but there are 5 aberrations in 3rd order optics (7 actually, but 2 of them- piston and tilt- do not affect the PSF) and more for 5th order optics with strange names you have not heard of, etc. etc.

So, you can see how aberrations form in optics- as the linear approximation to a sine function breaks down (say the numerical aperture of a lens increases), higher order terms are required for accuracy, and aberrations come along for the ride as a result.

- #7

Adeimantus

- 113

- 1

The way aberrations are discussed in ray optics is very artifical, IMO. Ray tracing involves linear and higher-order approximations to the sine function- linear optics has no aberrations, but there are 5 aberrations in 3rd order optics (7 actually, but 2 of them- piston and tilt- do not affect the PSF) and more for 5th order optics with strange names you have not heard of, etc. etc.

So, you can see how aberrations form in optics- as the linear approximation to a sine function breaks down (say the numerical aperture of a lens increases), higher order terms are required for accuracy, and aberrations come along for the ride as a result.

Yes, I looked up 'spherical aberration' on wikipedia and was immediately struck by how arcane all the terminology was for treating aberrations as tack-ons to the the ray model. I couldn't really follow it. Too much of "To find the correction for this particular effect, use third order so-and-so's equation" or something similar. But I guess when you need to actually design a lens system, and are not just interested in mathematical curiosities, those things would be useful.

You seem to be pretty knowledgeable about this stuff. Do you do research in an optics-related field?

I'm tempted to say the answer to my mathematical question is a hyperbola. I did a google search for 'hyperbolic lens' and found http://www.physics.umd.edu/lecdem/services/demos/demosl6/l6-03.htm [Broken] which purports to be a spherical lens (left) compared to a hyperbolic lens (right). Of course, it might just be a picture of a crappy spherical lens next to a picture of a good spherical lens for all I know.

Last edited by a moderator:

- #8

- 7,725

- 2,629

My graduate school training emphasized optics and fluid mechanics; I've since used optics in my research- microscopy, spectroscopy, laser tweezers, sensor systems, light scattering, etc.

There are several optical designs out there you may be interested in- the Ritchey-Chretien has two hyperboloids but only corrects coma off-axis, IIRC

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Ratledge/tm9.htm [Broken]

Another is the Maksutov-Cassegrain design, which has no spherical aberration but has a restricted field of view and low f/#:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maksutov_telescope

Here's a site showing how a decent optical designer thinks:

http://members.cox.net/rmscott/lh_scope/lh_design_article/lh_design.html

There are several optical designs out there you may be interested in- the Ritchey-Chretien has two hyperboloids but only corrects coma off-axis, IIRC

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/David_Ratledge/tm9.htm [Broken]

Another is the Maksutov-Cassegrain design, which has no spherical aberration but has a restricted field of view and low f/#:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maksutov_telescope

Here's a site showing how a decent optical designer thinks:

http://members.cox.net/rmscott/lh_scope/lh_design_article/lh_design.html

Last edited by a moderator:

- #9

Adeimantus

- 113

- 1

- #10

- 7,725

- 2,629

Glad to be of help! You may also like this website:

http://bhs.broo.k12.wv.us/homepage/alumni/dstevick/weird.htm [Broken]

Last edited by a moderator:

Share:

- Last Post

- Replies
- 10

- Views
- 368

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 459

- Last Post

- Replies
- 5

- Views
- 239

- Last Post

- Replies
- 8

- Views
- 423

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 299

- Replies
- 17

- Views
- 395

- Replies
- 13

- Views
- 405

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 456

- Last Post

- Replies
- 7

- Views
- 1K

- Last Post

- Replies
- 10

- Views
- 310