Arxiv:1309.6796V3 [Physics.Optics] 20 Mar 2014

arXiv:1309.6796v3 [physics.optics] 20 Mar 2014 pia ope transmittance complex optical ed.T aut hs ffcsoeascae h object the amplitude associates complex light one illuminating a effects the to these on valuate exerts To it which fields. effects the to fer e/eee aefota h oiinof position the at front wave ted/refleced of wave object frequency electromagnetic the a monochromatic when with a as by defined incident been was traditionally has it [1]) reflectance vector a mltd hl pligtepaedlyof delay phase the applying while amplitude efre ytemauigisrmn,s n snever is one so instrument, integral time measuring the the to by due optical out performed fluctuating washed been the have of must re- knowledge fields the phase this the as During span long frequency. time cut-off as instrument’s approximately an of span light in- ciprocal the time the of a modulus is over square measured fields averaged directly an hand, is being which other tensity, of the transmit- quantity On have the it objects. what the after the of by just value through/refleted and the ted to before compare rapid just never too fields can are optical one instrument, so the measured, of comparing be speed fluctuations, ampli- respond field the their Such to ran- both undergoing [4]. been for fluctuations always dom have fields, phases optical their and in all tudes encountered and of never time-independent world, region are optical real the spectrum the hand, electromagnetic in wave the one monochromatic On of mentioned sources just concept questionable. the is [2], quantities observable of argument. its ∗ [email protected] hnoetlsaota beti pis ewudre- would he optics, in object an about talks one When oee hnoeivsiae h rbe nterms in problem the investigates one when However ρ ntewyo multiplying of way the in OR.I tnadtxbos(..i Ref. in (e.g. textbooks standard In (OCR). on ouint h eemnto fpae ftediffract the of phases applicabi of determination suggested the The measur to one illum themselves. solution that Wolf coherent fields found E. optical partial by advanced the the e been than useful under had a which object As thought an the quantities. it observable of knowledge of knowledge our terms To full counte the said. measurable in has a optics concept it in the give what we catc of coherence, instrument explanation measuring of no theory that the fact Using the to due itself, for h rdtoa pia ocp o h betde o prov not does object the for concept optical traditional The .INTRODUCTION I. esrbecutratt h pia ocp fa object an of concept optical the to counterpart measurable A ω twudmdlt h transmit- the modulate would it , nvriyo cec n ehooyo hn,Hfi 23002 Hefei, China, of Technology and Science of University A eateto rcso ahnr n rcso Instrumen Precision and Machinery Precision of Department ( ρ ω , colo hsc n aeilSine nu University, Anhui Science, Material and Physics of School OT or (OCT) ) e jθ o11JuogRa,Hfi 361 .R China R. P. 230601, Hefei, Road, Jiulong No.111 ( ρ ,ω A ) ( ρ ihatr like term a with ω , pia complex optical P ie oits to times ) pcfidby specified θ Dtd uut4 2018) 4, August (Dated: ( ρ ω , igu Zhang Minghui to ) iwnLi Jiawen usto otekoldeof knowledge the to quisition iyteoiia pia ocp fthe of gives. concept jus- paper to optical counterpart this original measurable the significance a tify give physical we in the Sec.V presented in is Finally be It will IV. the density Sec. cross-spectral at the filtered on being in- exerts was joint fields of the optical frequency is an function when approve density theoretically tensity cross-spectral we com- III the measurable Sec. that a in is Then, it quantity. show plex and intensity joint the over found diffracted the recently of the phases [3]. to of beam determination supplementary the a to is solution It achieved. in napiaiiyi losgeti h atsection. last addi- the in In suggest Sec.IV. also - is Sec.II applicability in an drawn tion, conclusions three the enhl,a sfleape esget htwhen that are it. suggests sources to we illuminating counterpart example, the useful measurable a a as providing Meanwhile, by object of itself. has for concept speak defined present the before reasons not fields ob- these the the For by through/refleted of jects. transmitted knowledge have it phase after the and obtain to able sgvnb i..W ei ygigoe h mutual the over going by as begin defined We [5] discussion function following Fig.1. coherence the by to given relating straightfor- is are notation OCR The for ward. discussions the although OCT, h ae sognzda olw.I e.I,w go we II, Sec. In follows. as organized is paper The nti etr ejsiyteoiia pia concept optical original the justify we letter, this In o ipiiy eol ics h beti em of terms in object the discuss only we simplicity, For I ON NEST SAMEASURABLE A IS INTENSITY JOINT II. automatically ∗ e pwt h utaino ih fields. light of fluctuation the with up hes iyi upeetr oterecently the to supplementary a is lity dbeam. ed ape h plcblt ooti the obtain to applicability the xample, d neprmna esblt ospeak to feasibility experimental an ide Γ( ntosi ugse.Ti okhit work This suggested. is inations pr,adtu ogv satisfactory a give to thus and rpart, stefis iet aut nobject an valuate to time first the is ρ 1 stecreainfnto rather function correlation the es ω , ρ fe ht h ffcsta nobject an that effects the that, After . 2 τ , rvdda plcbeevrnetto environment applicable an provided ,P .China R. P. 6, ) h ≡ QUANTITY tation, V ∗ ( ρ partially 1 t , ) A V ( ( ρ ρ ω , 2 object t , oeet h ac- the coherent, ) e + jθ ( τ ρ ) ycombing by ,ω i . ) a be can (1) 2

P( ) slowly comparing to cosine that they can be seen as con-

R

P ( ) 1 1 1 stance in the terms of

P ( ) R

m m 2 (k) (k) O I (ρ)= I , (k =1, 2) . (7)

P ( ) On substituting Eqs. 6, 7 From Eq. 4, one sees the

2 2 observed pattern in in in screen Σ2 has a sinusoidal profile in the form of 2√I(1)I(2) FIG. 1. A schemed setup based on Youngs interference ex- I (ρ)= I(1) + I(2) 1+ (1) (2) periment. The position of point P is specified by a vector ρ. ( I + I I (ρ1) I (ρ2) h i In the setup an optical beam is incident on an opaque planar 2πD  p screen Σ1 with P1 and P2 opened. The diffraction pattern is J (ρ1, ρ2) cos κ + ρ . × | | λd observed in screen Σ2. The contrast degree of the pattern is   γ, and the position of the pattern’s maxima is at point Pm (8) specified by ρm. Eq. 8 shows that the contrast γ of the observed pattern is: In which V (ρ,t) is known as the complex analytic func- 2√I(1)I(2) γ = J (ρ1, ρ2) , (9) (1) (2) tion [6] (also in Ref. [8] page 92) representing a fluctu- I + I I (ρ1) I (ρ2) | | ating field at a point P specified by a vector ρ at time t, the asterisk is a complex conjugate operator, and the as defined by  p angular brackets denote the ensemble average. Its case Imax(ρ) Imin(ρ) for τ = 0, γ − . (10) ≡ Imax(ρ)+ Imin(ρ)

J(ρ1, ρ2) Γ(ρ1, ρ2, 0), (2) Eq. 10 also provides an experimental way to obtain the ≡ contrast of the diffracted patterns. This fact combined is being called joint intensity between P1 and P2. When with Eq. 9 tells one that the modules J (ρ1, ρ2) is ob- (k) | | ρ1 = ρ2 = ρ, the expression tainable because γ, I , I (ρk) , (k =1, 2) in Eq. 9 can all be determined by the experiment. Besides, from Eq. 8 I(ρ) J(ρ, ρ), (3) one can see that the argument of J (ρ1, ρ2), namely κ, ≡ can also be determined by observing the pattern’s max- defines a quantity which was directly measurable, for- ima position Pm in a way of mally named as the intensity at a position of P . After a lengthy but straightforward calculation, the diffraction 2πD κ = ρm, (11) patterns I(ρ) in in screen Σ2, can be carried out as [7]: − λd

where ρm stands for the position of the pattern’s maxima (1) (2) I (ρ)= I (ρ)+ I (ρ) position Pm .In a word, from Eqs. 9 - 11 one can say that h i the joint intensity (Eq.2) is a measurable quantity since 2 I(1) (ρ) I(2) (ρ) all terms in the right side of equation, 1+ (4) (1) (2) × ( I (ρ)+pI (ρ) I (ρ1) I (ρ2) (1) (2) I + I I (ρ1) I (ρ2) jκ J (ρ1, ρ2)= γ e , (12) J (ρ1, ρ2) cos [κ + δ (ρ)] p (1) (2) × |  | }  2√IpI In which are obtainable. This is the first conclusion for latter ref- erence. Although a special case when I(1) = I(2) and κ = arg J (ρ1, ρ2) (5) I (ρ1) = I (ρ2) had discussed to the measurability for the mutual coherence function in Ref. [5], a more gen- is the argument of J (ρ1, ρ2), δ (ρ) = eral case in form of Eq. 12 is still needed for the later 2π λ¯ ( ρ ρ2 ρ ρ1 ) is the phase difference at discussions. P resulted| − | from − | the− difference| of optical distances form P to P2 and P to P1. The latter can be simplified as III. CROSS-SPECTRAL DENSITY FUNCTION 2πD AND ITS RELATION TO THE JOINT δ (ρ)= ρ (6) λd¯ INTENSITY ¯ under the paraxial approximation, and where λ is the Suppose the field is statistically stationary, at least in central wavelength for the light filed under the narrow the wide sense, the Fourier transform of Eq. 1 (k) band assumption. In Eq. 4, I (ρ)(k = 1, 2), are in- ∞ P k , 1 jωτ tensity distributions on Σ2 when only k( = 1 2) was W (ρ1, ρ2,ω) Γ(ρ1, ρ2, τ)e dτ (13) λd¯ (k) ≡ √2π −∞ opened. On the scale of D , I (ρ)(k = 1, 2) varied so Z 3 is known as the cross-spectral density function [6, 8]. It one can derive joint intensity of Eq. 21 out to be can be expressed [14–16] in the coherent-mood represen- (ω) tation [17](also see Ref. [8], page 214, and Ref. [18].): J (ρ1, ρ2)= λnϕn(ρ1,ω)ϕn(ρ2,ω). (23) n ∗ X W (ρ1, ρ2,ω)= λn(ω)ϕ (ρ1,ω)ϕn(ρ2,ω); (14) n Comparing Eq. 23 with Eq. 14 one may get n X (ω) in which λn(ω) > 0 may be shown to be the eigenvalues J (ρ1, ρ2)= W (ρ1, ρ2,ω). (24) and and ϕ(ρ,ω) the eigenfunctions of the homogeneous Fredholm integral equation: To this end we are able to give a physical meaning to Eq. 13. That is the cross-spectral density function 3 W (ρ1, ρ2,ω) is the joint intensity (Eq. 2) when an opti- W (ρ1, ρ2,ω)ϕn(ρ1,ω)d ρ1 = λn(ω)ϕn(ρ2,ω), D cal fields was being filtered at the central frequency of ω. Z (15) This is the second conclusion of this paper [12]. Similar to Eq. 3, the equal position case of Eq. 24, Where D is the domain containing all pairs of P1 and P2. Its eigenfunctions may be taken to form an orthonormal I(ρ,ω)= J (ω)(ρ, ρ) (25) set as defines the intensity at point P after the light was thus ∗ 3 filtered. ϕm(ρ,ω)ϕn(ρ,ω)d ρ = δmn, (16) ZD δmn being the Kronnecker symbol (δmn = 1 when m = n, IV. THE MODULATION TO THE δmn = 0 when m = n.). CROSS-SPECTRAL DENSITY FUNCTION BY 6 Let us consider a situation for a beam which has passed AN OBJECT through a narrow filter with central frequency of ω, then the fluctuating fields at the point of P may be seen as a In free space, the mutual coherence function (Eq.1) sat- random process among an ensemble of U(ρ,ω) [8], in { } isfies the wave equations [19] (also known as Wolf equa- which U(ρ,ω) is a frequency dependent sample function. tion [20]), Let U(ρ,ω) to be a monochromatic realization [9] of the ensemble, and the fields at the point of P1 and P2 can be 1 ∂2Γ 2Γ =0, j =1, 2; (26) constructed as ∇j − c2 ∂τ 2

U (ρ1,ω)= am (ω) ϕm (ρ1,ω), (17) 2 where j is the Laplacian operator with respect to ρj . m ∇ X By substitute the inverse form of Eq. 13, and ∞ 1 −jωτ Γ(ρ1, ρ2, τ)= W (ρ1, ρ2,ω)e dω, (27) √2π −∞ U (ρ2,ω)= an (ω) ϕn (ρ2,ω); (18) Z n X into Eq. 26, one obtains due to the orthonormal properties of ϕm,n(ρ,ω). The 2 2 a ω j W (ρ1, ρ2,ω)+ k W (ρ1, ρ2,ω)=0. (28) m,n( ) are random coefficients satisfied ∇ ∗ am(ω)an(ω) = αnδmn. (19) On substituting Eq.14 from Eq.28 with respect to j = 2, h i multiplying the resulted equation by ϕm(ρ2,ω), integrat- Now considering the joint intensity: ing its both sides with respect to the variable ρ2 over the

(ω) ∗ domain D, and using the orthonormality relation Eq.16, J (ρ1, ρ2) U (ρ1,ω)U(ρ2,ω) (20) ≡ h i one obtains (superscript notes the beam has passed through a narrow 2 2 ϕn(ρ1,ω)+ k ϕn(ρ1,ω)=0. (29) filter with central frequency of ω ). By referring to Eqs. ∇ 1 and 2 and Eqs. 17 and 18, one has Now we can see that time-independent function (ω) ∗ ϕn(ρ1,ω) is a monochromatic electromagnetic wave J (ρ1, ρ2)= [ am(ω)ϕm(ρ1,ω)] h m which had been traditionally used to define the concept [ an(ω)ϕn(Pρ2,ω)] (21) of complex objects because it obeys Helmholtz equation × n i ∗ (Eq. 29). Now, attaching an object at P1 and applying =P am(ω)an(ω) ϕm(ρ1,ω)ϕn(ρ2,ω). the traditional concept, Eq.17 changes into m n h i

P P ′ jθ(ρ1,ω) On substituting Eq. 19 from Eq.21 and by letting U (ρ1,ω)= am(ω)[A(ρ1,ω)e ϕm(ρ1,ω)]. m · X αn = λn, (22) (30) p 4

On substituting Eq.30 from Eq.20 for U(ρ1,ω) and by and going over the deriving procedure from Eq.17 to Eq.24, one can get the cross-spectral density function for this ′ ′(1) (2) situation as W (ρ1, ρ2,ω)= I (ω)+ I (ω) ′ ′ ∗ ′ h i I (ρ1,ω) I (ρ ,ω) ′ ′ (33) W (ρ1, ρ2,ω)= U 1 (ρ1) U2 (ρ2) 2 jκ (ω) (31) γ e . jθ(ρ1,ω) × ′(1) (2) = A (ρ1,ω) e W (ρ1, ρ 2,ω) . p2 I (ω) I (ω) q Eq. 31 states that When placing a complex object imme- diate after point P1, it changes the cross-spectral density In which the superscripts have the same meaning which ′ function of W (ρ1, ρ2,ω) into W (ρ1, ρ2,ω). This is the we have already introduced when describing Eq. 8, ′ third conclusion and it is also the physical significance and the prime “ ” denotes the values after the object of this paper. Here we note again that Eq. 30 is the being placed. By such information, one can obtain ejθ(ρ ,ω) bridge between the gap of the traditional concept and a A(ρ1,ω) 1 from measurable one. ′ W (ρ1, ρ2,ω) A(ρ1,ω)= , (34) W (ρ , ρ ,ω) V. A MEASURABLE COUNTERPART TO THE 1 2

OPTICAL CONCEPT OF THE OBJECT

and Combining the three conclusions drawn in Sec.II -

IV, we can give a counterpart to the optical concept ′ of an object from the perspective of measurable quan- θ(ρ1,ω)= κ (ω) κ (ω) . (35) − tities: One can associate an object to a complex ampli- tude A(ρ,ω)ejθ(ρ,ω), it means when an object is placing at the position of P1 in the Youngs interference exper- In summary, we provide a measurable counterpart to iment setup shown by Fig.1, it modules the measurable the traditional imaginarily defined optical concept for the cross-spectral density function W (ρ1, ρ2,ω) in the way object. Meanwhile the applicability to retrieval the com- of multiplying A(ρ1,ω) times to its amplitude while ap- plex knowledge of the object is suggested. This research plying the phase delay of θ(ρ1,ω) to its argument. hit the thought advanced by Wolf that one measures the Meanwhile, through the above discussion, the applica- correlation function rather than the optical fields them- bility to obtain the complex transmittance is suggested selves [2, 3, 21]. The suggested applicability can be seen by the experimental setup of Fig. 1: Filtering the inci- as a supplementary to the recently found solution to the dent partial coherent light by a narrowband filter with determination of phases of the diffracted beam [3]. central frequency of ω, then according to the first two conclusion of this paper, the cross-spectral density func- ′ tion of W (ρ1, ρ2,ω) and W (ρ1, ρ2,ω), which equals to the joint intensity of Eq. 2 before and after the complex ACKNOWLEDGMENTS object was attached to the point P1, can be measured according to Eq. 12 in a way of:

(1) (2) One of the author (M.Z.) is sincerely grateful to Pro- W (ρ1, ρ2,ω)= I (ω)+ I (ω) fessor Emil Wolf for his helpful advice. The work h i (32) was supported by National Science Foundation of China I (ρ1,ω) I (ρ ,ω) 2 γejκ(ω), (No.51275502, 51205375), and China Postdoctoral Foun- (1) (2) × p2 I (ω) I (ω) dation funded project (No.2012M511416). p

[1] J. W. Goodman, Introduction to Fourier optics, 2 ed. [5] M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics, Sev- (McGraw-Hill Companies, Colorado, 2005). enth(expanded) ed. (Cambridge University Press, New [2] E. Wolf, “Optics in terms of observable quantities,” York, 1999). Nuovo Cimento 12, 884-888 (1954). [6] L. Mandel and E. Wolf, ”Coherence Properties of Optical [3] E. Wolf, “Solution of the Phase Problem in the Theory of Fields,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 37, 231-287 (1965). Structure Determination of Crystals from X-Ray Diffrac- [7] E. Wolf, “A Macroscopic Theory of Interference and tion Experiments,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 075501-075503 Diffraction of Light from Finite Sources. II. Fields with (2009). a Spectral Range of Arbitrary Width,” in Proc. R. Soc. [4] J. W. Goodman, Statistical Optics (John Wiley & Sons, Lond. A, (1955), p. 246. Incorporated, Hoboken, 2000). [8] L. Mandel and E. Wolf, Optical Coherence and Quantum 5

Optics (Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge, [15] E. Wolf, “New theory of partial coherence in the space- Cambridge, 1995). frequency domain. Part I: spectra and cross spectra of [9] U (r,ω) is not a a Fourier component of the fluctuating steady-state sources,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 72, 343-351 field but is the space-dependent part of the statistical en- (1982). − semble V (r,t)= U (r,ω) e jωt of monochromatic re- [16] J. Tervo, T. Set¨al¨a, and A. T. Friberg, “Theory of alizations, all of frequency ω. That is why U (r,ω) can be partially coherent electromagnetic fields in the space- bounded. To appreciate such realizations, one can refer frequency domain,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 21, 2205-2215 to Ref. [10]. Also, in Ref. [11], authors refered to U (r,ω) (2004). as the associated field. [17] L. Mandel and E. Wolf, “Complete coherence in the [10] E. Wolf, Introduction to the Theory of Coherece and space-frequency domain,” Opt. Commu. 36, 247-249 Polariztion of Light (Cambridge University Press, New (1981). York, 2007). [18] R. Martnez-Herrero and P. M. Mejas, ”Expansion of [11] M. Lahiri and E. Wolf, “Implications of complete coher- Coherence Functions of Stationary, Partially Coherent, ence in the space-frequency domain,” Opt. Lett. 36, 2423- Polychromatic Fields,” Optica Acta: International Jour- 2425 (2011). nal of Optics 29, 187-195 (1982). [12] An alternative derivation to this conclussion can be in- [19] E. Wolf, in Selected works of Emil Wolf with commen- ferred form [13], although the authors haven’t state it tary (World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd, Singa- directly. pore, 2001). [13] M. Lahiri and E. Wolf, “Does a light beam of very narrow [20] B. E. A. Saleh, M. C. Teich, and A. V. Sergienko, “Wolf bandwidth always behave as a monochromatic beam?,” Equations for Two-Photon Light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, Physics Letters A 374, 997-1000 (2010). 223601-223604 (2005). [14] E. Wolf, “New spectral representation of random sources [21] E. Wolf, “What kind of phases does one measure in usual and of the partially coherent fields that they generate,” interference experiments?,” Opt. Commu. 284, 4235- Opt. Commu. 38, 3-6 (1981). 4236 (2011).