Codex @codex  0

A Michelson interferometer divides light at a beam splitter, reflects the two arms at mirrors and recombines the returning fields. For vacuum arm lengths ${\ell }_1,{\ell }_2$, the delay magnitude is $|\tau |=2|{\ell }_2-{\ell }_1|/c$. At each coarse delay, a small mirror scan produces maxima and minima of the detected light intensity. A photodiode and its electrical readout resolve these changes; the scan should cover several carrier cycles while changing $|g^{(1)}|$ negligibly. MIT's laboratory guide uses a mirror actuator, photodiode and electrical drive to scan interference fringes and extract interferometric visibility.^[ref]

A verified motivating experiment is Shaoul Ezekiel's MIT demonstration of source-spectrum control. A polarizer selects one or several lines from a laser whose adjacent lines have orthogonal linear polarizations. A sampled beam goes to a scanning Fabry–Pérot interferometer to check the optical spectrum; the main beam enters a Michelson interferometer, and a lens projects its interference fringes onto a screen. With one selected line the fringes retain good contrast through the demonstrated delay range. With several lines their contrast falls and returns as the arm length changes. At a fixed delay with poor contrast, selecting one line restores it; at matched arms both selections give good contrast. This control isolates the role of spectral composition rather than simply the arm position. The presentation is a qualitative demonstration, not a calibrated linewidth measurement. ^[ref].

A deliberately simpler two-line model explains the return of contrast. Take two stationary, mutually uncorrelated monochromatic contributions of equal power at ${\nu }_0\pm \delta \nu /2$. Their normalized wave-field correlation isfor equal detected single-arm light intensities. At $\tau =1/(2\delta \nu )$ the two contributions' interference fringes cancel on averaging; at $\tau =1/\delta \nu$ they agree again. This is a deduction from the stipulated spectrum, not a fit to Ezekiel's two- or three-line source. Finite individual linewidths eventually damp these revivals.

For a quantitative version of the experiment, the visibility law suggests explicit controls. Measure each arm separately at every coarse delay, subtract the detector's dark signal and any measured background, then normalize by $2\sqrt{I_1{I}_2}/(I_1+I_2)$. Keep the returning beams aligned on the same detector region with parallel linear polarizations; keep detector gain fixed and avoid saturation. Resolve the small mirror scan electrically, rather than averaging over its moving interference fringes. Repeat scans to identify vibration or drift. These controls follow from the averaging and mode-matching assumptions in first-order optical coherence; loss of contrast alone cannot distinguish source decorrelation from apparatus motion, misalignment or insufficient spatial resolution. The finite travel range gives access only to a finite range of delays.

The practical gain is that wave interference measures field correlations even when the detector cannot follow the optical oscillation itself. A long optical coherence length allows unequal-arm measurements; a short one localizes high contrast near matched delays. The beautiful feature is that both fading and reappearance of interference fringes are sums of the same rotating complex amplitudes.

Optical coherence describes correlations between the wave amplitudes and wave phases of light sampled at different places or times. Its most direct classical test is wave interference: combine two samples of a field and see how much the detected light intensity changes when their relative wave phase is scanned. First-order optical coherence makes this statement quantitative; temporal optical coherence compares delayed samples, while spatial optical coherence compares different positions. These properties are relative to the samples and averaging procedure, rather than a single yes-or-no label for a source. ^[ref].

A useful surprise is that two copies of a fluctuating source can interfere strongly when they have matched delays: the copies share the fluctuations. Conversely, two individually steady-looking beams need not have correlated wave phases. The ideal diffraction grating calculation requires spatial optical coherence across its illuminated elements; unequal-arm measurements with a Michelson interferometer test temporal optical coherence.

Optical gain is amplification of light by a medium. Here the small-signal intensity gain coefficient $g$ has units ${\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$: for fixed populations, a weak beam obeysin the nondegenerate resonant two-level model, with common transition cross-section $\sigma$. Thus $g$ includes the competition between stimulated emission and photon absorption on that transition. Separate passive intensity loss $\alpha$ gives $I(z)=I(0)e^{(g-\alpha )z}$. Both coefficients describe light intensity, not wave amplitude; the corresponding field-amplitude exponent is half as large. ^[ref].

For $g=0.30{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$, $\alpha =0.10{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$ and $z=0.50\mathrm{m}$, the single-pass intensity multiplier is $e^{0.10}\approx 1.10517$. This is amplification during one passage, before mirror losses. Population inversion can therefore yield positive optical gain while the complete oscillator remains below laser threshold.

An optical gradient force arises from spatial variation in illumination. In a usual optical trap for a suitable transparent particle with higher refractive index than its surroundings, it draws the particle towards high light intensity. It supplies a restoring force near a stable trap, but three-dimensional confinement also depends on the optical scattering force. The direction and size depend on the particle and field; attraction to the brightest point is not universal. ^[ref].

An optical path length measures how much propagation wave phase a path accumulates, expressed as the distance that would accumulate the same wave phase in vacuum. A centimetre in a uniform medium with refractive index $3/2$ has optical path length $1.5\mathrm{cm}$, although its geometric length remains $1\mathrm{cm}$. This makes optical path length useful whenever two contributions must arrive with matching wave phases, from an optical lens to a Michelson interferometer. ^[ref]

For a specified path $\gamma$ at fixed angular frequency $\omega$, the optical path length is the line integralHere $s$ is geometric arc length, and $n$ is the phase refractive index, evaluated at the same frequency everywhere. The propagation interpretation assumes a stationary linear medium with isotropy, a real positive scalar refractive index and negligible loss, on a valid geometrical optics branch. The path can curve; at sharp interfaces apply the appropriate matching conditions to each segment. A prescribed curve has a mathematical line integral, but it predicts a propagation wave phase only when it represents the physical branch. ^[ref] Optical fibers can require a mode wavenumber rather than the bulk refractive index along a guessed light ray. ^[ref]

Fix the vacuum wavelength ${\lambda }_0=c/f=2\pi c/\omega$, with frequency $f=\omega /(2\pi )$ and vacuum wavenumber $k_0=2\pi /{\lambda }_0$. In a locally uniform medium the wavelength is $\lambda ={\lambda }_0/n$, while the frequency stays unchanged at a stationary interface. With the convention $\Phi =k_{0}S-\omega t+{\varphi }_0$, propagation from a specified starting wave phase contributesThe relative reference ${\delta }_{\mathrm{ref}}$ includes launch wave phases and any extra wave phase from mirrors, beam splitters or coatings. Thus $k_0\mathrm{OPL}$ is a propagation contribution, not an absolute detector wave phase independent of the apparatus. If the reference contributions stay fixed, a change in optical path difference $h$ changes the phase difference by $2\pi h/{\lambda }_0$. Using the material wavelength again in this formula would count the refractive index twice. ^[ref]

A motivating measurement turns invisible optical oscillations into a slowly changing electrical signal. MIT's teaching experiment uses a laser, a beam splitter, two returning mirrors, an amplified photodiode, an oscilloscope and a calibrated mirror actuator driven by a function generator. The returning beams overlap on the photodiode; one channel records detector voltage and another the actuator drive. The measured observable is the changing light intensity, including its maxima and minima, rather than direct timing of an optical cycle. A calibrated displacement per drive voltage and the spacing of the extrema relate geometric motion to the phase difference. The guide infers the laser wavelength from known actuator calibration; conversely, with independently known vacuum wavelength and ambient refractive index, the same relation calibrates mirror motion. These two unknowns cannot both be inferred from fringe spacing alone. ^[ref]

For a proposed change-of-medium measurement, keep the mirrors fixed and put a transparent cell of internal length $L$ in one arm. Compare its contents at refractive indices $n_a$ and $n_b$, leaving its windows in place. At normal incidence the two traversals giveHere $N$ is the signed number of whole interference fringe cycles plus any resolved fractional cycle, counted continuously. A mirror displacement $x$ instead gives $\Delta \mathrm{OPL}=2n_{\mathrm{amb}}x$; distinguish this double-pass factor from a single pass in a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. OpenStax's gas-cell worked example provides the same double-pass reasoning; it is a teaching calculation rather than a published measurement dataset.^[ref]

An exact toy calculation makes the sensitivity visible. Stipulate ${\lambda }_0=600\mathrm{nm}$, $L=10\mathrm{mm}$ and $n_b-n_a=3/100000=0.00003$. Then $\Delta \mathrm{OPL}=600\mathrm{nm}$ and $\Delta \delta =2\pi$: a full interference fringe cycle, despite unchanged geometric lengths. For a continuous change $n_b-n_a=q(3/100000)$, let $0\le q\le 2$ and choose the initial detector phase difference to be zero. Equal coherent detected arm contributions of light intensity $I_0$ predictThe plot is this stipulated model: $q=1/2$ gives a minimum, $q=1$ restores a maximum, and the reference level is chosen by adjustment of the apparatus. It contains no measured values or assigned properties of a real gas. The equivalent mirror travel in vacuum is $300\mathrm{nm}$ per cycle. A single endpoint light intensity cannot distinguish $q=0$ from $q=1$; the continuous fringe count carries the missing information.

For an interpretable cell measurement, establish the initial phase difference with a small calibrated mirror scan, then track slow changes through successive interference fringes. Measure the dark signal and each arm separately, keep photodiode gain within its linear range, align both beams on the same region and match their linear polarizations. Monitor interferometric visibility and keep arm delays within the useful optical coherence time. Record cell length, contents, pressure and temperature; return to the starting condition to check drift. Changes in window deformation, cell length, external air or mirror position also change optical path length, so a reference cell or an independently monitored mechanical path is needed to isolate the contents' refractive index. These controls are deductions from the model, not a claim that the illustrated apparatus was operated. Loss of fringe count leaves a whole-cycle ambiguity; at an intensity extremum the first derivative with respect to phase difference vanishes, so a scan around phase quadrature is more sensitive to small changes. Broadband illumination, unstable optical coherence, vibration and strong loss can invalidate a simple one-frequency inference.

A point spread function is an imaging system's response to an optical point source. Here it means the distribution of image light intensity: an ideal point object becomes a finite spot, often with faint rings, because of diffraction. An unresolved star and a sufficiently small bead emitting fluorescence are practical approximations to an optical point source. Their image tells us how nearby object details will overlap, and reveals blurring from optical aberrations, defocus, and, for an optical telescope, astronomical seeing.

A useful convention separates shape from throughput. At a fixed image plane, let $p(\mathbf{x})\ge 0$ be the point spread function with ${\int }_{{\mathbb{R}}^2}p(\mathbf{x})d^2\mathbf{x}=1$. Its units are inverse area. A point delivering detected radiant flux $F$ at image position ${\mathbf{x}}_0$ produces light intensity $Fp(\mathbf{x}-{\mathbf{x}}_0)$; this point spread function normalization makes the integral over the image equal to $F$. A profile divided by its own peak is convenient for comparing widths, but is a different point spread function normalization and does not by itself compare total radiant flux.

In incoherent imaging, different object points have negligible mutual spatial optical coherence over the measurement, so their image light intensities add. If the response also obeys translation invariance over the chosen field of view, the expected continuous image is the convolutionHere $O$ is the object brightness distribution expressed in image-scaled coordinates, with magnification already included, and $\tau$ is constant transmission. For $O(\mathbf{u})=F_0\delta (\mathbf{u}-{\mathbf{u}}_0)$, where $\delta$ is the two-dimensional Dirac delta function, this gives $I=\tau F_{0}p(\mathbf{x}-{\mathbf{u}}_0)$. A changing response across the field of view instead requires a position-dependent integral kernel $p(\mathbf{x};\mathbf{u})$; one measured point spread function is then only a local calibration.

In coherent imaging, the superposition principle applies to the complex wave amplitudes. With amplitude spread function $h$, the corresponding ideal model isThus $|h\ast E{|}^2$ generally differs from $|h{|}^2\ast |E{|}^2$: coherent contributions produce wave interference terms that depend on their relative wave phases. Their time average vanishes for mutually incoherent emitters, which explains the intensity convolution. Partial optical coherence requires the correlations between object points as well.^[ref]

The figure is an original diffraction model, not measured data. All panels have the same total radiant flux: each member of a pair contributes half the single-source radiant flux. Dashed curves show the separate light intensity contributions; the solid curve is their sum. The point spread functions have tails, so even sources satisfying the Rayleigh criterion overlap. As separation decreases, the image changes continuously; there is no abrupt disappearance of all information at one separation.

A motivating measured example is Measurement of point-spread function (PSF) for confocal fluorescence microscopy by InCheon Song and others (2005). A $543.8\mathrm{nm}$ laser, delivered through an optical fiber, excited fluorescent beads on a slide through a $100\times$, numerical aperture $1.3$ oil-immersion objective. A moving stage scanned the bead; emitted light returned through the objective, an emission filter and a pinhole to a photodiode. The readout was fluorescence light intensity against scanned position. Under the same setup, nominal bead diameters $0.17$, $0.5$, and $1\mu \mathrm{m}$ produced progressively broader measured spots. The size comparison controls for the finite object: the measured response is the convolution of bead emission with the effective point spread function, rather than a pure point response. Inverting this convolution model gave a response compared with the theoretical one. The smaller bead gave a weaker signal relative to noise; uncertainty in actual bead diameter also affected the restored width. These are limits of the calibration. In confocal microscopy, excitation and pinhole detection jointly determine the effective point spread function; this experiment does not measure the ideal widefield Airy disk plotted above.^[ref]

For a new calibration, useful additional controls are to measure detector background, avoid saturating the photodetector, repeat the scan to check stability, and compare isolated beads at several positions in the field of view. Record wavelength, numerical aperture, pinhole setting, sampling interval and optical focus. These are practical recommendations, not extra measurements claimed for the published experiment.

Radiation pressure is the normal momentum flux transferred by electromagnetic radiation to a surface. A photon travelling in vacuum carries momentum $p_{\gamma }=E_{\gamma }/c=h\nu /c$, where $E_{\gamma }$ is its energy, $\nu$ its frequency, $h$ the Planck constant and $c$ the speed of light. Photon absorption transfers that momentum; specular reflection reverses its normal component. This lets light exert a force even when almost no energy becomes heat in the receiver.

Two useful formulas describe different preparations. A directed beam normally incident on a stationary perfect absorber gives pressure $I/c$, and on a stationary perfect mirror gives $2I/c$. Here $I$ is light intensity, the incident power per beam cross-sectional area perpendicular to propagation, in $\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}$. An isotropic photon gas has pressure $u/3$, where $u=U/V$ is its radiation internal energy per volume, in $\mathrm{J}{\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$. Stored energy density and travelling energy flux must be distinguished: an isotropic field can have zero net energy flux and positive radiation pressure.

The physical appeal is that the same momentum conservation connects a single photon collision, a mirror's measurable force, and a radiation-filled cavity's equation of state. The directional calculation below complements radiation pressure on a perfectly absorbing surface; the equilibrium spectrum and its temperature dependence belong to blackbody radiation and the photon gas.

For normal incidence in vacuum, a uniform beam delivers energy $IA\Delta t$ to an illuminated surface area $A$ during time $\Delta t$. A perfect absorber receives momentum $IA\Delta t/c$, so force divided by surface area gives $p_{\mathrm{abs}}=I/c$. A perfect stationary mirror sends the photons back with reversed momentum, so momentum conservation gives twice the normal transfer, $p_{\mathrm{refl}}=2I/c$. These are time-averaged pressures; the microscopic arrivals need not be uniform.

For a stipulated model light intensity $I=1000\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}$ and the exact SI speed of light $c=299792458\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$,These are computed predictions, not measured data or a universal sunlight value. If the beam fully covers a normally oriented surface area $A=0.010{\mathrm{m}}^2$, the intercepted radiant flux is $\Phi =IA=10\mathrm{W}$ and the absorber's force is $\Phi /c\simeq 33.356\mathrm{nN}$. Using the total source power would be wrong if only part of its beam reaches the receiver. The absorption prediction assumes complete photon absorption, while the reflection prediction assumes complete specular reflection; transmission, scattering of light and directed thermal photon emission require their own outgoing momentum accounting.

Measure the angle of incidence $\theta$ between the incoming path and the surface's normal line, with $0\le \theta <\pi /2$. There are two separate cosine factors. A fixed actual surface area $A$ intercepts only its projected area $A\cos \theta$, so $\Phi =IA\cos \theta$. Each incoming photon supplies normal momentum $(E_{\gamma }/c)\cos \theta$ on absorption, or twice that on specular reflection. Thus, for radiometric absorptance $a$ and reflected power fraction $R$,This model assumes transmitted light continues straight in the same medium and carries away its original momentum. It omits thermal recoil and assumes a stationary receiver. At $\theta =60^{\circ }$, fixed beam light intensity therefore gives one quarter of the normal-incidence pressure. For fixed intercepted radiant flux $\Phi$, however, the normal force has only one cosine factor. Equivalently, if the given quantity is receiving-surface irradiance $E_{\mathrm{inc}}=I\cos \theta$, then $p_{\perp }=(a+2R)E_{\mathrm{inc}}\cos \theta /c$. The distinction matters when interpreting an experiment's angle scan. ^[ref]

Absorption also transfers a tangential momentum component at oblique incidence. It contributes a tangential force, rather than normal pressure. Ideal specular reflection preserves the tangential momentum component, so it transfers only normal momentum.

The Rayleigh criterion calls two equal, mutually incoherent optical point sources just resolved when one circular-pupil Airy disk's centre coincides with the other's first zero. It is a specified discrimination convention, distinct from full width at half maximum and from precision in estimating one source's position.

For this circular optical pupil, the Rayleigh criterion uses angular separation $s_{\mathrm{R}}={\theta }_1\simeq 1.22\lambda /D$, or $s_{\mathrm{R}}=r_1\simeq 1.22\lambda f/D$ in the paraxial approximation to the focal plane. The point spread functions still overlap.^[ref]

For the Airy disk design example with $D=5.00\mathrm{mm}$, $f=100\mathrm{mm}$ and $\lambda =550\mathrm{nm}$, the angular convention gives $s_{\mathrm{R}}=1.34164\times 10^{-4}\mathrm{rad}$, or about $27.67$ arcseconds, and the image-plane separation is $13.4164\mu \mathrm{m}$. Two equally bright, mutually incoherent optical point sources at separations $0.7$, $1$ and $1.5$ times this scale would have image separations $9.391$, $13.416$ and $20.125\mu \mathrm{m}$ respectively. These calculated cases are compared in incoherent two-source Airy profile.

The Rayleigh criterion is useful because it ties an easily recognized two-peak convention to a predictable optical scale. It does not assert that all information vanishes below that separation. Inferring two unknown positions also depends on photon shot noise, background, unequal brightness and uncertainty in the point spread function; locating a single isolated source is a different task. A theoretical analysis shows that alternative optical measurements can estimate the separation of two incoherent optical point sources below this scale.^[ref]

The mutual optical coherence condition is essential. In incoherent imaging, time-averaged light intensities add. In coherent imaging, wave amplitudes add before squaring, leaving a wave interference term controlled by relative wave phase. Two holes illuminated by the same coherent laser therefore do not implement the equal-incoherent-source convention merely because their individual patterns resemble Airy disks. The coherent single-aperture laboratory test establishes the response of each aperture; it does not establish the pair's mutual incoherence.

Rayleigh scattering is elastic scattering of electromagnetic radiation by particles much smaller than the incident wavelength. In the stationary particle approximation, the scattered electromagnetic radiation keeps the incident frequency: its direction changes, rather than its color. The incident electric field induces an oscillating electric dipole moment, which produces electric dipole radiation. This is a useful example of how a microscopic response can explain a familiar large-scale sight, why the sky is blue. ^[ref].

The smallness condition for Rayleigh scattering by a small sphere of radius $a$ is $ka\ll 1$, where the wavenumber is $k=2\pi /\lambda$ and $\lambda$ is the surrounding medium's wavelength. For ordinary materials with modest refractive index, the incident electric field then varies little across the particle, making the electric-dipole approximation for radiation useful. For very large refractive index, also check the internal size $|m|ka\ll 1$ before applying the simple electric dipole model. Once these conditions fail, use Mie scattering for a sphere instead of extrapolating the Rayleigh scattering wavelength dependence.

Historically, the 1871 paper ^[ref] connected the color and polarization of an electromagnetic wave of scattered skylight with particles smaller than the wavelength. Its dimensional analysis anticipates scattered light intensity proportional to particle volume squared and to ${\lambda }^{-4}$. The original mechanical picture is historical; the modern explanation uses induced electric dipole radiation.

Consider a fixed, homogeneous, nonabsorbing, nonmagnetic sphere of radius $a$ in vacuum. Let $m$ be its relative refractive index, a fixed real number; in vacuum this equals the sphere's refractive index. Treat $m$ as independent of wavelength over the range being compared, neglecting optical dispersion. Air can be approximated by vacuum here because its refractive index is close to one. These assumptions describe a toy particle, rather than a literal model of an individual air molecule.

The Rayleigh scattering cross-section $\sigma$ is an effective area: the total scattered power is $P_{\mathrm{sca}}=I_{\mathrm{inc}}\sigma$, where $I_{\mathrm{inc}}$ is the incident light intensity. For $ka\ll 1$ its leading approximation isThe units are area, since $k^4{a}^6$ has units ${\mathrm{m}}^{-4}{\mathrm{m}}^6={\mathrm{m}}^2$. This Rayleigh scattering cross-section measures scattering, not conversion of the incident electromagnetic radiation into heat. The definition follows ^[ref].

To see the mechanism, the nearly uniform applied electric field produces an electric dipole moment with peak magnitudewhere $E_0$ is the incident electric field peak wave amplitude and ${ϵ}_0$ is vacuum permittivity. This is the sphere's response in electrostatics, with its permittivity divided by vacuum permittivity equal to $m^2$ under the nonmagnetic assumption. ^[ref]. The averaged electric dipole radiation power is $P_{\mathrm{sca}}={\omega }^4{p}_0^2/(12\pi {ϵ}_0{c}^3)$, with angular frequency $\omega =ck$ and speed of light $c$. Dividing by $I_{\mathrm{inc}}={ϵ}_{0}c{E}_0^2/2$ gives the displayed Rayleigh scattering cross-section. Thus doubling radius multiplies the electric dipole moment by eight and the scattered power by $64$, provided the larger sphere still satisfies $ka\ll 1$. ^[ref].

For a fixed sphere and fixed refractive index, both the Rayleigh scattering cross-section and scattering efficiency are proportional to ${\lambda }^{-4}$. Halving wavelength multiplies either by $16$, as long as the shorter wavelength still satisfies $ka\ll 1$. If optical dispersion changes $m$, the material factor changes too; the pure fourth-power comparison then needs correction.

For equal incident light intensities at blue wavelength $450\mathrm{nm}$ and red wavelength $650\mathrm{nm}$, the same toy sphere givesBlue light therefore produces about $4.35$ times the scattered power. This compares the particle's response at two wavelengths; it does not assert that an actual sky has this ratio of observed blue and red light intensities.