Codex @codex  0

For $u=8\mathrm{cm}$ and negative focal length $f=-8\mathrm{cm}$,The transverse magnification is $M=-v/u=+1/2$, soThus the virtual image is upright, half the object's height, and $4.0\mathrm{cm}$ from the lens on the object's side. A parallel incident light ray diverges after the lens as though it originated at the near optical focus; the central light ray continues undeviated in the ideal thin lens model. Their backward extensions meet at the image tip, $(-4,1)\mathrm{cm}$.

Take the thin lens at $x=0$, with the object on the left and light rays travelling to the right. The positive object distance is $u=12\mathrm{cm}$ and the focal length is $f=8\mathrm{cm}$. The thin lens equation givesThe transverse magnification and signed image height areThus the real image is $24\mathrm{cm}$ beyond the lens, inverted and $10\mathrm{cm}$ high. For the ray tracing, a light ray parallel to the optical axis emerges through the far optical focus; a light ray through the optical centre continues straight in the ideal thin lens model. They intersect at $(24,-10)\mathrm{cm}$, independently reading off both answers from the diagram.

The calculation and diagram use the ideal paraxial approximation implicit in the thin lens equation. The comparatively large object height does not supply enough information to calculate optical aberrations of a real lens.

Consider an optical point source at $(z,x)=(0,0)$, a uniform transparent medium, and a flat return surface $z=L$. A light ray with slope $s$ reaches $(L,sL)$. A phase-conjugate mirror reverses its full direction and returns it to $(0,0)$. An ordinary mirror reverses only its normal direction; its returning light ray reaches $x=2sL$ at $z=0$. Thus rays with $s=-1/4,0,1/4$ at $L=3$ return to $x=-3/2,0,3/2$ with ordinary specular reflection, but all return to $x=0$ under ideal phase conjugation. These are stipulated geometric coordinates, not laboratory measurements.

Solid blue curves mark outward wavefronts; dashed curves mark returning wavefronts. In the phase-conjugate mirror panel the returning curves coincide with the outward ones, and the arrows reverse on the same light rays. The diagram uses equal spatial scales. In geometrical optics, reversing each light ray in an unchanged medium with wave reciprocity retraces its route. At the optical point source itself, the ray construction becomes singular and diffraction sets the physical focal size.

A wave-level proof outline applies to a stationary scalar medium with real refractive index $n(\mathbf{r})$ and no wave absorption. Writing $c$ for the vacuum speed of light, its Helmholtz equation isAll coefficients are real, so complex conjugation gives the same Helmholtz equation for $U^{\ast }$. The conjugated outgoing boundary data select the incoming solution. This explains the connection between phase conjugation and retracing, provided the required incoming field is supplied over the necessary aperture. It also exposes the limits: wave reciprocity alone does not imply absence of wave absorption; conjugation of complex material coefficients would describe a different medium. Loss, an incomplete aperture, a changing medium or failure of wave reciprocity can prevent exact reconstruction. Intensity-dependent material changes need a separate analysis and are not covered by this linear proof.

Phase conjugation creates a returning monochromatic wave whose spatial complex amplitude is proportional to the complex conjugate of the incident field. Fix the time convention throughout:Here $E$ is one scalar component of the electric field, $A\ge 0$ is the wave amplitude, $\omega >0$ is the angular frequency, and $\gamma$ is a spatially constant complex number setting the return strength and reference wave phase. The complex conjugation acts on $U$, including its spatial carrier, while the time factor remains $e^{-i\omega t}$. Conjugating both factors would merely give another representation of the same real field. With $\gamma =1$, the new real field equals $E(\mathbf{r},-t)$ in this ideal monochromatic wave model; that identity does not assert reversal of an arbitrary pulse or of the apparatus producing it.

The spatial wave phase becomes $-\varphi +\arg \gamma$, so the local wavevector changes from $\nabla \varphi$ to $-\nabla \varphi$. For example, $U=A{e}^{i(k_{x}x+k_{z}z)}$ with $k_z>0$ becomes $\gamma A{e}^{-i(k_{x}x+k_{z}z)}$: both components of the wavevector reverse. In a transparent stationary medium with isotropy and positive refractive index, light rays follow the wavevector, giving counterpropagation. The same wavefronts now have opposite propagation normals. This is why phase conjugation can return a distorted beam toward its origin: it reverses the detailed spatial wave phase, rather than requiring that wave phase to be flat.

The attractive application is correction of optical aberrations accumulated on an outward trip. The return uses the distortion itself as the prescription for correction, as the original thin phase-plate cancellation by phase conjugation example makes explicit. An experimentally accessible implementation measures the spatial wave phase and uses a spatial light modulator to generate its negative; digital optical phase conjugation describes an inspected 2010 demonstration of recovery through multiple scattering.

A point-mass gravitational lens is the ideal gravitational lens obtained by concentrating a positive mass $M$ at one location. Use geometrical optics, the weak-field approximation, small angles in radians, and a stationary lens whose deflecting region is short compared with the observer-lens and lens-source distances. At impact parameter $b$, require $b\gg r_s=2GM/c^2$, the Schwarzschild radius, and a ray passing outside any opaque body. The physical bend has magnitude $\hat{\alpha }=4GM/(c^{2}b)$ from Schwarzschild light deflection; $G$ is the gravitational constant and $c$ the speed of light. Multiple images can occur within this weak-field approximation: strong gravitational lensing does not require a ray to approach a black hole closely.^[ref]

Let $D_l$, $D_s$ and $D_{ls}$ be angular diameter distances from observer to lens, observer to source, and lens to source, respectively. They refer to the background geometry used in the thin gravitational lens equation. In nearby Euclidean geometry, $D_{ls}=D_s-D_l$; in cosmology, do not make that subtraction. The angular source coordinate $\mathbf{\beta }$ is the direction the source would have without this lens; the observed image coordinate is $\mathbf{\theta }$. Both are measured relative to the observer-lens optical axis.^[ref]

For the flat sketch below, extend the observer-side light ray backwards to the source plane. Its transverse position would be $D_s\mathbf{\theta }$, whereas the actual source is at $D_s\mathbf{\beta }$. Their separation is $D_{ls}\hat{\mathbf{\alpha }}$. Here $\hat{\mathbf{\alpha }}$ is defined outward along the lens-plane impact vector, as in the thin gravitational lens equation; the physical ray bends toward the mass. Substituting $\mathbf{b}=D_l\mathbf{\theta }$ givesThe same thin gravitational lens equation uses angular diameter distances in the cosmological setting. The factor $D_{ls}/D_s$ converts the physical bend into the reduced angular deflection; these are different angles.

Deflection changes one light ray's direction; focusing concerns relative directions of neighboring light rays and their bundle's cross section. To see the difference for a point-mass gravitational lens, send parallel incident light rays past the lens. A ray at impact parameter $b$ meets the optical axis approximately $f(b)=b/\hat{\alpha }=c^2{b}^2/(4GM)$ beyond the lens. Doubling $b$ quadruples this crossing distance. Thus the lens does not have a common focal length for all rays, although it can produce lensing magnification and an Einstein ring for a specified source-observer geometry.

The point-mass gravitational lens also illustrates why focusing must not be identified just with positive lensing convergence. Away from the central mass, differentiate the reduced deflection $\mathbf{\alpha }={\theta }_E^2\mathbf{\theta }/r^2$: its two-dimensional divergence is zero, so $\kappa =0$ there. Nevertheless its radial and tangential derivatives differ, giving lensing shear of magnitude ${\theta }_E^2/r^2$ and $\det A=1-{\theta }_E^4/r^4$. A vacuum ray bundle can be distorted and magnified. In the same ideal transparent geometrical optics model, surface brightness is preserved; the larger apparent solid angle supplies the increased received light.

Radiance resolves both position and direction: it is radiant flux per projected area and per solid angle. For a surface element of area $dA$, and a small outgoing cone $d\Omega$ at angle $0\le \theta <\pi /2$ to its outward unit normal,Here $\mathbf{x}$ locates the patch and $\mathbf{s}$ is a unit vector along the outgoing direction. The factor $dA\cos \theta$ is the patch's apparent area viewed along that direction. The same local definition applies to transmitted or received radiation, choosing the positive projected area for the crossing direction. ^[ref].

For a planar patch of area $A$ with spatially uniform, direction-independent radiance $L$, integrating over the patch givesTake $L=10\mathrm{W}{\mathrm{m}}^{-2}\mathrm{s}{\mathrm{r}}^{-1}$ and $A=0.020{\mathrm{m}}^2$. The radiant intensities are $I(0)=0.20\mathrm{W}\mathrm{s}{\mathrm{r}}^{-1}$ and $I(60^{\circ })=0.10\mathrm{W}\mathrm{s}{\mathrm{r}}^{-1}$. A sufficiently narrow $0.010\mathrm{sr}$ cone therefore carries approximately $2.0\mathrm{mW}$ or $1.0\mathrm{mW}$, respectively. Both views have the same radiance $L$: the oblique view presents half the projected area. This is Lambert's cosine law, not a loss of radiance with viewing angle.

Radiance is useful because it separates a source's local directional output from the geometry of an observation. Integrating over outgoing directions gives radiant exitance; integrating incoming radiance at a receiver gives irradiance. In the stationary vacuum setting of vacuum conservation of specific intensity, a resolved uniform source retains its radiance along each light ray, while the radiant flux received from the whole source can decrease as its apparent solid angle shrinks.

The geometrical optics account of an optical trap adds the momentum flux changes of refracted and reflected light rays. It applies when the bead is large compared with the surrounding medium's wavelength. When the bead is much smaller, an induced electric dipole gives a different approximation. For a homogeneous dielectric sphere of radius $a$, define $\mathbf{p}(t)=\mathrm{Re}[\alpha {\mathbf{E}}_0{e}^{-i\omega t}]$, with ${\mathbf{E}}_0$ the peak complex electric field and $\alpha$ its SI polarizability. In a transparent, nonmagnetic, nondispersive host,where $n_p,n_m$ are particle and host refractive indices, $I$ is cycle-averaged light intensity, ${ϵ}_0$ is the vacuum permittivity and $c$ is the speed of light. The quasistatic electric dipole approximation requires $2\pi n_{m}a/{\lambda }_0\ll 1$, with ${\lambda }_0$ the vacuum wavelength, and a field nearly uniform across the bead.

For real quasistatic $\alpha$, building an induced electric dipole gives instantaneous potential energy $-\alpha E^2/2$. Averaging over one optical cycle givesThus $n_p>n_m$ gives positive polarizability and attraction toward larger light intensity; $n_p<n_m$ reverses this contribution. The factor $1/4$ uses a peak field: substituting a root mean square field without changing that factor would halve the force incorrectly. Dimensionally $\alpha |E_0{|}^2$ is energy, so its gradient is force.

This leading conservative term does not remove the optical scattering force. Even a nonabsorbing induced electric dipole reradiates light: at fixed wavelength and index contrast, its Rayleigh scattering cross-section scales as $a^6$, while $\alpha$ scales as $a^3$. A smaller bead can therefore improve the ratio of gradient to scattering forces while weakening the well relative to $k_{B}T$, where $k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant and $T$ the temperature. Optical force balance and resistance to thermal escape are separate questions. Intermediate bead sizes require a wave-scattering calculation; neither a ray calculation nor this small-dipole expression is uniformly valid there.

A real image lies where the outgoing light rays from each object point actually intersect in geometrical optics. A screen or detector placed at that image plane receives the focused pattern. The screen reveals the real image; it does not create the intersection. A viewer can also see a real image without a screen if their eye receives the diverging light rays beyond the intersection. ^[ref].

For a converging thin lens and real object with $u>f>0$, the real image has $v>0$ and signed transverse magnification $m<0$. Inversion is a property of this particular setup, not the definition of a real image. With $f=10\mathrm{cm}$ and $h_o=0.50\mathrm{cm}$, the following are predictions:

To test both image position and transverse magnification, use an optical bench with an illuminated arrow or millimetre target, a converging optical lens of nominal focal length $10\mathrm{cm}$, a movable white screen and a ruler. Measure corresponding target and image intervals, rather than guessing the whole image size when it exceeds the screen. PASCO's Experiment 12 compares distance-based and size-based magnification; the following procedure uses several object distances, as in the Northern Virginia laboratory. ^[ref]; ^[ref].

Keep the optical lens, illumination and central target detail fixed between trials. Approach best focus from both sides and record the interval over which sharpness is difficult to distinguish; repeat focusing to estimate its reproducibility. A modest central aperture stop tests whether peripheral light rays change the result, but also reduces brightness. Spherical aberration, chromatic aberration and diffraction can broaden the optimum; a thick optical lens also makes the chosen reference plane imperfect. Treat nominal $f$ as an initial prediction, and report position and interval-reading limits instead of forcing exact agreement. ^[ref].

Moving the object toward the front optical focus from outside makes the real image larger and farther away. A failed screen search near $u=f$ can therefore mean that the real image is beyond the bench, rather than that a virtual image has formed. At exactly $u=f$, the outgoing bundle from each point is parallel and no finite screen position focuses it.

Refraction changes the direction of a transmitted wave when it crosses between media with different phase velocities. For light at a planar interface, Snell's law relates the angles measured from the normal vector through the refractive indices. At normal incidence the direction remains unchanged even though the wavelength and phase velocity can change. The worked example under geometrical optics distinguishes transmission from total internal reflection.

For light, refraction explains why a submerged object looks nearer the surface and why an optical lens can form an image. A wavefront crossing a boundary must retain a consistent wave phase along that boundary: its normal spacing changes with phase velocity, and oblique light rays change direction. Normal incidence separates these two effects especially clearly.

Take stationary, transparent, homogeneous media with isotropy, linearity of their optical response, and real positive refractive indices, at one chosen frequency $f$. With $c$ the vacuum speed of light and ${\lambda }_0=c/f$ the vacuum wavelength, medium $j$ hasThe frequency is unchanged at a stationary boundary; the phase velocity, wavelength and wavenumber can change. Here $n_j$ is a phase refractive index, not the group refractive index. If there is optical dispersion, evaluate $n_j$ at this same frequency on both sides.^[ref]

For an original idealized air–water example, stipulate $n_{\mathrm{a}}=1$ and $n_{\mathrm{w}}=4/3$, with vacuum wavelength $600\mathrm{nm}$. Then $f=c/(600\mathrm{nm})\approx 4.99654\times 10^{14}\mathrm{Hz}$, the water phase velocity is $3c/4$, and its wavelength is $450\mathrm{nm}$. At an air angle of incidence $30^{\circ }$, Snell's law gives a water angle of refraction $\arcsin (3/8)\approx 22.0243^{\circ }$. These stipulated values illustrate the relations; actual refractive indices depend on material conditions and frequency. By reversibility of an optical ray, the same path emerging from water has outgoing air angle $30^{\circ }$.

The refractive index compares the phase velocity of light in a medium with the vacuum speed of light $c$. For a transparent, uniform medium with isotropy and a positive-index propagation branch,Here $\omega >0$ is the angular frequency, $k>0$ is the wavenumber, and $v_{\mathrm{ph}}=\omega /k$ is the speed of a surface of constant wave phase. The refractive index is a dimensionless quantity; it is a property of a specified material response at a specified frequency, rather than a universal number attached to the word “glass”. More general absorbing or negative-index media require the conventions discussed in refractive index and electromagnetic response. ^[ref]

For an original model example, choose $n=3/2$ at vacuum wavelength ${\lambda }_0=600\mathrm{nm}$. The phase velocity is $v_{\mathrm{ph}}=2c/3\simeq 1.999\times 10^{8}m/s$, the frequency is $f=c/{\lambda }_0\simeq 4.997\times 10^{14}\mathrm{Hz}$, and the medium wavelength is $400\mathrm{nm}$. These are stipulated model values, not measured properties of glass or water. A value at this single frequency does not determine a pulse's group velocity.

The usefulness of refractive index is that one measured response connects several different observations: Snell's law predicts refraction, optical path length predicts accumulated wave phase, and changes with frequency describe optical dispersion. Even at normal incidence, where a light ray does not bend, a changed refractive index changes wavelength and wave phase. The following comparison isolates that effect; the oblique geometry is developed in wavefront.

Schlieren photography makes spatial changes of refractive index visible by converting deflections of light rays into contrast at an optical camera. In a gas, mass density variations can produce these deflections through refraction. A knife edge in the focused beam is a common implementation.

Consider an original, explicitly normalized model of primary coma, rather than a prescription for a particular optical lens. Let $(u,v)$ be Cartesian coordinates in a circular optical pupil divided by its radius $a$, with $u^2+v^2\le 1$. Let $h=\alpha /{\alpha }_0$ be a signed small field angle divided by an arbitrary positive reference angle. With polar coordinates $u=\rho \cos \theta$, $v=\rho \sin \theta$, prescribe the wavefront errorHere $W_0$ is an arbitrary positive optical path difference scale, not a measured error. The cubic optical pupil dependence and linear field dependence are the classical Seidel form.^[ref]

In the paraxial approximation, light ray direction errors follow the transverse gradient of wavefront error. For a reference sphere a distance $L$ from the exit optical pupil in a uniform image medium of refractive index $n$, the corresponding image-error scale is $s=L{W}_0/(na)$. Choose image-error coordinate signs so the normalized displacement is $\nabla w$; reversing the convention reverses the plotted orientation. Image coordinates below are errors relative to the ideal image of this particular object point, rather than positions of different objects:The partial derivatives explain the asymmetry: opposite optical pupil points $(u,v)$ and $(-u,-v)$ land together, rather than on opposite sides of the ideal image. For $h>0$, every $X$ is nonnegative, while $Y$ can have either sign. The figures stipulate this single wavefront error, omit other optical aberrations and diffraction, and assign no instrument dimensions.

For a ring of fixed optical pupil radius $\rho$, the double-angle formulas for trigonometric functions giveThus each ring maps into a circle of radius $|h|{\rho }^2$ whose centre is displaced by $2h{\rho }^2$. Doubling $\rho$ quadruples both sizes; for $h=1$, the edge ring has centre $(2,0)$ and radius $1$, while the half-radius ring has centre $(1/2,0)$ and radius $1/4$. Superposing these displaced circles produces the comet-like envelope.

For uniform irradiance over the circular optical pupil, equal area samples give an equal-weight geometrical image. Its centroid is $(h,0)$ because $⟨u^2⟩=⟨v^2⟩=1/4$ and $⟨uv⟩=0$. Moving the coordinate origin to that centroid translates the image; it does not remove its asymmetric shape. Adding a linear term to $w$ likewise translates all light rays equally. These origin choices must be distinguished from changing the optical aberration itself.

The model's full transverse extent is $3|h|$ along $X$ and $2|h|$ along $Y$. Halving the field angle halves the blur, and reversing it reverses the pattern about the ideal image. This isolates why coma matters for an optical camera's usable field of view: collecting more light does not ensure that off-axis points remain compact. Near diffraction-limited resolution, a physical optics calculation of the point spread function is needed instead of interpreting the geometrical tip as an infinitely sharp image.^[ref]

At a smooth mirror with unit normal vector $n$, an incoming unit direction $i$ has outgoing direction $i-2(i\cdot n)n$. Thus the incident and reflected rays make equal angles with the normal.

More precisely, specular reflection redirects each incident light ray into the direction prescribed by the law of reflection, rather than spreading it over many outgoing directions. The incident light ray, reflected light ray, and local normal vector lie in one plane. The surface must be sufficiently smooth on the scale of the wavelength for this model to describe its reflected beam; a visibly flat surface can still scatter light if its microscopic roughness is appreciable. ^[ref].

The displayed formula uses unit vectors $\mathbf{i},\mathbf{n},\mathbf{r}$ and the dot product. It preserves the component parallel to the mirror and reverses the normal component. For a mirror along $y=0$, take $\mathbf{n}=(0,1)$ and $\mathbf{i}=(3/5,-4/5)$. Then $\mathbf{i}\cdot \mathbf{n}=-4/5$ and $\mathbf{r}=(3/5,4/5)$: both directions have vector norm one, and both make an angle $\arccos (4/5)\approx 36.87^{\circ }$ with the relevant normal direction. Replacing $\mathbf{n}$ by $-\mathbf{n}$ leaves the result unchanged.

This same local rule explains a flat mirror's virtual image. For a source at $(0,a)$ above $y=0$, backward extensions of reflected light rays intersect at $(0,-a)$. The light remains above the mirror; its apparent origin lies below it. A curved mirror changes its normal vector from point to point and can instead make reflected light rays converge. The geometry of image formation therefore starts with one simple direction rule. ^[ref].

// Target: optics.bigb

For a light ray in a spherically stratified refractive index $n(r)$, $p=n(r)r\sin \psi$ is constant, where $\psi$ is the angle to the radius. Approximate the medium by concentric homogeneous shells. Straight propagation within each shell conserves $r\sin \psi$, the line's distance from the centre; Snell's law at each shell boundary conserves $nr\sin \psi$. Passing to the smooth limit proves the result. In an exterior region with $n=1$, $p$ is the distance of the asymptotic straight light ray from the centre. Consequently a surface-tangent light ray at radius $R$ and refractive index $n_s$ has vacuum asymptote at altitude $(n_s-1)R$, provided the light ray reaches the exterior without trapping.

A thin lens models an optical lens by collapsing its refracting surfaces into one plane, neglecting thickness relative to the relevant radius of curvature values and object and image distances. Here use an ideal converging thin lens in air and the paraxial approximation: light rays make small angles with the optical axis, so Snell's law can be linearized using the small-angle approximation. Equal surrounding refractive indices on both sides give the familiar symmetric equation.^[ref]

Put the thin lens at $x=0$, with incident light travelling to the right. An object at $x=-u$ has $u>0$. The image coordinate is $x=v$: $v>0$ for a real image and $v<0$ for a virtual image. The converging thin lens has focal length $f>0$, and heights $h_o,h_i$ are signed relative to the optical axis. The thin lens equation and transverse magnification areThe expression for $v$ requires $u\ne f$. Negative transverse magnification means inverted; positive transverse magnification means upright. Remember that the positive distance $u$ differs in sign from the object's coordinate $-u$. ^[ref].

For focal length $f=1\mathrm{m}$, object distance $u=3\mathrm{m}$, and object height $h_o=0.1\mathrm{m}$, calculation givesThe real image is inverted, half as tall, and located $1.5\mathrm{m}$ to the right of the thin lens. A screen at that position receives the image because the outgoing light rays actually meet there.

For the same focal length $f=1\mathrm{m}$ and object height $h_o=0.1\mathrm{m}$, move the object inside the front optical focus, to $u=0.5\mathrm{m}$. ThenThe virtual image is upright, twice as tall, and apparently $1\mathrm{m}$ to the left of the thin lens. Outgoing light rays still travel to the right; only their backward extensions intersect at the virtual image. A screen there cannot collect that image from the outgoing bundle. This geometry explains why a converging optical lens can act as a magnifier when held close to an object. ^[ref].

Both diagrams use two rules for ray tracing. A light ray from the object's tip parallel to the optical axis reaches the thin lens at $(0,h_o)$ and exits along the straight line through the rear optical focus $(f,0)$. Another light ray through the centre $(0,0)$ continues undeviated in the ideal thin lens model. Their intersection, or the intersection of their backward extensions, locates the image tip. ^[ref].

A short geometric proof outline makes the signs transparent. The two outgoing straight lines areFor nonzero $h_o$, equating their heights at $x=v$ gives $1-v/f=-v/u$, hence the thin lens equation; the centre light ray gives $h_i/h_o=-v/u$, hence the transverse magnification. This derives the image equations from the ideal ray tracing rules, whose physical justification comes from Snell's law in the paraxial approximation.

At $u=f$, the two outgoing straight lines are parallel: there is no finite image position. For $u>f$ the real image has $m<0$; for $0<u<f$ the virtual image has $m>0$. These cases let an optical camera designer choose a receiving position and let a user understand a magnifier. An actual optical lens has finite apertures, which cause diffraction and impose diffraction-limited resolution; optical aberrations can further blur the image. The diagrams are ideal geometrical optics, with exact coordinates within that model, rather than exact predictions of Maxwell's equations. ^[ref].

At an equilibrium ${\mathbf{r}}_{\ast }$, the total force vanishes. A small transverse displacement must produce a transverse restoring force; a small axial displacement must also restore the bead. Downstream of a tight focus, the backward optical gradient force can oppose the forward optical scattering force. Equality at one point is insufficient: the total axial force must decrease as the bead moves downstream through that point. The equilibrium can therefore lie downstream of the intensity maximum.

For uncoupled overdamped coordinates, ${\zeta }_i\dot{\delta r_i}=-k_i\delta r_i$ with ${\zeta }_i>0$ decays only when each $k_i>0$. More generally, linearizing gives $\dot{\delta \mathbf{r}}=MJ\delta \mathbf{r}$, where $M$ is the hydrodynamic mobility matrix and $J_{ij}=\partial F_i/\partial r_j$ at equilibrium. All eigenvalues of $MJ$ must have negative real parts for linear asymptotic stability. For a conservative force with symmetric positive-definite mobility, a positive-definite Hessian matrix of the potential energy supplies this condition. A general optical force need not possess a global potential energy.

Increasing numerical aperture admits more strongly converging light rays and a steeper axial variation of the field. But a larger nominal numerical aperture alone does not establish trapping: illumination of the objective pupil, optical aberration, particle properties and the actual in-liquid focus also matter. A harmonic optical trap describes local confinement after this stability question has been answered; it does not predict capture from arbitrary positions or an infinite holding force.

Total internal reflection occurs when a wave travels from higher to lower refractive index above the critical angle for total internal reflection, leaving no propagating transmitted plane electromagnetic wave normal to the interface.

At an infinite planar interface, total internal reflection returns all incident normal power in the reflected plane electromagnetic wave. Assume homogeneous dielectrics with isotropy, linearity, no dielectric loss, magnetic permeability ${\mu }_0$, and positive real refractive indices $n_1>n_2$. Above the critical angle for total internal reflection, both TE polarization and TM polarization have unit optical reflectance despite the external evanescent wave.^[ref]

This makes total internal reflection useful for guiding light in an optical fiber: suitable internal incidence angles keep energy inside successive boundaries. Its more surprising feature is that perfect optical reflectance coexists with an external electric field. The evanescent field in total internal reflection can interact with a nearby object, as the frustrated total internal reflection experiment demonstrates.

For an original idealized example, choose $n_1=1.5$, $n_2=1$ at vacuum wavelength ${\lambda }_0=633\mathrm{nm}$. At angle of incidence $40^{\circ }$, Snell law for electromagnetic waves gives an angle of refraction $\arcsin (1.5\sin 40^{\circ })\approx 74.6186^{\circ }$, so a transmitted light ray still emerges. At ${\theta }_c\approx 41.8103^{\circ }$, its direction becomes tangent to the boundary. At $50^{\circ }$, the proposed sine of a real angle of refraction would be $1.5\sin 50^{\circ }\approx 1.14907>1$: the transmitted wavevector must instead have an imaginary normal component. These are predictions for the stipulated media, not measured properties of a particular block.

A real semicircular-block experiment isolates this threshold. The University of Maryland laboratory instructions place a laser, motor-driven rotation stage and photodetector together; an aperture limits the detector voltage. The semicircular block is centered on the rotation axis, with the photodetector aligned along its flat face. The instructions identify a strong grazing-beam signal and a weaker signal just before the critical angle for total internal reflection. The readout is detector voltage versus stage angle. Retracing the incident laser beam identifies normal incidence for alignment.^[ref]

The semicircular shape supplies a geometric control: a light ray passing radially through the curved face enters at normal incidence, avoiding additional entrance refraction. The weaker signal near the flat face locates a limiting angle of refraction; a vanishing remote-detector signal alone would not establish that the external electric field vanishes. Beam width and alignment limit angular resolution; no measured threshold or decay depth is supplied.^[ref]

Transverse magnification is the ratio of corresponding signed lengths perpendicular to the optical axis. For an ideal image of a small arrow of nonzero height,Use the same upward-positive height convention in both planes. Thus an upright $0.50\mathrm{cm}$ arrow imaged as $-0.25\mathrm{cm}$ has $m=-1/2$: inverted and half as tall. The sign describes orientation; real image versus virtual image describes ray intersections. They are separate properties, even when a particular thin lens setup correlates them.^[ref]

For a thin lens with object coordinate $-u$ and image coordinate $v$, the undeviated centre light ray is the straight line through $(-u,h_o)$ and $(0,0)$, so its height at $x=v$ is $h_i=-h_{o}v/u$. This is the signed similar triangles argument. Combining it with the thin lens equation givesFor $f>0$, $u>2f$ gives $-1<m<0$; $u=2f$ gives $m=-1$; $f<u<2f$ gives $m<-1$; and $0<u<f$ gives $m>1$. At $u=f$, the image is conventionally “at infinity”: the divergent expressions for $v$ and $m$ describe the limiting behaviour, not a finite image of infinite height. Different object points produce parallel bundles in different directions, which is why angular magnification remains meaningful.

The real image experiment tests $m$ in two independent ways: signed ratios of measured corresponding intervals, and $-v/u$ from measured longitudinal distances. As a further prediction, moving from $u=30\mathrm{cm}$ to $u=15\mathrm{cm}$ for $f=10\mathrm{cm}$ swaps $u,v$, changing $m=-1/2$ to $m=-2$. The two image sizes differ by a factor of four, while both images remain inverted. This reversal follows from the symmetric thin lens equation and connects to the Bessel lens displacement method.

For speed $c(y)=1/y$ in $y>0$, Fermat principle gives the elapsed-time integrand $y\sqrt{1+(y^{\prime }{)}^2}$. Its symmetric stationary light rays through $(\pm d,H)$ are the displayed catenaries. Set $t=d/a$. The endpoint equation is $\cosh t/t=H/d$. This function decreases and then increases, with unique minimum where $t\tanh t=1$. Thus above the minimum there are two stationary rays, at the minimum one, and below it none. The travel time on either ray is $T=ad+(a^2/2)\sinh (2d/a)$, and its minimum height is $a$.

For $d=1$ and $H=\cosh 1$, one solution is $a=1$, with $T=1+\sinh 2/2$. A second has $a\simeq 0.7021026952$, with $T\simeq 2.8224491447$. Hence these endpoints do not uniquely specify the ray. Stationarity is distinct from global minimization: paths descending almost to $y=0$ have limiting travel time $H^2$, below either stationary value in this example.