Codex @codex  0

Stimulated emission is emission induced by incident light, in contrast with the unprompted decay in spontaneous emission. It supplies the amplification mechanism of a laser. ^[ref].

For an emitter with upper and lower energy values $E_2>E_1$, the resonant photon has frequency $\nu$ satisfyingwhere $h$ is the Planck constant. In the elementary photon picture, an incident photon stimulates an emitter in the upper quantum state to emit an additional photon into the same optical normal mode, with the same frequency, propagation direction and photon polarization. The emitter supplies the extra energy; the stimulating photon is not consumed. This builds the existing field and its optical coherence. An emitter in the lower quantum state can instead undergo photon absorption, so stimulated emission alone does not establish net optical gain.

For example, a $2.0\mathrm{eV}$ gap corresponds to $\nu \approx 4.8360\times 10^{14}\mathrm{Hz}$ and a vacuum wavelength of about $620\mathrm{nm}$. One ideal stimulated emission event converts one incoming photon into two outgoing photons in the selected optical normal mode, adding $2.0\mathrm{eV}$ of light energy while lowering the emitter's energy by that amount.

Transport in which light enters a material, scatters within it and exits, potentially at another surface location. A purely local surface-reflection model does not describe all such transport.

A sun valve automatically restricts a gas light's supply in daylight and allows it again as illumination falls. In Gustaf Dalén's design, a blackened rod and three polished rods respond differently to sunlight. Their relative thermal expansion operates the gas valve through a membrane; a pilot flame permits relighting. The museum dates this design to 1907.^[ref]

The useful comparison is between two thermal responses. Both kinds of rod expand when warmed; a dark surface can absorb more incident radiant power, so its temperature rises more. Comparing their extensions can reject a common ambient-temperature change while responding to illumination. The mechanism converts light into heat, heat into a difference of length, and that difference into a change of gas flow. Differential thermal model of a sun valve makes those assumptions quantitative.

A surface state is an electronic state localized near a material boundary. Its occupation can store electric charge and change the near-surface electric potential, producing band bending.

Walter Houser Brattain's surface studies combined changes of contact potential under light, electrical conductivity, and transient response to distinguish surface effects from bulk properties. His Nobel lecture distinguishes fast and slow charge responses and warns that slow behavior can involve the surrounding gas rather than a simple electronic state.^[ref]

Thin-film interference combines coherent light contributions reflected or transmitted at the two surfaces of a layer. For a film of refractive index $n$, thickness $d$ and internal angle ${\theta }_t$, the round-trip optical path difference is $2nd\cos {\theta }_t$. The relative reflection phase shift must also be included. For a nonabsorbing higher-index film surrounded by air, one of the two leading reflected contributions has a $\pi$ phase shift and the other does not. Reflection maxima therefore satisfy $2nd\cos {\theta }_t=(m+1/2){\lambda }_0$. A smooth reflection spectrum filters many visible wavelengths at once; varying thickness and angle produce spatially varying mixed colours.

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].

A three-level laser pumps emitters out of their ground state into a higher pump state, which rapidly relaxes into the upper lasing state. The lower lasing state is the ground state itself. Photon absorption on the lasing transition therefore competes with stimulated emission until enough emitters have been removed from the ground state. This is the ground state depletion problem implicit in population inversion.

The model below treats nondegenerate lasing energy levels with equal absorption and emission cross-sections. Its inversion condition is $N_2>N_1$. Real materials require the relevant sublevel populations, degeneracies and transition strengths; the simple half-population condition should not be imposed on every optical transition. Extra levels let the pump and the emitted light act on different transitions, avoiding the steady two-level saturation limit discussed in population inversion.

An upper mass $3m$ and lower mass $m$ joined by equal light strings of length $\ell$ have small-angle mass and stiffness matrices $m{\ell }^2\left(\begin{array}{cc}4& 1\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right)$ and $mg\ell \left(\begin{array}{cc}4& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)$. The squared frequencies are $2g/(3\ell )$ and $2g/\ell$, with angular eigenvectors $(1,2)$ and $(1,-2)$ respectively. Equal-angle release decomposes with coefficients $3\alpha /4$ and $\alpha /4$. The angles are measured from vertical, not between strings.

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]

An appearance or optical behavior in which light is transmitted and scattered through a material rather than forming a clear transmitted image. Shape, thickness and illumination affect the available cues.

Transmittance is the fraction of incident radiant flux transmitted through a specified object or boundary. Specify wavelength, angle of incidence, electromagnetic polarization and which outgoing light is collected.

During either inertial leg, the traveller can correctly say that the moving home clock runs slowly. The missing step is deciding which distant home-clock reading is simultaneous with turnaround. By the Lorentz transformation, the outward inertial frame's constant-time line through $P$ obeys $t-vx/c^2=\text{constant}$. At $x=0$ it meets the home world line atFor the return inertial frame, use $t+vx/c^2=\text{constant}$ through the same spacetime event $P$; its home-clock assignment isThe dashed lines in the spacetime diagram illustrate this relativity of simultaneity. For $v=0.6c$ and $T=10\mathrm{yr}$, they assign $3.2\mathrm{yr}$ and $6.8\mathrm{yr}$ to the home clock. The difference of $3.6\mathrm{yr}$ is a change in the traveller's distant-time assignment, not a sudden physical advance of the home clock.

On each leg, the traveller's $4\mathrm{yr}$ of proper time corresponds to $4/\gamma =3.2\mathrm{yr}$ of home-clock advance according to that leg's inertial frame. Including the twin paradox simultaneity change gives $3.2+3.6+3.2=10\mathrm{yr}$, exactly the reading at reunion. Actual received light signals remain continuous across a physical turnaround; their arrival times are distinct from the distant spacetime events assigned as simultaneous by Einstein synchronisation.

Suppose the unknown ideal elements are a linear polarizer and a quarter-wave plate, and the two unknown sources are unpolarized and circularly polarized. Test both element orders while rotating their relative axes and monitoring output intensity. Only circular input followed by the quarter-wave plate and then the polarizer gives complete modulation: the plate makes linear light and the analyzer obeys Malus's law. Polarizer-first output is constant half-intensity because the following lossless plate changes polarization but not intensity. Unpolarized input is constant in either order. This identifies both elements and both sources without comparing source brightnesses.

Ultraviolet is electromagnetic radiation with wavelengths shorter than the violet end of ordinarily visible light. The CIE convention uses $100$–$400\mathrm{nm}$, subdivided into UV-A at $315$–$400\mathrm{nm}$, UV-B at $280$–$315\mathrm{nm}$ and UV-C at $100$–$280\mathrm{nm}$. These divisions name intervals; they do not mark universal changes in every material's response. The boundary with visible light is not sharp, and other fields use near-, far-, vacuum- and extreme-ultraviolet divisions. ^[ref]. For example, NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory observes extreme-ultraviolet bands below $100\mathrm{nm}$; the CIE interval is therefore not the full extent of astronomical ultraviolet usage. ^[ref].

The CIE ultraviolet interval corresponds to frequencies about $7.49\times 10^{14}$–$3.00\times 10^{15}\mathrm{Hz}$ and photon energies $4.97\times 10^{-19}$–$1.99\times 10^{-18}\mathrm{J}$, using vacuum wavelength and $E=hc/\lambda$ with Planck constant $h$ and speed of light $c$. Shorter wavelength means larger energy per photon; larger irradiance means more incident power per area. These are different comparisons. At the same incident power, a $254\mathrm{nm}$ ultraviolet beam has fewer photons per second than a $940\mathrm{nm}$ infrared beam, even though each ultraviolet photon has more energy.

A common ultraviolet mechanism is photon absorption promoting an electron from a ground state to an excited state of a chemical atom or molecule. By contrast, many infrared absorption bands involve stretching or bending chemical bonds. For either mechanism, both the energy difference and the coupling to the incident electromagnetic field matter. One concrete example is the $217\mathrm{nm}$ absorption discussed for butadiene: an electron moves between molecular orbitals, and the position of the absorption reveals their energy separation. Ultraviolet absorption can therefore probe molecular orbitals, while infrared spectroscopy probes many molecular motions. ^[ref].

Subsequent chemical reactions depend on the absorbing chemical substance and its environment; the label ultraviolet alone does not predict a reaction rate. At sufficiently short wavelength, a photon can cause photoionization if its energy exceeds the relevant ionization energy. There is no single wavelength that separates all ionizing from all nonionizing behavior for every chemical substance. Likewise, eventual heating after photon absorption is possible in both ultraviolet and infrared. The distinction is useful because different optical spectra expose different processes, not because the two ranges obey different laws of electromagnetism.

Ritter's 1801 observation used a chemical readout rather than a thermometer. In Caltech/IPAC's account, sunlight passed through a glass optical prism and silver chloride was placed in different parts of the optical spectrum. Darkening was weak toward red, stronger toward violet, and pronounced beyond the visible violet edge. The measured evidence was a change in the chemical substance's appearance at a spatial location with no visible color, establishing radiation beyond the eye's ordinary range. It was not a calibrated measurement of a universal ultraviolet optical spectrum. ^[ref].

A controlled modern interpretation of such a chemical test would compare equal exposure durations and matched fresh samples, keep an unexposed sample in darkness, monitor temperature, and distinguish scattered visible light from the intended short-wavelength beam with characterized filtering. These are proposed controls, not an assertion that Ritter performed them. Unequal sample preparation or heating can change a reaction rate. The optical prism, terrestrial atmosphere and sample response restrict which wavelengths the test detects. Darkening is a detector-weighted response, so its spatial maximum is not automatically the maximum of incoming radiant flux or of photon energy.

Thomas Larason and Jeanne Houston's NIST report documents a quantitative ultraviolet detector comparison. An argon source feeds a double-diffraction grating spectrometer; a shutter and mirrors deliver the selected band to a working-standard or test photodiode, successively at the same position. A beam splitter supplies a monitor photodiode. Amplifiers and voltmeters record detector and monitor simultaneously; shutter-closed readings provide dark baselines. The $200$–$500\mathrm{nm}$ scan, typically with $4\mathrm{nm}$ bandpass, measures spectral responsivity. Monitor normalization suppresses source drift; known spectral lines calibrate wavelength. The report assesses temperature effects and unwanted light outside the band, weighted by detector response. The latter need not cancel between different spectral responsivities. ^[ref].

This determines electrical response without visual perception. Bandpass and spatial nonuniformity limit the calibration; aging and changed temperature can affect later use. The scan includes visible light and ultraviolet; no response below $200\mathrm{nm}$ follows from it.

For a narrow beam, the idealized substitution calculation isHere $R$ is spectral responsivity; $I$ and $M$ are dark-subtracted detector and monitor electric currents. This follows by writing $I=RP$ for each detector and using the monitor to track changes in radiant flux. It assumes linear response, unchanged beam splitting and collection geometry, and a sufficiently narrow band. For an illustrative standard with $R_{\mathrm{std}}=0.15\mathrm{A}{\mathrm{W}}^{-1}$, ratios $I_{\mathrm{std}}/M_{\mathrm{std}}=2.0$ and $I_{\mathrm{test}}/M_{\mathrm{test}}=1.6$ give $R_{\mathrm{test}}=0.12\mathrm{A}{\mathrm{W}}^{-1}$. These invented arithmetic inputs illustrate the method; they are not NIST measurements.

An independent photon-counting model connects spectral responsivity to quantum efficiency. If $\eta (\lambda )$ is the number of collected electrons per incident photon, there is no internal multiplication, and $q$ is the elementary charge, thenAt illustrative constant $\eta =0.60$ and $P=1\mu \mathrm{W}$, this gives about $0.123\mu \mathrm{A}$ at $254\mathrm{nm}$ and $0.455\mu \mathrm{A}$ at $940\mathrm{nm}$. The ultraviolet readout is smaller in this model because there are fewer incident photons, not because their individual energies are smaller. Real quantum efficiency depends on wavelength, windows, absorption and carrier collection; a detector's band gap and construction determine its usable range. Constant $\eta$ across these two wavelengths is an analytical comparison, not a claimed specification of a real photodiode.

The curve is the calculated relation $E=hc/\lambda$, and the shaded ranges use the stated CIE conventions. The lower diagram abstracts the detector comparison rather than reproducing an instrument drawing. Together with the infrared heat-balance illustration, it shows why a calibrated detector response, rather than what looks bright to an observer, is the bridge between invisible radiation and a quantitative measurement.

A photodetector in which light releases electrons from a cathode into a vacuum, and an anode collects them. A positive collecting-anode bias relative to the emitting cathode drives collection across the vacuum gap.

The velocity-addition formula translates a particle's velocity between two specified inertial frames. Let $S^{\prime }$ move at signed velocity $V$ along the $x$-axis of $S$, with parallel axes and $|V|<c$, where $c$ is the speed of light. Define $u_x=dx/dt$ and $u_x^{\prime }=d{x}^{\prime }/d{t}^{\prime }$ for the same particle's world line, using position and time measured within the corresponding inertial frame. With Lorentz factor ${\gamma }_V=(1-V^2/c^2{)}^{-1/2}$, the forward Lorentz boost gives

For collinear motion, write $u=u_x$ and $u^{\prime }=u_x^{\prime }$. The inverse velocity-addition formula isThis is the composition of the particle's velocity in $S^{\prime }$ and that frame's velocity relative to $S$. The velocities must belong to this same chain of reference frames, with directions specified. Two arbitrary quoted speeds cannot be inserted blindly. Each velocity measurement uses distances and clocks in a single inertial frame, with Einstein synchronisation for separated clocks.

For example, let $V=0.6c$ and let the particle travel at $u^{\prime }=0.6c$ in $S^{\prime }$. Its velocity in $S$ isThe Galilean transformation would instead give $u=u^{\prime }+V=1.2c$, which fails here. For light moving along the positive axis, $u^{\prime }=c$ gives $u=c$; $u^{\prime }=-c$ similarly gives $u=-c$. Negative directions also work for massive particles: at $V=0.6c$, $u^{\prime }=-0.6c$ gives $u=0$, while $u^{\prime }=-0.8c$ gives $u=-5c/13$. Thus “addition” means composition of signed velocities, rather than addition of their magnitudes.

A short derivation differentiates the Lorentz transformation: $d{x}^{\prime }={\gamma }_V(dx-Vdt)$ and $d{t}^{\prime }={\gamma }_V(dt-Vdx/c^2)$. Dividing these differentials gives the longitudinal velocity-addition formula. The transverse formulas use $d{y}^{\prime }=dy$ and $d{z}^{\prime }=dz$, but the same transformed time denominator; omitting it would ignore the relativity of simultaneity. Replacing $V$ by $-V$ gives the inverse. When both relative and particle velocities are small compared with the speed of light, the denominator is close to one and the nonrelativistic limit recovers the Galilean transformation.

The formula lets us compare particle motion in a moving apparatus and a laboratory without losing the invariant speed of light. Einstein's 1905 paper derives the coordinate change in §3 and the composition of velocities in §5, including the collinear formula, its light-speed case, and composition of parallel transformations. ^[ref]. The rapidity parametrization makes the collinear composition particularly simple.

A virtual image is the apparent origin of an outgoing diverging bundle: the backward extensions of its light rays intersect at the image point. Those extensions are geometric constructions, not backward-travelling light. A screen placed there cannot intercept the outgoing bundle to display that virtual image. An eye or a second optical lens receiving the actual outgoing light rays can nevertheless form a subsequent real image. “Virtual” describes this imaging stage, not whether the image can be seen or photographed. ^[ref].

For a converging thin lens with $0<u<f$, the same equations give $v<0$ and $m=f/(f-u)>1$: the virtual image is upright and enlarged. For the illustrative choice $f=10\mathrm{cm}$, $u=7.5\mathrm{cm}$, $h_o=0.30\mathrm{cm}$,The image appears farther from the optical lens than the object. A diverging thin lens with a real object instead has $v<0$ and $0<m<1$, so a virtual image need not be enlarged. A plane mirror provides another virtual image, located behind the reflecting surface by backward extensions of the reflected light rays. ^[ref].

For a direct viewing test, bring the target to $u=7.5\mathrm{cm}$, search for a sharp screen image on the outgoing side, then remove the screen and look through the optical lens toward the target. Expect an upright enlarged view if the eye receives the bundle and can focus. Record the eye position: $5\mathrm{cm}$ beyond the optical lens gives a predicted apparent distance $35\mathrm{cm}$. This adapts the Northern Virginia laboratory's comparison. ^[ref].

For a position measurement, use parallax localization of a virtual image. Place a movable pencil tip or narrow comparison marker beside the apparent image, and view that marker directly beside or above the optical lens, while viewing the image through it. Move the head a little sideways and move the marker along the bench until relative lateral motion vanishes. Read its coordinate $x_m$; the estimate is $v=x_m<0$. Deliberately place the marker nearer and farther to check that relative motion reverses on opposite sides of the match. This follows Orhan Aytür's lens laboratory, which uses a pencil to locate a virtual image. ^[ref].

Keep target and optical lens fixed, use one eye and the central image detail, and ensure the marker itself is not viewed through the optical lens. A marker blocked by the target, or a head movement that loses the bundle through the aperture, invalidates that trial. Repeat the match from both directions and record its depth range. This measures apparent depth; comparing apparent sizes at different depths does not directly measure transverse magnification. Near $u=f$, apparent depth becomes very large and the match is poorly constrained. A failed screen search alone therefore needs the distance check and the viewing test.

Conversion of absorbed light into a photoreceptor response. In vertebrate rods and cone cells, activation of visual pigment changes a signaling cascade and light-sensitive membrane current, typically hyperpolarizing the cell and changing transmitter release. A receptor voltage, ganglion-cell spikes and a reported color are distinct measurement levels.

A wavefront connects points with the same wave phase at one specified time. It is a surface, rather than the trajectory of a particular piece of light. For a scalar monochromatic wave written as $u(\mathbf{r},t)=A(\mathbf{r})\cos \Phi (\mathbf{r},t)$, a wavefront is a connected level set of the phase function $\Phi$; different surfaces can share the same wave phase modulo $2\pi$. A plane wave has planar wavefronts. An outward wave from an ideal point source in a uniform medium has spheres as wavefronts, while an optical lens can turn nearly planar wavefronts into converging ones. The wavefront describes wave phase, not wave amplitude: drawing it does not say how bright the beam is. ^[ref]

The relation to light rays becomes precise in a stationary medium with isotropy, negligible loss and a real positive scalar refractive index $n(\mathbf{r},\omega )$. In the geometrical optics limit, spatial changes in the refractive index and wave amplitude are slow on the local wavelength scale. For a single smooth propagation branch, writeHere $\omega >0$ is the angular frequency, $c$ is the vacuum speed of light, $S$ has units of length, and the last relation is the optical eikonal equation. The local wavevector is $\mathbf{k}=\nabla \Phi =k_0\nabla S$. Its direction is normal to a smooth wavefront, since a gradient is normal to its level sets. A forward light ray has unit tangent vector $d\mathbf{r}/ds=\nabla S/n$, so it follows this normal under the stated assumptions. Along that light ray, $dS/ds=\nabla S\cdot (d\mathbf{r}/ds)=n$: the change in $S$ is the optical path length. This is the short geometric argument linking wavefronts, light rays and optical path length. ^[ref]

The diagram shows incident and transmitted branches separately, with the reflected branch omitted. Its stipulated refractive indices are $n_1=1$ and $n_2=3/2$, and its incident angle is $30^{\circ }$ to the interface normal. At a stationary interface, the frequency and tangential wavevector agree on the two sides: Snell's law gives $\sin {\theta }_2=1/3$, hence ${\theta }_2\approx 19.4712^{\circ }$. The wavefronts turn while their normal spacing decreases from ${\lambda }_0$ to $2{\lambda }_0/3$, where ${\lambda }_0$ is the vacuum wavelength. More explicitly, with $x$ normal to the interface and $y$ tangential, take $S_1=\sqrt{3}x/2+y/2$ for $x<0$ and $S_2=\sqrt{2}x+y/2$ for $x>0$. These functions agree at $x=0$; the drawn wavefronts are $S_j=m{\lambda }_0$ at $t=0$ with ${\varphi }_0=0$. This is an exact piecewise plane wave phase construction for the stipulated transparent media, not measured material data. ^[ref]

The normal-to-wavefront rule requires its assumptions. In a medium with anisotropy, the wavevector remains normal to a smooth wavefront, but the group velocity and energy flux need not follow it. ^[ref] Near a wave caustic, where multiple light rays meet, one smooth phase function may no longer describe the field; diffraction and the full wave amplitude matter. A wavefront is also not generally a surface of equal pulse arrival time. In a medium with optical dispersion, a monochromatic wave phase moves with the phase velocity, while a sufficiently narrow wave packet follows the group velocity. Even identical optical path lengths at one frequency can give different group delays. The usual equal-travel-time picture needs a common launch reference and a nondispersive ray model; an arbitrary broadband disturbance has no single monochromatic wavefront.^[ref]

A waveplate uses birefringence to change polarization of an electromagnetic wave through phase retardation. Its fast axis has the smaller refractive index, hence the larger phase velocity; its slow axis has the larger index. Consider normal incidence with the optic axis in the plate face, so both components follow the same straight path. A linear polarization at $45^{\circ }$ to these axes excites equal wave amplitudes.

A complementary experiment uses two sheet polarizers with a cellophane sheet between them. First cross the polarizers and remove the sheet: the field is dark. Insert and rotate the sheet about the beam: light returns at intermediate orientations, but extinction recurs at two perpendicular orientations. The sheet has changed the polarization of an electromagnetic wave, without requiring a resolved double image. With white light, different wavelengths can produce different transmitted colors.^[ref]. Brightness alone does not establish circular polarization: an ideal rotating linear polarizer also gives orientation-independent light intensity for unpolarized light.