Codex @codex  0

Amplitude transmittance is the local ratio of transmitted to incident complex amplitude in a thin optical-element model. It includes wave phase as well as attenuation. For identical incident and transmitted media at normal incidence, the corresponding intensity transmittance is $|t{|}^2$; $t$ itself is not the transmitted power fraction. A pure phase screen has $|t|=1$.

For a slowly varying envelope $E=\psi e^{-ikx}$, the paraxial approximation to the Helmholtz equation isBecause $n=1+\mu W$ and ${\mu }^2\ll 1$, passage through a sufficiently thin phase screen producesIts modulus is one at the screen exit. Beyond the screen, $n=1$, so the parabolic wave equation is $E_x=i{E}_{zz}/(2k)$. A Taylor expansion in propagation distance givesSincewe findIt follows thator, equivalently, $|E{|}^2=1-x{\varphi }^{\prime \prime }/k+O(x^2)$. Thus random phase curvature produces local focusing and defocusing: free-space diffraction converts phase fluctuations into amplitude fluctuations immediately after the screen.

The phase screen adds the phase accumulated across its thickness, so the reduced field just after the screen isFor a zero-mean random variable $w$ with a normal distribution and variance ${\sigma }^2$, its characteristic function givesThe same expression is approximately valid for a non-Gaussian weak fluctuation: the cumulant expansion begins with $-k^2{\xi }^2{\sigma }^2/2$, while higher cumulants give higher-order corrections.

For $x>0$, every realization obeys the parabolic wave equationLinearity permits ensemble averaging, soThe initial mean is independent of $z$, hence diffraction does not change it and $⟨E(x,z)⟩=\exp (-k^2{\xi }^2{\sigma }^2/2)$ for every $x\ge 0$.

The polarization generated by the relevant third-order nonlinear optical susceptibility is proportional to $E_1{E}_2{E}_3^{\ast }$. Multiplication of its temporal and spatial wave phase factors givesThe two opposing pump arrows in the original diagram mean ${\mathbf{k}}_2=-{\mathbf{k}}_1$. Thus the mixing source points along $-{\mathbf{k}}_3$, and its conjugate signal amplitude drives a backward field. This is counterpropagating-pump phase matching in four-wave mixing.

There is a phase matching qualification to the initial frequency statement. In the stipulated nondispersive isotropic medium, $|{\mathbf{k}}_j|=n{\omega }_j/c$. Exact equality of the backward free-wave vector to $-{\mathbf{k}}_3$ therefore requires ${\omega }_4={\omega }_3$, hence ${\omega }_3={\omega }_P$. For unequal frequencies the backward direction remains the geometry suggested by the source, but the longitudinal phase mismatch has magnitude $2n|{\omega }_P-{\omega }_3|/c$. Efficient generation over a finite length requires that mismatch times $L$ be small; a sinc function factor suppresses conversion otherwise. Nondispersion does not remove the magnitude mismatch. The remainder of the calculation is explicitly degenerate four-wave mixing, so this difficulty disappears.

At the pump frequency, for the strong field $E_1$, self-phase modulation and cross-phase modulation by $E_2$ dominate the weak signal's influence. They change its propagation wave phase through its own intensity and the other pump's intensity. With continuous uniform plane waves, these are nonlinear wave phase shifts; finite pulses acquire temporal chirp, and finite transverse beams can acquire a lens. No universal factor of two should be assigned between the two shifts without specifying their polarization contraction and the field-amplitude convention.

Write $u={\tilde{A}}_3$ and $v={\tilde{A}}_4$. Differentiating the exponential substitutions cancels the terms proportional to $2\kappa$:Consequently $u^{\prime }=i\kappa v^{\ast }$ and $v^{\prime }=-i\kappa u^{\ast }$. Conjugate the latter before eliminating a field: $(v^{\ast }{)}^{\prime }=i\kappa u$, so $u^{\prime \prime }=-{\kappa }^{2}u$. The backward four-wave-mixing boundary problem requires opposite-end boundary conditions: $u(0)=a$, where $a=A_3(0)$, and $v(L)=0$. The transfer matrix isAt $L$, $0=ia\sin \kappa L+b\cos \kappa L$, so $b=-ia\tan \kappa L$. Substitution givesThe printed target expression for $A_4$ has the opposite overall sign. This is present in the original PDF, not just the transcription. With its stated first-order equations, the derivative at the far face must be $v^{\prime }(L)=-i\kappa a^{\ast }/\cos \kappa L$. The boxed result has that derivative; the printed expression has its negative. Reversing the convention for the mixing coefficient could reverse the generated phase, but would also change the coupled equations. The result above satisfies the equations and both boundary conditions together.

At the entrance, $A_4(0)=i{a}^{\ast }\tan \kappa L$, so the returned amplitude is proportional to the complex conjugate of the signal. An ordinary ideal mirror gives $ra$, with a fixed reflection coefficient $r$, rather than $a^{\ast }$. The mixing pumps supply both the extra energy and a wave phase reference. The ideal conjugate reflectivity and signal transmission areThe constancy of $|u{|}^2+|v{|}^2$ along the medium is another direct check. The relation between the incoming signal and outgoing waves allows net output energy to come from the pumps. As $\kappa L\to \pi /2$, the undepleted-pump approximation fails: the predicted fields would extract an appreciable pump fraction. This is the ideal four-wave-mixing oscillation threshold; saturation, pump depletion and noise seeding replace the divergent linearized solution. It is not an unlimited source of reflected power. Amplified phase-conjugated propagation and parametric oscillation are also the effects identified in the primary analysis by Amnon Yariv and David M. Pepper.^[ref]

For the aberrating linear medium, assume its permittivity is real and stationary at this frequency. Taking the complex conjugate of the forward-envelope equation givesThis is the backward-envelope equation with carrier $e^{-i{k}_{3}z}$. Launching the conjugate boundary field therefore permits retracing of the distorted wave. In a transverse lossless phase screen model, let transmission be $t(x)=e^{i\psi (x)}$. A return proportional to $(tU{)}^{\ast }$ acquires $t$ on its second passage and becomes $t(tU{)}^{\ast }=U^{\ast }$. Thus the aberration phase cancels. A mirror instead gives $r{t}^{2}U$, adding the aberration twice; merely reversing the central propagation direction does not reverse the wavefront phase.

The one-dimensional printed equation describes longitudinal variation; genuine transverse aberrations require the corresponding transverse Helmholtz equation or paraxial operator, for which the same real-coefficient conjugation argument applies. Exact reconstruction requires adequate aperture, the correct conjugate amplitude and polarization, uniform pump-product phase, and an unchanged reciprocal lossless medium. Absorption, missing scattered modes or a changed aberrator prevent a universal reconstruction. This is phase conjugation and thin phase-plate cancellation by phase conjugation under specified conditions, rather than reversal of every possible propagation loss.

For a scalar complex wave amplitude $E$, the squared-amplitude scalar wave intensity convention is $I=E{E}^{\ast }$. It is nonnegative and unchanged by multiplying $E$ by a unit-modulus wave phase factor. This convention is useful in paraxial propagation and phase screen models. Conversion to physical energy flux also depends on the field variable and medium; an arbitrary superposition need not have its full flux determined by this scalar alone. For a random field, $⟨I⟩$ is the mean wave intensity, whereas $|⟨E⟩{|}^2$ is the squared coherent field; these generally differ.

Model a thin transparent plate by a lossless reciprocal phase screen with transmission $t(x)=e^{i\psi (x)}$ at the chosen angular frequency. Both passages multiply the local field by the same $t(x)$: reversing travel does not by itself change the sign of an accumulated optical path length. Assume the plate is stationary, the two passages use corresponding transverse positions, and the plate is adjacent to the return surface or perfectly reimaged onto it. Ignore propagation between these reference surfaces, wave absorption, clipping and intensity-dependent changes. Take the incident boundary envelope to be $U_0(x)=A(x)e^{i{\varphi }_0(x)}$. Outward transmission gives $t{U}_0$. Ideal phase conjugation and the second transmission then giveThis is a complete short proof of cancellation in the specified phase screen model. For an ideal ordinary mirror with constant reflection factor $r$, the corresponding envelope is $rt(x{)}^2{U}_0(x)$: the extra wave phase is $2\psi (x)$, rather than zero. A constant reflection wave phase changes neither conclusion.

For an original toy optical aberration, let $\xi =x/a$ on $-1\le \xi \le 1$, take ${\varphi }_0=0$, and chooseThe even term adds symmetric curvature and the odd term makes the two sides unequal. The outward wave phase is $\psi$; immediately after ideal phase conjugation it is $-\psi$; after the second passage it is zero. At $\xi =-1,0,1$, the outward values are $\pi /4,0,3\pi /4$, while an ordinary mirror's completed return has values $\pi /2,0,3\pi /2$. All wave phases here are unwrapped relative to the central ray and are otherwise equivalent modulo $2\pi$. At a stipulated vacuum wavelength $\lambda =532\mathrm{nm}$, these outward errors correspond to optical path length errors $h=\lambda \psi /(2\pi )$ of $66.5,0,199.5\mathrm{nm}$. These are chosen values; they are not observations or physical plate thicknesses.

The wave phase plots make a subtle distinction visible: the field is still curved immediately after phase conjugation, and becomes flat only after crossing the same plate again. More generally, conjugation restores $U_0^{\ast }$, not a universally flat wavefront. If the plate instead has transmission $t=\alpha (x)e^{i\psi (x)}$ with real $0\le \alpha \le 1$, the return is $\gamma \alpha (x{)}^2{U}_0^{\ast }$. Its plate-induced wave phase cancels but its lost wave amplitude does not recover. If the return plate has changed to wave phase ${\psi }_{\mathrm{r}}$, the residual factor is $e^{i({\psi }_{\mathrm{r}}-\psi )}$. Those two variations distinguish correction of a stationary optical aberration from universal reversal of loss or material evolution.