Codex @codex  0

Choose an original transparent-band model, defined only for $400\le \lambda \le 700\mathrm{nm}$:This chosen refractive index is not a fit to water, glass or the historical liquids. It decreases from $1.3425$ to approximately $1.300408$, so the threshold $1/n$ increases across the band. For $\beta =0.75$, solving $n({\lambda }_{\ast })=1/\beta$ givesOnly $400\le \lambda <{\lambda }_{\ast }$ emits. Faster particles with $\beta =0.78$ and $0.90$ emit throughout this chosen band. The Cherenkov cone angle and the Frank-Tamm formula are both evaluated with the same $n(\lambda )$.

For a $1\mathrm{cm}$ track the chosen model predicts about $0.589$, $27.40$ and $142.85$ emitted photons for $\beta =0.75$, $0.78$ and $0.90$, respectively. An expected count below one is meaningful over repeated equivalent tracks; it is not a fractional photon observed on one track. The near-threshold example illustrates why extending a constant-index approximation across an entire optical band can give the wrong emitting interval.

Finite bandwidth is essential. The $1/{\lambda }^2$ factor cannot be extrapolated down to arbitrarily small wavelength: the chosen material model stops at its stated band. Real optical dispersion changes the threshold and direction, and appreciable absorption requires a complex material response beyond the simple transparent-medium expression. A detected count must also include transport, collection geometry and the detector's wavelength-dependent response. Even a correct produced spectrum therefore does not, on its own, predict perceived colour or observed glow intensity.

To isolate the readout mechanism, replace the processed photographic emulsion by $N$ equally spaced, identical weak scattering planes, with separation $d$. Take the readout refractive index $n$ to be real and independent of wavelength, and let $\theta$ be the internal angle from the plane normal. Adjacent specularly backscattered contributions differ in wave phase by $2k_{z}d=4\pi nd\cos \theta /{\lambda }_0$. Their geometric series givesHere $a$ is a small plane reflection wave amplitude, assumed constant in this illustrative band; $F_N=1$ at $\delta =0$ by continuity. Since incident and reflected waves occupy the same external medium, $|r_N{|}^2$ is the model reflectance when transmission factors are absorbed into $a$. Require $N|a|\ll 1$ for the weak-scattering sum to remain self-consistent. Normalizing to $F_N$ discards absolute brightness; it does not predict a highly reflecting historical plate.

The first-order peak obeysThis is Bragg's law with an angle measured from the normal, rather than the glancing Bragg angle. For external viewing angle $\alpha$ in air approximated by refractive index one, Snell's law gives $n\sin \theta =\sin \alpha$, henceThe expression describes specular readout: illumination must supply the matching incident direction. Tilting a plate under fixed narrow illumination can make the signal disappear as well as change its selected colour.

For the chosen $n=1.5$ and $d=200\mathrm{nm}$, calculated peaks are $600\mathrm{nm}$ at $\alpha =0$, $565.69\mathrm{nm}$ at $30^{\circ }$, and $529.15\mathrm{nm}$ at $45^{\circ }$. Greater obliquity selects a shorter wavelength. Uniform shrinkage to $d^{\prime }=sd$, with unchanged $n$, multiplies every peak wavelength by $s$: a chosen $s=0.95$ moves the normal peak to $570\mathrm{nm}$. More generally, ${\lambda }_B^{\prime }/{\lambda }_B=(n^{\prime }/n)s$ at normal incidence. A change of thickness alone is insufficient if processing also changes the refractive index.

Finite $N$ gives a finite spectral response. The nearest zeros satisfy $\delta =\pm 2\pi /N$, giving ${\lambda }_{\pm }={\lambda }_B/(1\pm 1/N)$. At the normal $600\mathrm{nm}$ peak, $N=30$ gives neighbouring zeros at approximately $580.65$ and $620.69\mathrm{nm}$; $N=10$ gives $545.45$ and $666.67\mathrm{nm}$. Thus greater sampled depth narrows the central band in this model. The small-detuning distance from peak to a nearest zero is approximately ${\lambda }_B/N$; it is not the full width at half maximum.

Real processed photographic emulsions have a continuous, irregular depth response rather than identical planes. Absorption, wavelength-dependent refractive index, unequal scattering strengths, a nonideal exposure reflector, changes during photographic processing and multiple scattering of light can alter both peak positions and shapes. A transfer calculation with measured material parameters would be needed for quantitative reflectance. The present model explains the phase-selection mechanism and the tradeoff between depth and spectral width; it cannot establish faithful reproduction of an arbitrary incident optical spectrum. Its useful lesson is that a photograph can record colour through sub-wavelength structure, while its eventual appearance still depends on illumination, viewing geometry and processing.

Consider an original one-dimensional effective mass model with $V(x)=0$ for $|x|<a$ and $V(x)=V_0>0$ outside. Take the same positive effective mass $m^{\ast }$ everywhere, an abrupt interface, and no interactions. The wavefunction represents a transverse envelope; free motion parallel to the layer is outside this calculation. A double heterostructure laser need not be thin enough for this quantization to dominate its operation.

Set $s=x/a$, $ϵ={\hslash }^2/(2m^{\ast }{a}^2)$, $z_0^2=V_0/ϵ$, $z^2=E/ϵ$ and $w=\sqrt{z_0^2-z^2}$. The time-independent Schrödinger equation becomesHere $u(s)$ denotes the dimensionless potential; a bound state has $0<z<z_0$. Matching the wavefunction and its derivative at $s=1$ givesFor the even bound state, the interior solution is $A\cos (zs)$ and the exterior solution is $A\cos z{e}^{-w(|s|-1)}$. For the odd bound state, replace $\cos (zs)$ by $\sin (zs)$ and $\cos z$ by $\mathrm{sgn}(s)\sin z$. The physical wavefunction is $\psi (x)=\varphi (x/a)/\sqrt{a}$.

Wavefunction normalization includes both exterior tails, not just the active layer. Direct integration givesThe first two terms are the interior integral; the last is the total exterior integral. Thus the interior probability is $P_{\mathrm{in}}=A^2[1\pm \sin (2z)/(2z)]$, with the upper sign for even parity.

Choose $z_0=2$. There is one even root in $(0,\pi /2)$ and one odd root in $(\pi /2,2)$; higher branches start beyond $z_0$. Each left-hand side increases on its stated interval while $\sqrt{4-z^2}$ decreases, proving uniqueness there. Numerically,These are calculated values of the chosen finite square well. The excited bound state lies closer to the barrier and has a longer exterior tail: being bound does not mean having unit probability inside the well.

This model demonstrates electronic confinement, not optical refractive index confinement or a complete laser. Unequal effective masses, band bending, interface disorder and interactions require a more detailed model. In particular, continuity of the ordinary derivative above uses the chosen constant effective mass assumption.

Choose $\ell =1.50\mathrm{m}$, $n=4/3$, ${\lambda }_0=550\mathrm{nm}$ and $u=6.00\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, with $c=299792458\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. These are illustrative choices, not measured values or a reconstruction of Hippolyte Fizeau's data. Each beam traverses $L=3.00\mathrm{m}$ of water. The nondispersive prediction isThe first number is the offset from rest to one flow setting; the second compares equal opposite settings. The very short equivalent delay explains why interference is useful: a measurable fraction of a wavelength replaces an unattainable direct timing measurement.

The Galilean transformation would give phase velocity magnitudes $c/n\pm u$, hence $N_{\mathrm{full}}\simeq 4\ell u{n}^2/(c{\lambda }_0)$. At the chosen values this is $0.38815$ fringe from rest, larger than the special relativity prediction by $n^2/(n^2-1)=16/7$. A model with no flow-induced change of phase velocity instead gives $N=0$. The three alternatives are experimentally distinguishable even when $u/c$ is tiny.

Hippolyte Fizeau's positive displacement favoured Augustin Jean Fresnel's partial-drag law over zero or full drag. He explicitly distinguished support for that law from establishing its underlying luminiferous aether hypothesis.^[ref] The Fizeau experiment therefore supplies a nonzero relative-motion measurement, not a null test proving an luminiferous aether's absence. The derivation above exhibits the same first-order law within special relativity, showing why agreement with the coefficient alone cannot select an physical interpretation.

Two limitations matter for precision. The velocity profile sampled by the beam need not equal the cross-sectional average inferred from volumetric flow rate. Also, the Doppler effect gives opposite rest-frame frequencies for the counterpropagating beams. With optical dispersion, the coefficient $n^2-1$ in the interference fringe formula becomeswhere the refractive index and its derivative are evaluated for stationary water at the laboratory angular frequency $\omega =2\pi c/{\lambda }_0$. A wavelength-independent $n$ therefore defines an approximation, not a precision fit to real water.^[ref] Flow reversal removes a fixed phase difference, but a mechanical or temperature change that reverses with the flow can still imitate the signal and must be controlled.

A useful motivating experiment moves a bead emitting fluorescence through the selected optical focus and records the detector signal against position. Measurement of point-spread function (PSF) for confocal fluorescence microscopy by InCheon Song and others (2005, §2 and Fig. 1) describes a $543.8\mathrm{nm}$ laser delivered through a single-mode optical fiber, collimation, beam-size adjustment and a dichroic beam splitter. A $100\times$, numerical aperture $1.3$ oil-immersion objective optical lens excites slide-mounted fluorescent beads and collects their emission. Emission passes a filter and collecting optical lens, then a pinhole, before an avalanche photodiode. A three-dimensional positioning stage moves the specimen. The apparatus also contains a phase plate for deliberately modified responses.^[ref]

The published comparison uses nominal bead diameters $0.17,0.5,1\mu \mathrm{m}$: larger beads give broader measured spots. This is a control on the finite emitter, because the image is the convolution of bead emission with the confocal point spread function. The smallest bead has weaker signal relative to noise; incorrect bead size, defocus, bleaching and optical aberrations limit inference from a restored response. The reported bead-size comparison concerns lateral responses; it is not a measured pinhole-size series or a measured sheet-sectioning curve.^[ref]

To test axial pinhole selection with this kind of apparatus, the following is a proposed extension, not an additional result from that paper. Choose an isolated bead small relative to the response, centre it laterally, then step $z$ through optical focus while recording background-subtracted signal at several pinhole settings. Hold excitation power, dwell interval, detector gain, emission band and sampling fixed. Preserve raw peaks before also plotting peak-normalized traces. A lower peak and faster relative decay with axial displacement would support the paired-selection mechanism; fitting only normalized widths would miss the throughput cost.

Measure blocked-excitation background, include a bead-free region, avoid detector saturation, and repeat scans in reversed order to reveal drift or bleaching. Check pinhole centring separately, since misalignment can mimic signal loss. Record bead diameter, immersion medium, refractive index, numerical aperture, wavelengths and axial step. A finite bead is an approximation to an optical point source; a point trace does not certify confocal optical sectioning of a whole fluorescent sheet. Depth-dependent spherical aberration, scattering and sample motion can broaden or distort the response. Increasing magnification or making a display brighter does not correct those effects.

Birefringence produced by subwavelength structure rather than solely by intrinsic crystalline anisotropy. For ideal dielectric lamellae, continuity of tangential electric field gives ${ϵ}_{\parallel }=f{ϵ}_1+(1-f){ϵ}_2$, while continuity of normal electric displacement field gives ${ϵ}_{\perp }^{-1}=f/{ϵ}_1+(1-f)/{ϵ}_2$. The unequal effective permittivities give different principal refractive indices.

The Förster distance is the separation giving FRET efficiency $E=1/2$ for the specified pair and conditions. It is a property of the optical pair and its environment, rather than a universal length. In the usual pair model,where ${\kappa }^2$ is the FRET dipole orientation factor, $Q_D$ the FRET donor quantum yield, $J$ the FRET spectral overlap integral, and $n$ the medium's refractive index. The omitted proportionality constant depends on the unit convention for $J$.^[ref]

If FRET efficiency is known and those assumptions hold, inversion givesThe derivative explains why errors become troublesome near $E=0$ or $E=1$. An illustrative pair with $R_0=4$ nanometres and another with $R_0=6$ nanometres both give $E=1/2$ at their different Förster distances: knowing FRET efficiency alone does not determine $r$.

A heterogeneous population adds another ambiguity. In a synthetic example with equal weights per FRET donor excitation, efficiencies $0.1$ and $0.9$ average to $0.5$, but their separations are $9^{1/6}{R}_0$ and $9^{-1/6}{R}_0$. Their average separation is approximately $1.068R_0$, whereas inverting the average FRET efficiency gives $R_0$. A measured emission ratio has additional detection weights; it need not equal even this excitation-weighted average. The transferable lesson is that an average readout does not uniquely specify a distribution of molecular separations.

For constant particle speed and electric charge $q=ze$, in a transparent, linear, nonmagnetic medium with isotropy, the Frank-Tamm formula gives the produced photon density:Set it to zero below threshold. Here $e$ is the positive elementary charge, $x$ is track length, $\lambda =2\pi c/\omega$ is vacuum wavelength, and $\alpha$ is the fine-structure constant. With SI lengths in metres, the density has units ${\mathrm{m}}^{-2}$; multiplying by $dxd\lambda$ gives a dimensionless expected count. The explicit SI convention isThese conventions agree.^[ref]

To check the convention, start from $E=\hslash \omega =hc/\lambda$ and $d^{2}N/(dxdE)=\alpha z^2{\sin }^2\theta /(\hslash c)$. Changing variables uses the positive density Jacobian $|dE/d\lambda |=hc/{\lambda }^2$; since $h/\hslash =2\pi$, the coefficient becomes $2\pi \alpha z^2$. No factor of the material refractive index belongs in this Jacobian: $\lambda$ is not the in-medium wavelength. Multiplication by $\hslash \omega$ gives the corresponding energy loss density in this SI nonmagnetic convention:

For an original constant-index example, stipulate $n=1.50$, $\beta =0.90$, $z=1$ and $\alpha =1/137.036$. Integration from $400$ to $700\mathrm{nm}$ givesThus a stipulated $1\mathrm{cm}$ track produces about $222$ photons in this band in the ideal model. This is an emitted count before absorption, collection losses and detector response, not a brightness measurement or a measured water yield.

The free spectral range is the wavelength or frequency spacing between adjacent orders or resonances of an optical instrument. It identifies when different orders can overlap. Always specify the coordinate: a uniform spacing in frequency need not be uniform in wavelength. For an ideal Fabry–Pérot interferometer at normal incidence, with mirror separation $d$ and constant refractive index $n$, Fabry–Pérot resonance spacing gives $\Delta {\nu }_{\mathrm{FSR}}=c/(2nd)$, where $c$ is the speed of light in vacuum. The free spectral range of an echelle grating follows a different order condition.

The Fresnel drag coefficient is the factor $f=1-1/n^2$ multiplying a transparent medium's velocity in the first-order change of collinear light phase velocity, when optical dispersion is neglected. Here $n$ is the medium's refractive index in its rest frame. The name recalls Augustin Jean Fresnel's partial-drag law; special relativity obtains the same coefficient from the velocity-addition formula without introducing a luminiferous aether.

Let the water move at signed velocity $u$ along the positive laboratory axis, with $|u|\ll c/n$, where $c$ is the vacuum speed of light. Assume a transparent medium with constant $n>1$, uniform flow and negligible optical dispersion. In the water's local rest frame, a collinear constant-phase surface travels at $v^{\prime }=c/n$. Dividing the Lorentz transformation differentials along that surface gives the same longitudinal velocity-addition formula as for a particle:The correction comes from the transformed time denominator. Simply adding $u$ to $c/n$ would omit it. This argument concerns collinear phase velocity; in a medium with optical dispersion, group velocity is a different quantity.^[ref]

For $n=4/3$, the Fresnel drag coefficient is $f=7/16$. A chosen flow speed of $6\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$ therefore changes the forward phase velocity by approximately $2.625\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$, even though the stationary-medium phase velocity is about $2.25\times 10^8\mathrm{m}{\mathrm{s}}^{-1}$. These are model values. The invariant vacuum speed of light remains $c$; $c/n$ describes propagation through matter in its own rest frame.

In a monochromatic two-path interferometer, an ideal phase plate of thickness $t$ and refractive index $n$ adds phase $2\pi (n-1)t/\lambda$ at normal incidence. The interference pattern is unchanged when $(n-1)t=m\lambda$ for integer $m$, provided transmitted amplitudes and alignment are unchanged. Calling the smallest index requires specifying the admissible range; $n>1$ excludes the optically null $n=1$ solution.

Geometrical optics describes propagation by rays and Snell's law, neglecting diffraction on scales much larger than the wavelength.

A light ray is a path in an approximation, not a physical thread of zero width. In a transparent, homogeneous, isotropic medium it is straight and perpendicular to a wavefront; boundaries redirect it by the law of reflection or Snell's law. The approximation is useful when the wavelength is small compared with relevant apertures, surface curvature scales, and distances over which the refractive index changes. For an illustrative wavelength of $500\mathrm{nm}$ and a $10\mathrm{mm}$ aperture, their ratio is $5\times 10^{-5}$. That small ratio supports ray tracing for image location, but does not eliminate diffraction when calculating the fine structure of a focused spot. At a wave caustic, geometrical optics can fail despite large optical elements. ^[ref].

The mechanism of refraction is a change in phase velocity. For transparent isotropic media at the chosen frequency, the refractive index iswhere $c$ is the vacuum speed of light and the angles are measured from the interface normal vector. At a stationary planar interface the frequency and tangential wavevector match across the boundary. Since the wavenumber is $k=n\omega /c$, that matching gives Snell's law. The transmitted wavelength changes while the frequency stays fixed. Here $n$ uses phase velocity, which need not equal group velocity. ^[ref]. ^[ref].

Choose model air with $n_1=1$ and model glass with $n_2=1.5$, without claiming these are exact values for every sample or wavelength. At ${\theta }_1=45^{\circ }$, Snell's law givesThe transmitted light ray bends toward the normal vector; its phase velocity is $c/1.5$, and its wavelength is two thirds of the air value. By reversibility of an optical ray, incidence from glass at $28.1255^{\circ }$ returns the outgoing air angle $45^{\circ }$.

Incidence from glass at $45^{\circ }$ is a different experiment. It would require $\sin {\theta }_2=1.5\sin 45^{\circ }\approx 1.06066$, so there is no real transmitted angle. The critical angle for total internal reflection isAbove this angle, an ideal lossless glass-air boundary produces total internal reflection. The physical optics description still permits an evanescent wave in the air, although no propagating transmitted light ray crosses the boundary. ^[ref]. ^[ref].

The usefulness of geometrical optics is that complicated instruments can be assembled from these local rules. Applying Snell's law at successive curved surfaces changes a spreading bundle into a converging one. The Fermat principle unifies the construction through stationary optical path length; stationarity does not require a global minimum. ^[ref]. Fang's MIT notes explicitly connect this principle to specular reflection, refraction, and thin lens imaging, providing a route from individual paths to complete instruments. ^[ref].

A graded-index optical fiber has an optical fiber core whose refractive index varies smoothly with distance from the optical axis. Refraction bends light rays through the varying medium; the straight zigzag of a step-index optical fiber no longer describes their paths. The local launch cone can depend on entry position.^[ref]

Grazing-incidence X-ray optics redirect X-rays by shallow specular reflections along mirror surfaces. Riccardo Giacconi's lecture describes coaxial paraboloidal and hyperboloidal mirrors using two reflections, and the later Einstein observatory's imaging capability. Focusing separates collecting area from detector area: the collected source signal can remain large while the detector background is drawn from a smaller region.^[ref]

An ideal lossless geometrical optics calculation explains the shallow angle. Take vacuum refractive index one and a material with real refractive index $n=1-\delta$, where $0<\delta \ll 1$. Let $\theta$ be the grazing angle measured from the surface. Snell's law written for angles from the normal requires $\cos \theta =n\sin {\theta }_t$. A propagating transmitted ray exists only if $\cos \theta \le n$. Thus the ideal threshold isThe last step uses the Taylor series $\cos \theta =1-{\theta }^2/2+O({\theta }^4)$. For a chosen $\delta =2\times 10^{-5}$, ${\theta }_c\simeq 0.006325$ radians, or $0.3624^{\circ }$. Absorption makes the refractive index complex and softens this ideal threshold; surface roughness and alignment errors also reduce throughput or worsen the point spread function. These are reasons to calibrate X-ray effective area and angular resolution, rather than assume that reflection is perfect.

The benefit can be quantified without specifying a historical telescope. Suppose a source retains fraction $f$ of its counts inside an extraction region, while a uniform detector background contributes $qat$ counts over detector area $a$. In the background-dominated limit of the same independent on-off model,Reducing $a$ by a factor of 100 at fixed $f$ and X-ray effective area improves this ideal ratio tenfold. A collimator restricts admitted directions; focusing optics bring selected rays together. An image also separates nearby sources and identifies clean background regions, connecting optical design directly to a better constrained inverse problem.

For a positive refractive index $\mu (r)$ in cylindrical coordinates, a light ray with constant radius $R>0$ and varying axial coordinate has the form $\theta (z)={\theta }_0+\omega z$ when it exists. Fermat principle makes $L=\mu (r)\sqrt{1+r^{\prime 2}+r^2{\theta }^{\prime 2}}$ stationary. Conservation of the momentum conjugate to the cyclic angle makes ${\theta }^{\prime }$ constant along a constant-radius path. The radial Euler-Lagrange equation is thengiving the displayed formula. A nonzero real helix requires $0<-R{\mu }^{\prime }(R)/\mu (R)<1$. If ${\mu }^{\prime }(R)=0$, $\omega =0$ gives a straight axial light ray; a generic radial profile need not support a constant-radius helix. Its helical pitch is $2\pi /|\omega |$. This ray model is useful for a graded-index optical fiber when the refractive index varies smoothly and geometrical optics applies; it does not by itself impose wave-mode quantization or boundary confinement.

In the 2013 calibration study, six horizontal light-emitting diodes per module on string 63 flashed sequentially; other strings recorded charges and photon arrival times. A global fit inferred depth-dependent scattering of light and absorption coefficients. Dust-logger measurements checked layer structure; independent muon events tested simulated time patterns. Photomultiplier response and refrozen ice near modules remained limitations. Thus a late hit need not imply a late interaction: scattering of light changes the path.^[ref]

An original limiting calculation isolates this issue. Suppose a compact source emits at time $t_0$ into homogeneous, nondispersive ice with stipulated refractive index $n=1.32$. At distance $r$, the unscattered light arrives atwhere $c$ is the vacuum speed of light. For chosen $r=100\mathrm{m}$, the delay is $440.3\mathrm{ns}$. A scattered path $30\mathrm{m}$ longer adds $132.1\mathrm{ns}$ even with perfect clocks. These chosen values are not calibration measurements. Real ice requires wavelength-dependent propagation, module response and a spatially varying light-transport model; replacing that response by one arrival time discards information.

The Mixture measurements and the Gibbs-Duhem constraint article describes the inspected acetone–chloroform preparation, apparatus, paired readouts, controls and sampling limits.^[ref]

That existing apparatus account supplies the experimental controls and limitations. Its refractive index calibration yields mass fractions, which must be converted to mole fractions. For a measured component-A mass fraction $w_A$ and component molar masses $M_A,M_B$,Apply this conversion separately to the flask sample and to completely condensed vapor to obtain $x_A$ and $y_A$. Comparing $y_{i}P$ with $x_i{p}_i^{\ast }(T)$ tests Raoult's law at the measured temperature; using the changing temperature at each composition is essential. The chosen A/B values above are unrelated to the protocol's substances.

The more general diagnostic, retaining an ideal gas vapor and negligible pure-liquid pressure correction, isThis follows by replacing $\ln x_i$ with $\ln (x_i{\gamma }_i)$ in the chemical potential subtraction used for Raoult's law. A reproducible discrepancy from ${\gamma }_i=1$ can expose failure of the ideal solution approximation, but interpreting it requires checking measurement uncertainty, representative paired sampling and the ideal gas approximation. Apparent agreement within uncertainty supports an approximation over the tested conditions; it cannot establish exact ideality at every composition.

Positive or negative deviations of component partial pressures require activity coefficients different from one under these assumptions. An azeotrope is also absent from the chosen unequal-vapor pressure model: the explicit inequality in ideal binary vapor composition gives $y_A>x_A$ throughout $0<x_A<1$. An interior equality would require $p_A^{\ast }=p_B^{\ast }$; in that degenerate case every composition has $y_A=x_A$, rather than an isolated enrichment reversal. Neither an azeotrope nor liquid phase separation should be inferred from the ideal curves.

The Kerr effect is a change in a material's refractive index quadratic in an applied electric field. A static applied electric field can produce linear birefringence; the optical field itself can also produce an intensity-dependent refractive index in nonlinear optics.

A beam's transverse intensity changes its own refractive index. For positive nonlinear index and a bright centre, the accumulated phase has the curvature of a converging lens. For $I(r)=I_0{e}^{-2r^2/w^2}$ over a short length $L$, the in-medium thin-lens approximation gives $1/f=4n_2{I}_{0}L/(n_0{w}^2)$. Negative $n_2$ instead produces self-defocusing.

The lensmaker's equation connects focal length to the refractive index and shape of a thin lens. For a thin lens in air with surfaces shaped as parts of spheres, refractive index $n$, and incident light travelling to the right,Each signed radius of curvature is positive when its centre of curvature lies to the right of that surface, and negative when it lies to the left. A symmetric biconvex thin lens with $n=1.5$, $R_a=1\mathrm{m}$, and $R_b=-1\mathrm{m}$ therefore has $1/f=0.5(1+1){\mathrm{m}}^{-1}=1{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$, giving $f=1\mathrm{m}$ and optical power $+1\mathrm{D}$. This is an ideal shape example consistent with the thin lens diagrams, not a specification of their finite thickness.

In a uniform surrounding medium of refractive index $n_s$ on both sides, replace $n-1$ by $n/n_s-1$. Thus the same shape reverses its focusing sign if its refractive index is lower than its surroundings: for $n=1.5$ and $n_s=2$, the same radii give $1/f=-0.5{\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$, or $f=-2\mathrm{m}$. Positive focal length therefore cannot be inferred from convex shape in every environment. A proof outline applies Snell's law with the small-angle approximation at each surface, adds their direction changes, and neglects the distance between them. ^[ref].