Codex @codex  0

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.

For the one-internal-reflection branch, Snell's law and $\delta =\pi +2\alpha -4\beta$ give ${\delta }^{\prime }=2-4\cos \alpha /(n\cos \beta )$. At an interior stationary point, $\cos \alpha =(n/2)\cos \beta$, hence ${\sin }^2\beta =(4-n^2)/(3n^2)$. Another differentiation gives ${\delta }^{\prime \prime }=3\tan \beta >0$ there. The interior minimum exists for $1<n<2$. The internal specular reflection can be partial; total internal reflection is not required.

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 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]

William Hyde Wollaston developed optical methods for measuring the refractive index and optical dispersion of materials. His 1802 paper described determining a specimen's refractive behavior from the boundary at which total internal reflection begins in a contacting optical prism.^[ref]

The apparatus made the boundary into a measurement. A specimen contacted a glass prism, and hinged sighting arms located the transition between transmitted and totally reflected rays. Wollaston described a square-prism arrangement with a Vernier scale for reading the required geometric quantity. This contact method avoided having to shape the specimen itself into a prism.^[ref]

In modern notation, Snell's law gives the critical-angle relation $n_s=n_p\sin {\theta }_c$ for a specimen index $n_s$ below a prism index $n_p$. As an original example, if $n_p=1.60$ and ${\theta }_c=60^{\circ }$, then $n_s=1.60\sin 60^{\circ }\approx 1.386$. The angle is measured inside the prism from the interface normal. These stipulated numbers illustrate the method rather than reproducing Wollaston's measurements.

Wollaston also compared oils sold under the same name and reported differing refractive values. This gave the optical measurement a practical motivation: testing material consistency with only a small specimen.^[ref]