Conical refraction

Conical refraction is an optical phenomenon in which a ray of light, passing through a biaxial crystal along one of two possible directions axes, is transformed into a hollow cone of light. There are two possible conical refractions, one internal and one external.
For internal conical refraction, a planar wave of light enters an aperture a slab of biaxial crystal whose face is parallel to the plane of light. Inside the slab, the light splits into a hollow cone of light rays. Upon exiting the slab, the hollow cone turns into a hollow cylinder.
For external conical refraction, light is focused at a single point aperture on the slab of biaxial crystal, and exits the slab at the other side at an exit point aperture. Upon exiting, the light splits into a hollow cone.
This effect was predicted in 1832 by William Rowan Hamilton[1] and subsequently observed by Humphrey Lloyd in the next year.[2][3] It was possibly the first example of a phenomenon predicted by mathematical reasoning and later confirmed by experiment.[4]
History
The phenomenon of double refraction in crystals was discovered in the 17th century and was initially explained by Christiaan Huygens using a wave theory of light. The explanation was a centerpiece of his Treatise on Light.
However, his theory was limited to uniaxial crystals and could not account for the behavior of biaxial crystals, which have two optic axes. In the early 19th century, Augustin-Jean Fresnel developed a more comprehensive theory that could describe double refraction in both uniaxial and biaxial crystals. However, his description of the wave surface in biaxial crystals was incomplete, overlooking certain key features.
William Rowan Hamilton, building upon Fresnel's work, mathematically analyzed the wave surface in biaxial crystals and discovered the presence of four conoidal cusps. These cusps implied that, under certain conditions, a ray of light could be refracted into a cone of light within the crystal. He termed this phenomenon "conical refraction" and predicted two distinct types: internal and external conical refraction.
Hamilton's prediction was met with skepticism by some, including George Biddell Airy, who had also studied the wave surface but had not realized its full implications. However, Humphrey Lloyd, working closely with Hamilton, conducted experiments using aragonite crystals and successfully observed both internal and external conical refraction. This discovery was a significant victory for the wave theory of light and solidified Fresnel's theory of double refraction.[4] Lloyd's experimental data are described in [5] pages 350–355.
The rays of the internal cone emerged, as they ought, in a cylinder from the second face of the crystal; and the size of this nearly circular cylinder, though small, was decidedly perceptible, so that with solar light it threw on silver paper a little luminous ring, which seemed to remain the same at different distances of the paper from the arragonite.[6]
In 1833, James MacCullagh claimed that it is a special case of a theorem he published in 1830 that he did not explicate, since it was not relevant to that particular paper.[7] Cauchy discovered the same surface in the context of classical mechanics.[6]
[8] is an early historical review coauthored by Lloyd.[9] gives an updated historical review.


Theory
Surface of wavevectors
Given a biaxial crystal with the three principal refractive indices . For each possible direction of planar waves propagating in the crystal, it has a certain group velocity . The refractive index along that direction is defined as .
Define, now, the surface of wavevectors as the following set of pointsIn general, there are two group velocities along each wavevector direction. To find them, draw the plane perpendicular to . The indices are the major and minor axes of the ellipse of intersection between the plane and the index ellipsoid. At precisely 4 directions, the intersection is a circle, and the two sheets of the surface of wavevectors collide at a conoidal point.
To be more precise, the surface of wavevectors satisfy the following degree-4 equation (,[5] page 346):or equivalently,
The major and minor axes are the solutions to the constraint optimization problem: where is the matrix with diagonal entries .
Since there are 3 variables and 2 constraints, we can use the Karush–Kuhn–Tucker conditions. That is, the three gradients are linearly dependent.
Let . We have , etc. Therefore, Plugging back to , we obtain Let be the vector with the direction of , and the length of . We thus find that the equation of is Multiply out the denominators, then multiply by , we obtain the result.
In general, along a fixed direction , there are two possible wavevectors: The slow wave and the fast wave , where is the major semiaxis, and is the minor.
Plugging into the equation of , we obtain a quadratic equation in :which has two solutions .
At exactly four directions, the two wavevectors coincide, because the plane perpendicular to intersects the index ellipsoid at a circle. These directions are where , at which point .
Expanding the equation of the surface in a neighborhood of , we obtain the local geometry of the surface, which is a cone subtended by a circle.
Further, there exists 4 planes, each of which is tangent to the surface at an entire circle. These planes have equation (,[5] pages 349–350)and the 4 circles are the intersection of those planes with the ellipsoid
Thus, such points on the surface of wavevectors has two parts: Every point with , and every point that intersects with the auxilliary ellipsoid
Using the equation of the auxilliary ellipsoid to eliminate from the equation of the wavevector surface, we obtain another degree-4 equation, which splits into the product of 4 planes:
Thus, we obtain 4 ellipses: the 4 planar intersections with the auxilliary ellipsoid. These ellipses all exist on the wavevector surface, and the wavevector surface has tangent plane parallel to the axis at those points. By direct computation, these ellipses are circles.
It remains to verify that the tangent plane is also parallel to the plane of the circle.
Let be one of those 4 planes, and let be one point on the circle in . If , then since the circle is on the surface, the tangent plane to the surface at must contain the tangent line to the circle at . Also, the plane must also contain , the line pass that is parallel to the -axis. Therefore, the plane is spanned by and , which is precisely the plane . This then extends by continuity to the case of .One can imagine the surface as a prune, with 4 little pits or dimples. Putting the prune on a flat desk, the prune would touch the desk at a circle that covers up a dimple.
Surface of ray vectors
The surface of ray vectors is the reciprocal pedal surface of the surface of wavevectors. Its equation is obtained by replacing with in the equation for the surface of wavevectors.[1] That is,All the results above apply with the same modification. The two surfaces are related by a duality:
- The four special planes tangent to the surface of wavevectors on a circle correspond to the 4 conoidal points on the surface of ray vectors.
- The four conoidal points on the surface of wavevectors correspond to the 4 planes tangent to the surface of ray vectors on a circle.
Approximately circular
In typical crystals, the difference between is small. In this case, the conoidal point is approximately at the center of the tangent circle surrounding it, and thus, the cone of light (in both the internal and the external refraction cases) is approximately a circular cone.
Observations
The angle of the cone depends on the properties of the crystal, specifically the differences between its principal refractive indices. The effect is typically small, requiring careful experimental setup to observe. Early experiments used sunlight and pinholes to create narrow beams of light, while modern experiments often employ lasers and high-resolution detectors.
Modern developments
The study of conical refraction has continued since its discovery, with researchers exploring its various aspects and implications. Some recent work includes:
- Paraxial theory: This theory provides a simplified description of conical refraction for small angles of incidence and has been used to analyze the detailed structure of the light patterns observed.[10]
- Chiral crystals: The inclusion of optical activity (chirality) in the crystal leads to new phenomena, such as the transformation of the conical cylinder into a "spun cusp" caustic.[11]
- Absorption and dichroism: The presence of absorption in the crystal significantly alters the behavior of light, leading to the splitting of diabolical points into pairs of branch points and affecting the emergent light patterns.[12]
- Nonlinear optics: Nonlinear optical effects in biaxial crystals can interact with conical refraction, leading to complex and intriguing phenomena.[13]
The surface of wavevectors is a degree-4 surface, which is a special case of the Kummer surface. Since for every linear material, the dispersion equation is quartic, and 16 is the maximum number of isolated singularities for a Kummer surface. That such a material might exist was proposed in 1910,[14] and in 2016, a metamaterial was constructed realizing this, and it was confirmed to have 16 directions for conical refraction.[15]
See also
References
- ^ a b Hamilton, William R. (1832). "Third Supplement to an Essay on the Theory of Systems of Rays". The Transactions of the Royal Irish Academy. 17: v–144. ISSN 0790-8113.
- ^ Lloyd, Humphrey (February 1833). "XXI. On the phænomena presented by light in its passage along the axes of biaxal crystals". The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science. 2 (8): 112–120. doi:10.1080/14786443308647984. ISSN 1941-5966.
- ^ Lloyd, Humphrey (March 1833). "XXXIII. Further experiments on the phænomena presented by light in its passage along the axes of biaxal crystals". The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science. 2 (9): 207–210. doi:10.1080/14786443308648010. ISSN 1941-5966.
- ^ a b Berry, M. V.; Jeffrey, M. R. (2007-01-01), Wolf, E. (ed.), "Chapter 2 Conical diffraction: Hamilton's diabolical point at the heart of crystal optics", Progress in Optics, vol. 50, Elsevier, pp. 13–50, retrieved 2024-04-23
- ^ a b c Preston, Thomas; Thrift, William Edward (1912 (1924 printing)). The theory of light. University of California Libraries. London, Macmillan and Co., limited.
{{cite book}}
: Check date values in:|date=
(help) - ^ a b Hamilton, William Rowan. "On some results of the view of a characteristic function in optics." British Association Report, Cambridge (1833): 360-370.
- ^ Flood, Raymond (2006). "Mathematics in Victorian Ireland". BSHM Bulletin: Journal of the British Society for the History of Mathematics. 21 (3): 200–211. doi:10.1080/17498430600964433. ISSN 1749-8430. S2CID 122564180.
- ^ "Discovery of Conical Refraction by William Rowan Hamilton and Humphrey Lloyd (1833)". Isis. 17 (1): 154–170. January 1932. doi:10.1086/346641. ISSN 0021-1753.
- ^ O'Hara, J. G. (1982). "The Prediction and Discovery of Conical Refraction by William Rowan Hamilton and Humphrey Lloyd (1832-1833)". Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. Section A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences. 82A (2): 231–257. ISSN 0035-8975.
- ^ Sokolovskii, G. S.; Carnegie, D. J.; Kalkandjiev, T. K.; Rafailov, E. U. (2013-05-06). "Conical Refraction: New observations and a dual cone model". Optics Express. 21 (9): 11125. doi:10.1364/OE.21.011125. ISSN 1094-4087.
- ^ Berry, M V; Jeffrey, M R (2006-05-01). "Chiral conical diffraction". Journal of Optics A: Pure and Applied Optics. 8 (5): 363–372. doi:10.1088/1464-4258/8/5/001. ISSN 1464-4258.
- ^ Berry, M V; Jeffrey, M R (2006-12-01). "Conical diffraction complexified: dichroism and the transition to double refraction". Journal of Optics A: Pure and Applied Optics. 8 (12): 1043–1051. doi:10.1088/1464-4258/8/12/003. ISSN 1464-4258.
- ^ Bloembergen, N.; Shih, H. (May 1969). "Conical refraction in nonlinear optics". Optics Communications. 1 (2): 70–72. doi:10.1016/0030-4018(69)90011-x. ISSN 0030-4018.
- ^ Bateman, H. (1910). "Kummer's Quartic Surface as a Wave Surface". Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society. s2-8 (1): 375–382. doi:10.1112/plms/s2-8.1.375.
- ^ Favaro, Alberto; Hehl, Friedrich W. (2016-01-22). "Light propagation in local and linear media: Fresnel-Kummer wave surfaces with 16 singular points". Physical Review A. 93 (1): 013844. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.93.013844.
- Jeffrey, M. R. (2007). Conical Diffraction: Complexifying Hamilton’s Diabolical Legacy (PhD thesis). University of Bristol.
This article has not been added to any content categories. Please help out by adding categories to it so that it can be listed with similar articles. (April 2024) |