Illustrated Physics
physics, drawn
Concept

Aperture — where it appears

The opening admitting a wave into an instrument, whose width fixes the diffraction limit and says nothing about the quality of the glass. Doubling it halves the smallest resolvable angle and quadruples the light gathered, which is why every improvement in telescopes has been a larger one.

Named by 10 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Single-slit diffraction at three slit widths. Intensity against angle behind a single slit, evaluated from the integral across the aperture, for slits two, six and twenty wavelengths wide. A wide slit throws a nearly sharp shadow; a narrow one spreads light through a wide angle.

Where rays stop being enough, and a shadow acquires a bright centre

Light going through a narrow gap spreads. No amount of ray tracing predicts it, the size of the spreading is set by one ratio, and taking that ratio to zero is exactly what the ray model is.

optics · Diffraction The dip that decides it. Two equally bright points seen through a circular aperture, their Airy patterns added, at 0.7, 1, 1.6 times the Rayleigh separation. Below each is the depth of the dip between the peaks, measured off the drawn sum: 0.0%, 26.5%, 91.6%. At exactly the Rayleigh separation the dip is 26.5% — the criterion is a convention about how much of a dip a detector can see, not a threshold anything crosses. Below it the two peaks merge into one and the pair is gone; above it the answer was never in doubt.

How far apart two things have to be

An instrument's ability to tell two things apart is not set by the quality of its glass. It is set by the width of the hole light comes through, by a factor that is the first zero of a Bessel function — and the threshold everyone quotes is a convention laid over a computed dip of 26.5 per cent.

optics · Diffraction 6 modes of a drum, and their frequency ratios. Nodal-line diagrams for 6 modes of a circular membrane, each labelled with its frequency as a multiple of the lowest mode's. A mode (m, n) has m nodal diameters and n − 1 nodal circles, and the circles are drawn at the radii where the computed radial function J_m(j(m,n)·r/R) crosses zero — not at guessed fractions of the radius. The two tints are the two directions the head is moving in at that instant, and the lines between them are the parts of it that never move. The ratios are 1.000, 1.593, 2.136, 2.295, 2.653, 2.917: each one is a quotient of two zeros of Bessel functions, computed here from the power series and checked against their published values to 4.4e-7. Not one is a whole number, which is why a drum has no harmonic series and no pitch in the sense a string has one — and why these same ratios belong to every circular membrane ever stretched, whatever it is made of and however tightly it is pulled.

The drum that has no harmonics

A string's allowed frequencies are 1, 2, 3, 4 times its lowest, because counting half-wavelengths is arithmetic. Clamp a membrane round a circle and the same reasoning returns 1.000, 1.593, 2.136, 2.295 instead — zeros of Bessel functions, not integers. And those numbers belong to the shape of the boundary alone, which raises a question nobody could answer until 1992.

waves · Standing waves What arrives in the back focal plane. A grating of pitch 1.2 µm illuminated at 550 nm, and the spectrum that appears in the objective's back focal plane. Each spatial frequency in the object leaves at its own angle, sinθ = mλ/d, and the bar heights are the Fourier coefficients of the object's transmittance. The aperture admits everything inside sinθ = 0.65, which here is orders -1, 0, 1 — 2 of them carrying information about the pitch. Orders outside it are drawn faint and are simply lost: they never reach the image plane, and no amount of magnification afterwards recovers them. This is where a microscope's resolution is decided — not at the image, not by the eyepiece, but by which of these bars the front of the objective is wide enough to catch.

The image that is a diffraction pattern twice

A lens does not project an object onto a screen. It takes the object's spatial frequencies apart, spreading them across its own back focal plane at an angle each, and then puts them back together — so an image is the object's spectrum, filtered by whatever the aperture admits, transformed back. With only the zeroth order through, the image is a uniform grey with no information in it at all.

optics · Imaging A grain that is not on the object. A speckle pattern, computed as the far field of a circular aperture 421 samples in area filled with random phases — which is what a rough surface does to coherent light, and nothing else. The texture is not a picture of the surface: change the phases and the grains move, but their size and their statistics do not. Five shades are drawn here, from the darkest fifth of the range to the brightest. The measured contrast — the standard deviation of the intensity divided by its mean — is 1.0101, against exactly one for a fully developed speckle, and that is a strong statement: it says the most likely intensity anywhere in this pattern is zero, and that the bright grains are as far above the mean as the dark ones are below. Anybody who has pointed a laser at a wall has seen this and most take it for a property of the wall. It is a property of the light and of the aperture looking at it — including, when the aperture is an eye, of the pupil, which is why the pattern swims when the head moves and why its grain size tells an optometrist about the eye rather than about the wall.

The grain that is in the light

Point a laser at a wall and the wall appears to be covered in a fine boiling texture. Nothing on the wall is that size and nothing about the wall decides it: the grain belongs to the aperture looking at it, the statistics are the same for every rough surface there is, and the most likely brightness anywhere in the pattern is zero.

optics · Coherence Rings whose radii go as the square root of their number. A 20-zone plate for 550 nanometres at 200 millimetres, drawn to scale, beside its zone radii against zone number. The outermost is 1.483 millimetres and the innermost 0.332, and the curve is a square root because the radii come from making each zone's extra path exactly half a wavelength longer than the last. The consequence worth noticing is on the drawing rather than in the formula: every ring has the same area, to 0.003 per cent, so each contributes about equally to what arrives on the axis and the rings get thinner outwards to keep it so. Alternate rings are opaque. Half the light is thrown away and the axis gets brighter, because what is thrown away is the half that would have arrived out of phase with the rest.

The lens that is a set of rings

A lens focuses by delaying the light at its centre until every path takes the same time. A zone plate does the opposite: it changes nothing about the light that gets through, and paints out the light that would have arrived out of step. Half the aperture is thrown away and the axis gets brighter, which sounds like a contradiction and is the whole idea.

optics · Diffraction Image distance against object distance. Image distance in focal lengths against object distance in focal lengths. At exactly one focal length the image runs off to infinity; inside it the image distance goes negative, which means virtual.

The focus that is a slab, not a plane

A lens images one plane and no other, which would make every photograph and every micrograph almost entirely out of focus. What rescues them is a tolerance — and there are two of them, one from rays and one from waves, which give different answers and stop being interchangeable exactly where microscopes work.

optics · Imaging The bowl a lens actually focuses onto. Where a lens of 50 mm focal length brings each part of a flat scene to a focus, against distance from the centre of the field, out to 21.6 mm — the corner of a 35 mm frame. The surface of best focus is a sphere of radius 76 mm curving towards the lens, and the corner of the frame sits 3.13 mm in front of the plane the centre is focused on. The shaded band is the depth of focus at f/8, which is 0.070 mm — 45 times smaller than the sag it has to cover. The curvature is not an error in the lens. It is what Σ1/nf comes to for this stack, and it depends on the powers and the glasses and on nothing else: bending the surfaces, moving the stop or stopping down changes every other aberration and leaves this one exactly where it was.

The flat scene that comes back curved

A lens does not image a plane onto a plane. It images it onto a bowl, and the curvature of that bowl is fixed by the powers and the glasses alone — not by the shapes of the surfaces, not by where the stop is, and not by stopping down. Everything a designer usually plays with leaves it exactly where it was.

optics · Imaging What a row of sources does that one cannot. The pattern of 8 identical sources in a row, spaced 0.5 wavelengths apart, all driven in phase. Each source alone radiates the same in every direction drawn here; together they radiate almost entirely along one. The sum being performed is the sum over path differences across the row, which is the sum a diffraction grating performs over its slits — the same function with the same first null, at sin θ = 1/Nd, measured here off the curve. What has been exploited is retardation: the contributions arrive at different times, and the pattern is a map of where they arrive in step.

When the source is not heard all at once

The dipole approximation is not a statement that a source is small. It is a statement that every part of it is heard at the same retarded time, and dropping that assumption turns one source into a sum over a source. The sum is the same one a diffraction grating performs over its slits, with the same first null and the same extra orders — so a phased array and a grating are one piece of arithmetic met twice.

electromagnetism · Retardation The rings belong to the edge, not to the size. The far-field intensity of 3 apertures of the same width, against angle in units of the diffraction limit, on a logarithmic intensity axis spanning ten decades. They differ only in how the transmission falls off toward the rim. With a hard edge the first sidelobe is 13.3 decibels down and the core is 0.89 wide. With a Hann taper the first sidelobe is 31.5 decibels down and the core is 1.44 wide. With a Blackman taper the first sidelobe is 58.1 decibels down and the core is 1.64 wide. The hard edge's rings are not a defect of the optics and are not reduced by making it larger — they are the transform of a discontinuity, and the only way to remove them is to remove the discontinuity. What it costs is the width of the core, which is the resolution.

The rings that belong to the edge

Every account of diffraction so far asks what the size of an aperture does. The rings around a star are not about its size: they are the transform of a discontinuity, they do not shrink relative to the core when the telescope grows, and the only way to remove them is to stop the transmission falling to zero abruptly. Softening the edge buys forty-five decibels of contrast and costs eighty per cent of the resolution.

optics · Diffraction

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

DiffractionInterferenceFocal lengthImagingNumerical apertureRayleigh's criterionResolutionCoherenceContrastDiffraction limitFourier transformLens

All concepts