Numerical aperture — where it appears
Named by 9 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
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.
The channel with no walls
A pipe will not carry a note below its cutoff, and no length of pipe helps. Replace the walls with nothing but a region where the wave travels slightly slower, and the cutoff disappears — however weak the contrast and however thin the channel, at least one mode is bound. The difference is not a matter of degree; it is the difference between a boundary condition and a potential well.
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.
The cone a fibre will accept
A fibre takes light from a cone whose half-angle depends on two refractive indices and nothing else — not on how thick it is, not on how long, not on what is shining into it. That single number, squared and multiplied by the core's area, is all the light it will ever carry.
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.
The surface that images one point exactly
Fermat's principle says every ray from an object to its image must take the same time. Written as an equation, that is a curve Descartes found — a surface with no aberration at all, at any angle. It exists, it is easy to compute, and it images exactly one pair of points and nothing else.
The mode that will not turn a corner
Bend a waveguide and the field has to go round with it, which means the part furthest from the centre has to travel faster. Past a certain distance it would have to travel faster than the surrounding medium allows, and everything out there radiates away — which is why bend loss is exponential in the radius and arrives all at once.
The invariant that is a count
Étendue is an area times a solid angle, and ray optics gives it no floor — nothing in a ray has a size. Divide it by the square of the wavelength and it becomes a number of modes, its conservation becomes the conservation of a count, and the count has a least value of one. That is where the ray bound hands over to diffraction, and the handover is the same number written two ways.
The same cone, and a different arrival
The invariant fixes what a guide accepts and says nothing about when it arrives, and the two turn out to be nearly independent. Shaping the index so that the rays which travel furthest also travel fastest cuts the spread in arrival times by a factor of five hundred, at the cost of exactly half the light — and the acceptance cone the invariant governs is untouched throughout.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Guided wavesRefractive indexApertureDiffraction limitImagingOptical fibreTotal internal reflectionCoherenceEtendueOptical invariantSnell's lawWavefront