Abstract

We study focused fields which, for a given total power and a given numerical aperture, have maximum electric field amplitude in some direction in the focal point and are linearly polarized along this direction. It is shown that the optimum field is identical to the image of an electric dipole with unit magnification. In particular, the field which is the image of an electric dipole whose dipole vector is parallel to the optical axis, is identical to the field whose longitudinal component is maximum at the image point.

© 2011 OSA

1. Introduction

When light is focused by a lens with numerical aperture larger than 0.6, the rotation of polarization becomes important. The rotation of polarization of a diffraction limited lens of high numerical aperture is well described by the model of Ignatowsky [1, 2] and Wolf and Richards [3, 4]. When the field in the lens aperture is that of a linearly polarized plane wave, the dominant electric field component near the focal point is parallel to the direction of polarization of the incident plane wave. But, as the numerical aperture increases, the maximum value of the longitudinal component of the electric field in the focal plane becomes quite substantial, although it vanishes at the focal point itself.

In many applications such as optical recording, photolithography and microscopy, it is important to be able to shape the focused spot. A field in focus with maximum electric component in a certain direction is of interest for manipulating and probing single molecules and particles, and in materials processing [59]. The focused wavefront can be tailored by setting a proper amplitude, phase and polarization distributions in the pupil of the focusing lens [10,11]. Nowadays it is possible to realize almost any complex transmission function in the pupil plane, using for example liquid crystal-based devices [1215].

The optimization of focused fields has been studied by [1618] for rotational symmetric systems. In the first two papers it was noted that the focused linearly polarized plane wave in the theory of Ignatowsky and Richard and Wolf, is in the Debye approximation identical to the sum of fields that are truncated by the lens aperture and converge to orthogonal electric and magnetic dipoles, with a particular ratio of dipole strengths. A nice treatment is given in [19].

It was noted by several authors [16, 2023] that when a radially polarized beam is focused, the distribution of the longitudinal component can be considerably narrower than the focused spot obtained by focusing a linearly polarized plane wave. In [24] the pupil field was determined which after focusing gives the maximum longitudinal component in the focal point for a given power incident on the lens. The optimum pupil field is radially polarized and its amplitude increases in a particular way with radial distance to the center of the pupil. Furthermore, the distribution in the focal plane of the optimized longitudinal component is narrower than the Airy spot. If a recording medium would be used which is sensitive for only the longitudinal component of the electric field, this optimized longitudinal component can yield higher resolution.

In [25] this analysis was generalized to optimum pupil fields of which the electric field amplitude in an arbitrary, not necessarily longitudinal, direction in the focal point is maximum. It was in particular found that the pupil field which gives maximum transverse amplitude in focus is similar but not identical to that of a linearly polarized plane wave.

An interesting feature of the optimum focused fields is that, although the electric field amplitude at the focal points is maximum in a required direction, the electric field is in general not linearly polarized in that direction but in another direction. Exceptions are the maximum longitudinal and maximum transverse components. In those cases the optimum fields are linearly polarized along the longitudinal and transverse directions, respectively.

For certain applications it is desirable to have maximum electric field amplitude in the focal point in a given direction under the additional constraint that the electric field is also linearly polarized in that direction. We shall therefore consider this optimization problem in this paper. A major result is that as the optimization direction is varied the set of solutions is identical to that of the problem without the constraint of parallel polarization studied in [25]. To be more precise: the electric field that has maximum amplitude in a given direction but which is not linearly polarized along that direction, is also the field that has maximum amplitude in the direction of its linear polarization.

As was already explained in [25], the optimum focused fields can be realized by focusing appropriate pupil fields. These pupil fields are linearly polarized with the direction of polarization and amplitude that are functions of the pupil coordinates. An alternative method to realize the optimum fields is by imaging an electric dipole by an optical system with unit magnification, e.g. two identical lenses. The image of an electric dipole was studied previously in [6, 17, 19] and, more recently, in [27]. We will show that when the imaging system has unit magnification, the image of an electric dipole with dipole vector p = (px, py, pz) is, for the given power, identical to the electric field in image space that has maximum amplitude in the direction (px, py, – pz), where the z-axis is the optical axis. It follows in particular that the image of a dipole that is parallel to the optical axis is the field for which the longitudinal component is maximum.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 the optimization problem and the optimum fields that have been derived in [24] and [25] are summarized. The optimization problem is formulated in homogeneous space without considering the optical system by which the optimum fields are generated. The reason is that the results thus obtained are general and independent of any model used for the optical system. In Section 3 the results of this optimization are interpreted and the new optimization problem is studied where the electric field is required to be linearly polarized along the direction for which the amplitude of the electric field is maximum. It is then shown that when this direction is varied, the set of optimum fields is identical to the set of optimum fields that are the solutions of the first optimization problem. Finally in Section 4 two methods to realize the optimum fields are considered. The first method is by focusing an appropriate pupil field. We use here the vector diffraction theory of Ignatowksy and Wolf and Richards, which is based on the Debye approximation. The second method is by imaging an electric dipole with unit magnification.

2. The optimization problem

2.1. Formulation of the optimization problem

We first define a few quantities and introduce some notations. As was stated in the Introduction, in the optimization problem we first leave the optical system out of consideration. The optimized fields are derived from the rigorous Maxwell equations and are therefore generally valid. We only assume that the field in image space has a certain numerical aperture NA ≤ n, where n is the refractive index in image space, and that the field has a prescribed power. Later we will discuss what fields in the entrance pupil of a lens with the chosen numerical aperture produce the optimum focused fields.

The plane wave vectors in image space are limited by the numerical aperture of the imaging system. Let (x,y,z) be a Cartesian coordinate system with the z-axis parallel to the optical axis. Using the plane wave expansion, the electric field in a point r in image space, which propagates in the direction of the positive z-axis, can be written as

(r,t)=Re[E(r)eiωt]=14π2Re[kx2+ky2k0NAA(kx,ky)ei(k·rωt)dkxdky],
where E(r) is the complex field, k = (kx, ky, kz) the wave vector in the medium with refractive index n, k 0 = |k|/n = 2π/λ 0 with λ 0 the wavelength in vacuum and A(kx, ky) are the complex plane wave amplitudes. Since the field propagates in the positive z-direction, we have kz=k02n2kx2ky2>0. The circle kx2+ky2k0NA in the (kx, ky)-plane, which limits the integration area, will be denoted by Ω for brevity. Since the electric field is free of divergence, we have:
A(kx,ky)·k=0.

The time-averaged power flow is given by the integral over a plane z = constant of the z-component of the time averaged Poynting vector [25]:

P(A)=12Re[E(r)×H(r)*]·z^dxdy=18π2k0(ɛ0μ0)1/2Ω|A(kx,ky)|2kzdkxdky.
Let be a unit vector and consider the projection of the electric field at the origin r = 0 along this unit vector:
(0,t)·v^=Re[E(0)·v^eiωt].
The aim is to find the field for which the amplitude of (0,t) · is maximum for a given total power. Without restricting the generality we may assume that E(0) · v is real. In fact, if it is not real, applying a time shift can always make it real. Hence we will assume that
Im[E(0)·v^]=14π2ΩIm[A(kx,ky)·v^]dkxdky=0.
Then the optimization problem is to find the plane wave amplitudes A(kx, ky) for which the component of the electric field along has maximum amplitude for a given total power P 0:
1(v^):maxA0Ev(A)E(0)·v^,undertheconstraintP(A)P0,
where 0 is the space of plane wave amplitudes which have finite mean flow of power through a plane z = constant and which satisfy Eq. (5). The problem is denoted as 1() to indicate that we are optimizing in the direction of . It can be shown that optimization problem 1() has a unique solution. The uniqueness is due to the imposed condition that E(0) · is real. Without this condition the optimum solutions are unique except for a phase shift [25].

2.2. Optimum plane wave amplitudes and field distributions

The solution of problem 1() can be computed by applying the Lagrange multiplier rule for inequality constraints. We remark that since we optimize a linear functional on a sphere in a Hilbert space (the sphere is the set of all fields of finite given power), the solution can alternatively be derived by using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality. In any case, the solution can be computed in closed form and is given by [25]:

A(kx,ky)=(8πP0n)1/2(μ0ɛ0)1/41kz1Γ(αmax,vz)[v^(v^·k^)k^],
where
Γ(αmax,vz)={43cosαmax13cos3αmaxvz2cosαmaxsin2αmax}1/2,
for which α max is such that
sinαmax=NA/n.
It follows from Eq. (6) that the electric field vector of the plane wave with wave vector k is parallel to the projection of on the plane perpendicular to k. The electric field in an arbitrary point r in image space can be obtained by substitution of the optimum plane wave amplitudes into Eq. (1). By changing the integration variables to respective polar and azimuthal angles, 0 < α < α max and 0 < β < 2π, given by (Fig. 1)
kx=ksinαcosβ,
ky=ksinαsinβ,
kz=kcosα,
and using cylindrical coordinates ρ,φ,z for the point of observation: r = x + y ŷ + z = ρ ρ^ + z = ρ cos φ + ρ sin φ ŷ + z , one finds for the optimum electric field [25]:
E(ρ,φ,z)=2πnP0λ0(μ0ɛ0)1/41Γ(αmax,vz)¯¯(ρ,φ,z)(vxvyvz),
where
¯¯(ρ,φ,z)=(g00,1(ρ,z)+g02,1(ρ,z)000g00,1(ρ,z)+g02,1(ρ,z)0002g00,3(ρ,z))+(g20,3(ρ,z)cos(2φ)g20,3(ρ,z)sin(2φ)2ig11,2(ρ,z)cosφg20,3(ρ,z)sin(2φ)g20,3(ρ,z)cos(2φ)2ig11,2(ρ,z)sinφ2ig11,2(ρ,z)cosφ2ig11,2(ρ,z)sinφ0),
and where
glν,μ(ρ,z)=0αmaxeik0nzcosαcosναsinμαJl(k0nρsinα)dα.
Note that the electric field vector and the matrix in Eq. (12) are on the Cartesian basis {,ŷ,}.

 

Fig. 1 Spherical coordinates in image space with respect to wave unit vector .

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

3. Interpretation of optimum fields and second optimization

3.1. The electric field in focus

We consider the optimum electric field vector at the origin. Because glν,μ(0)=0 when l ≥ 1 it follows from Eq. (13) that

E(0)=[g00,1(0)+g02,1(0)]vxx^+[g00,1(0)+g02,1(0)]vyy^+2g00,3(ρ,z)vzz^,
with
g00,1(0)=0αmaxsinαdα=1cosαmax,
g02,1(0)=0αmaxcos2αsinαdα=1313cos3αmax,
g00,3(0)=0αmaxsin3αdα=23cosαmax+13cos3αmax.
It is seen that the electric vector E(0) has real components, hence the electric field at r = 0 is linearly polarized. It is furthermore parallel to the plane through and the z-axis. However, the direction of polarization is in general different from , i.e. from the direction along which the electric field amplitude is maximized. We shall write for convenience:
γ+g00,1(0)+g02,1(0)=43cosαmax13cos3αmax,
γ2[g00,1(0)g02,1(0)]=432cosαmax+23cos3αmax.
Then Eq. (7) becomes:
Γ(αmax,vz)={γ+(γ+γ)vz2}1/2,
and Eq. (15) can be written as
E(0)=γ+(vxx^+vyy^)+γvzz^.
Let û be the unit vector of the direction of polarization, i.e.
u^=E(0)|E(0)|=γ+(vxx^+vyy^)+γvzz^γ+2(vx2+vy2)+γ2vz2.

We conclude that the direction of polarization at the origin is only parallel to the direction of optimization when vz = 0 (transverse polarization) and when vx = vy = 0 (longitudinal polarization). An exception is the case that the numerical aperture NA = n. Then α max = π/2, so that γ + = γ = 4/3 and hence û and are always identical.

Without restricting the generality we may assume that lies in the (x,z)-plane, i.e. that vy = 0. Then û also is in the (x,z)-plane. Let ϑv and ϑu be the angle that and û, respectively, make with the z-axis. Then

vx=sinϑv,vz=cosϑv,
and similarly,
ux=sinϑu,uz=cosϑu,
The relationship between both angles is displayed in Fig. 2 for several values of the numerical aperture. We see that always ϑu ≥ ϑv, i.e. the angle that û makes with the positive z-axis is in general larger than that of . Furthermore, ϑu sweeps out all values between 0 and π/2 when ϑv varies between 0 and π/2. The difference between the two angles decreases when the numerical aperture is increased and the angles are the same in the limit NA = n.

 

Fig. 2 The relationship between the optimization angle ϑv for which problem 1 is solved and angle ϑu between the direction of the optimum electric field vector E(0) and the z-axis, for several values of the numerical aperture NA.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

3.2. Optimum linearly polarized electric field

Although the solutions of problem 1() have at the origin maximum electric field amplitude in the direction of , the electric field vector at the origin is, although linearly polarized, not parallel to . In fact it is pointing in the direction of the unit vector û.

The question then arises: what are the optimum fields that have maximum amplitude in a given direction and are in addition linearly polarized along ? The requirement that the electric field vector (0,t) = Re[E(0)exp(–iωt)] is parallel to at all times t is equivalent to demanding that the vector E(0) is proportional to , which in turn is equivalent to:

E(0)·(v^×z^)=0andE(0)·[v^×(v^×z^)]=0.
(When = these conditions become: E(0) · = 0 and E(0) · ŷ = 0). Hence, the second optimization problem that we want to consider is:
2(v^):maxA0Ev(A)=E(0)·v^,undertheconstraintsP(A)P0and(26),
where the space 0 consists as before of all plane wave amplitudes A (kx, ky) such that E(0) · is real.

The solution of problem 2() can be determined analogously to that of problem 1() by using the Lagrange multiplier rule or alternatively using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality. In the latter case the constraint that the electric field should be linearly polarized along the direction of , should be incorporated into the Hilbert space of fields to which the Schwarz inequality is applied. Closed formulae are again obtained and the solution is again unique due to the fact that the phase is fixed by requiring that E(0) · is real. It is then found that when is varied, more precisely, when ϑv is varied in the interval 0 ≤ ϑvπ/2, the two sets of optimum solutions of the two optimization problems are identical when the proper directions are chosen. For every there is a unit vector û such that the optimum field that is the solution of 1() is also the solution of 2(û), and conversely. In fact, the relationship between the unit vectors and û is given by Eq. (23) defined in the previous section.

This is easy to prove. Let E1v^ and E2u^ be the solution of problem 1() and 2(û), respectively, and let and û be related by Eq. (23). Then we have to show that

E1v^=E2u^.
We first remark that both E1v^ and E2u^ are pointing in the direction of the unit vector û and are real vectors. For E1v^ this follows from Eq. (15) while for E2u^ it follows from the requirements for the field in optimization problem 2(û).

It is clear that E1v^ satisfies all constraints of problem 2(û). Hence

0<E1v^(0)·u^E2u^(0)·u^.
Since E1v^(0) and E2u^(0) are both pointing in the direction of û and since by Eq. (23) · û > 0, it follows that
E1v^(0)·v^E2u^(0)·v^.
but E2u^ satisfies all constraints of problem 1() and since E1v^ is the solution, it follows that in Eq. (29) equality holds. Because the solution of problem 1() is unique, we thus conclude that Eq. (27) is indeed true.

3.3. Explicit expressions for the solution of problem ℘2

With the results obtained above, explicit formulae for the optimum plane wave amplitudes that are solutions of optimization problem 2(û) can be easily obtained. First we determine the unit vector by inverting Eq. (23):

v^=γ(uxx^+uyy^)+γ+uzz^γ2(ux2+uy2)+γ+2uz2=γu^+(γ+γ)uzz^γ2(ux2+uy2)+γ+2uz2.
By substituting this into Eq. (6), we obtain the optimum plane wave amplitudes of problem 2(û):
A(kx,ky)=(8πP0n)1/2(μ0ɛ0)1/41kz1Γ(αmax,vz)[v^(v^·k^)k^]=(8πP0n)1/2(μ0ɛ0)1/41kz1Γ˜(αmax,uz)×{γ[u^(u^·k^)k^]+(γ+γ)uz[z^(z^·k^)k^]},
where
Γ˜(αmax,uz)Γ(αmax,vz)γ2(ux2+uy2)+γ+2uz2=γ+γ{γ(γ+γ)uz2}1/2,
Finally, the expression for the optimum electric field in an arbitrary point r becomes with Eq. (12):
E(ρ,φ,z)=2πnP0λ0(μ0ɛ0)1/41Γ˜(αmax,uz)¯¯(ρ,φ,z)(γuxγuyγ+uz),
where ℳ̿ (ρ, φ, z) is still given by Eq. (13).

3.4. Electric field strength in focus

Let E1v^ be the solution of optimization problem 1() for some unit vector and let û be the unit vector in the direction of E1v^(0) as defined by Eq. (23). Without restricting the generality, we assume again that vy = uy = 0. At the left-side of Fig. 3 the projections of E1v^(0) along the direction of optimization and along û are compared as function of ϑv for several values of the numerical aperture and for total power P 0 = 1W. The right-side of Fig. 3 shows a comparison between the projections of the solutions of 1() and 2() along , i.e. E1v^(0)·v^ and E2v^(0)·v^ (again as functions of ϑv for several values of the numerical aperture and for P 0 = 1W). We see that for ϑv = 0o (longitudinal polarized optimum field) and ϑv = 90o (transverse polarized optimum field), the projections are identical. As was pointed out before, this is also true for all angles 0 ≤ ϑvπ/2 when NA = n.

 

Fig. 3 Left: The electric field E1v^(0) projected along and û as functions of ϑv for several values of the numerical aperture. : The projections of the optimum electric fields E1v^(0) and E2v^(0) along the direction , as function of ϑv for several values of the numerical aperture.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

4. Realization of the optimum fields

In this section we discuss two methods for realizing the optimum fields. In the first method an appropriate pupil distribution is focused by a lens of given numerical aperture. The optimum field is the field in image space of the lens with the focal point as point were the electric field is maximum. In the second method, an electric dipole with appropriate dipole moment is imaged by a lens system with magnification 1. The field component is then maximum at the image point of the dipole. It should be noted that both realizations of the image field are approximative because they are based on a model of the focusing and imaging of a high NA lens which are valid under certain, be it rather mild, assumptions [28].

4.1. Pupil fields that when focused yield the optimum field distributions.

We consider a diffraction limited lens with (high) numerical aperture NA and a light beam which propagates parallel to the optical axis and is focused by this lens. Let {,ŷ,} be a Cartesian basis in image space such that the optical axis is parallel to and the origin coincides with the focal point. Let { p,ŷ p} be the coordinate system in the entrance pupil of the lens, with p and ŷ p parallel to and ŷ, respectively. Finally, let ρp and φp be polar coordinates in the entrance pupil, i.e.

xp=ρpcosφp,yp=ρpsinφp.
We have
ρ^p=cosφpx^p+sinφpy^p,
φ^p=sinφpx^p+cosφp·y^p,
so that {ρ^ p, φ^ p,} is a positively orientated orthonormal basis. The electric field in a point (ρp, φp) of the entrance pupil of the lens is decomposed on this basis:
Ep(ρp,φp)=Eρp(ρp,φp)ρ^p+Eφp(ρp,φp)φ^p,
where the -component of the electric field is neglected because the incident beam is predominantly propagating parallel to the optical z-axis. This system is illustrated by Fig. 4.

 

Fig. 4 The focusing lens with numerical aperture NA.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

To determine the focused field we use the theory of Ignatowsky [1, 2] and Richards and Wolf [3,4]. This theory is based on (i) Debye’s approximation which expresses the plane wave amplitudes at the focal plane in terms of the tangential electric field in the entrance pupil, and (ii) the Abbe sine condition, which guarantees conservation of energy. Debye’s approximation is equivalent to a sharp cut-off of the plane wave spectrum as mentioned in [29] and is valid provided that [28, 30]:

fλ0nsin2(αmax),
where f is the focal distance and sinα max = NA/n. In the model, the pupil coordinates xp and yp are related to the wave vector components by (see Fig. 4):
kx=kxpf=kρpfcosφp,ky=kypf=kρpfsinφp.
We introduce unit vectors perpendicular to the wave vector
iS^(k^)=k^×z^|k^×z^|=1kx2+ky2(kykx0),
iP^(k^)=iS^(k^)×k^|iS^(k^)×k^|=1k1kx2+ky2(kxkzkykzkx2+ky2).
Note that the orthonormal basis { iP^(k^), iS^(k^), } is positively oriented. The vector amplitude A(kx, ky) of the plane wave with wave vector k can be written as:
A(kx,ky)=AP(kx,ky)iP^(k^)+AS(kx,ky)iS^(k^).
The radial and polar components of the pupil field are proportional to AP and AS, respectively [29, 31]:
Eρp(ρp,φp)=kkz2πifAP(kρpfcosφp,kρpfsinφp),
Eφp(ρp,φp)=kkz2πifAS(kρpfcosφp,kρpfsinφp),
where the factor kkz is included to account for energy conservation and
kz=k1ρp2f2.
By substituting the plane wave amplitudes Eq. (6) of the solution of problem 1(), we obtain the entrance pupil field that after focusing by the lens yields this optimum field in the focal region:
Ep(ρp,φp)=i(2P0πn)1/2(μ0ɛ0)1/41fΓ(αmax,vz)×{[(f2ρp2)1/4f1/2(cosφpvx+sinφpvy)+ρpf1/2(f2ρp2)1/4vz]ρ^p+f1/2(f2ρp2)1/4(cosφpvysinφpvx)φ^p}.
Similarly, the pupil field that yields the solution of optimization problem 2(û) is:
Ep(ρp,φp)=i(2P0πn)1/2(μ0ɛ0)1/41fΓ˜(αmax,uz)×{[(f2ρp2)1/4f1/2γ(cosφpux+sinφpuy)+ρpf1/2(f2ρp2)1/4γ+uz]ρ^p+f1/2(f2ρp2)1/4γ(cosφpuysinφpux)φ^p}.

It follows from the formulas that the optimum pupil fields are linearly polarized in all points of the pupil and that in all points they are in phase. Furthermore, for the case that vx = vy = ux = uy = 0 (longitudinal case), the pupil field is radially polarized in all points of the pupil.

In Fig. 5 snapshots are shown of the optimum pupil distributions which after focusing give the solution of 1() (left figure) and 2() (right figure), for unit vector with vy = 0 and ϑv = 45°. The numerical aperture is NA/n = 0.75 in both cases. The direction of the arrows is that of the linear polarization and their length is proportional to the electric field amplitude. The optimum pupil field at the right of Fig. 5 is similar to a radially polarized pupil field but with center shifted in the negative xp-direction.

 

Fig. 5 Left: Snapshots of the electric field in the entrance pupil, E p, which after focusing yields the field with maximum component along obtained by solving 1() (left) and the optimum pupil field that is solution of 2() (right), where is such that vy = 0 and ϑv = 45°. In both cases NA/n = 0.75.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

4.2. Imaging of an electric dipole

Consider an imaging system consisting of two lenses as shown in Fig. 6. We choose a Cartesian coordinate system {,ŷ,} in object space which is parallel to the coordinate system in image space as defined in Subsection 4.1 but the first focal point is at the origin of this coordinate system. Although the coordinate systems in object and image systems are denoted by the same symbols, no confusion will arise. Let there be an electric dipole with dipole vector p = (px, py, pz) in the focal point of the first lens. The electric field in object space radiated by this dipole is [32]:

Ed(r)=k2ɛ0pG(r)(·pɛ0G(r)),
where G(r) is the free space Green’s function of the scalar Helmholtz equation:
G(r)=eikr4πr.
By Fourier transformation with respect to (x,y), the plane wave expansion of E d in a plane of constant z ≥ 0 is:
[Ed](kxo,kyo,z)=[k2p(ko·p)ko]eikzoz2iɛ0kzo,
where superscript ‘o’ indicates a wave vector in object space. Let Ao(kxo,kyo) be the plane wave amplitudes in the source plane z = 0. Then
Ao(kxo,kyo)=[Ed](kxo,kyo,0)
=12iɛ0kzo[k2p(ko·p)ko].
The field of the dipole at the focal point is collimated by the first lens and then focused by the second lens with focal length f 2. The pupil fields are again assumed to be related to the plane wave amplitudes by Ignatowsky’s model. After writing the plane wave amplitudes in the object plane on the basis {o, iP^o, iS^o}, the electric field in the exit pupil of the left lens and the entrance pupil of the second lens are obtained by Eqs. (43) and (44). When the two lenses are identical, i.e. f 1 = f 2, the (paraxial) magnification is equal to 1 and the plane wave amplitudes Ai(kxi,kyi) in the focal plane of the second lens become
Ai(kxi,kyi)·k^i=Ao(kxo,kyo)·k^o=0,
Ai(kxi,kyi)·iP^i=Ao(kxo,kyo)·iP^o,
Ai(kxi,kyi)·iS^i=Ao(kxo,kyo)·iS^o,
where superscript ‘i’ refers to image space and the wave vector components in image and object spaces are related by: kxi=kxo, kyi=kyo and kzi=kzo. These relationships and Eqs. (40) and (41) imply that in image space:
Ai(kx,ky)=12iɛ0kz[k2p˜(p˜·k)k],
where = (px, py, −pz) and where we have omitted the image space superscript from the wave vector in image space. By comparing Eqs. (56) and (6), it follows that when the dipole vector has length:
|p˜|=(32πɛ0P0n)1/2(ɛ0μ0)1/4Γ(αmax,vz),
and the unit vector is defined by
v^=(vx,vy,vz)=(px,py,pz)/|p˜|=p˜/|p˜|,
the plane wave amplitudes of the image of the dipole and that of the solution of problem 1 () are identical (apart from a factor −i). We conclude that when an electric dipole p is imaged with unit magnification, the field in the image point has, for the given power, maximum field amplitude in the direction of the unit vector = (px, py, −pz)/||. Because of the relationships between the solutions of optimization problems 1 () and 2 (û), the image of the electric dipole is also the field that has maximum amplitude and is linearly polarized in the direction of the unit vector û given by
u^=γ+(pxx^+pyy^)γpzz^γ+2(px2+py2)+γ2pz2,
which is illustrated in Fig. 7.

 

Fig. 6 The two lens system that is used to image the optimum electric field in image space when a dipole source is placed in object space. The focal length f 1 denotes the radius of entrance pupil sphere 1, focal length f 2 that of exit pupil sphere 2.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

 

Fig. 7 Schematics of the imaging of a dipole using the two lens system with (paraxial) magnification equal to 1. The dipole produces the electric field at the focal point which has maximum amplitude in the direction of and which has maximum amplitude and is linearly polarized in the direction of û.

Download Full Size | PPT Slide | PDF

5. Conclusion

In a previous study focused fields were determined that have maximum electric field amplitude in a particular direction in the focal point. Although the optimum electric field is linear polarized in the focal point, the direction of polarization is in general not parallel to that for which the amplitude is optimum. We therefore studied the optimization problem in which it is required that the optimum field is linear polarized in the same direction as for which the amplitude is maximum. It was shown that when the direction is varied, the set of solutions of the two optimization problems are identical, i.e for every optimization direction in the unconstrained optimization problem there is a direction for the second optimization problem such that the solutions of the two problems are the same. The relationship between solutions of the two optimization problems for the same direction of optimization were derived. The optimum fields can be realized by focusing of appropriate pupil fields. Alternatively, the fields can be obtained by imaging an electric dipole with unit magnification. We demonstrated that the optimum field for a given direction is identical to the image of an electric dipole whose vector is the mirror image of the direction of optimization with the (x,y)-plane as mirror.

References and links

1. V. S. Ignatowsky, “Diffraction by a lens having arbitrary opening,” Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd I, paper IV (1919), (in Russian).

2. V. S. Ignatowsky, “Diffraction by a parabolic mirror having arbitrary opening,” Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd , I, paper V (1920), (in Russian).

3. E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems I. An integral repesentation of the image field,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 349–357 (1959). [CrossRef]  

4. B. Richards and E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems II. structure of the image field in an aplanatic system,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 358–379 (1959). [CrossRef]  

5. X. S. Xie and R. C. Dunn, “Probing single molecule dynamics,” Science 265, 361–364 (1994). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

6. L. Novotny, M. R. Beverluis, K. S. Youngworth, and T. G. Brown, “Longitudinal field modes probed by single molecules,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5251–5254 (2001). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

7. Q. W. Zhan, “Trapping metallic Rayleigh particles with radial polarization,” Opt. Express 12, 3377–3382 (2004). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

8. L. E. Helseth, “Focusing of atoms with strongly confined light potentials,” Opt. Commun. 212, 343–352 (2002). [CrossRef]  

9. M. Meier, V. Romano, and T. Feurer, “Material processing with pulsed radially and azimuthally polarized laser radiation,” Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 86, 329–334 (2007). [CrossRef]  

10. Q. Zhan and J. Leger, “Focus Shaping using cylindrical vector beams,” Opt. Express 10, 324–331 (2002). [PubMed]  

11. J. Wang, W. Chen, and Q. Zhan, “Engineering of high purity ultra-long optical needle field through reversing the electric dipole array radiation,” Opt. Express 18, 21965–21972 (2010). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

12. N. Sanner, N. Huot, E. Audouard, C. Larat, J.-P. Huignard, and B. Loiseaux, “Programmable focal spot shaping of amplified femtosecond laser pulses,” Opt. Lett. 30, 1479–1481 (2005). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

13. M. A. A. Neil, F. Massoumian, R. Juskaitis, and T. Wilson, “Method for the generation of arbitrary complex vector wave fronts,” Opt. Lett. 27, 1929–1931 (2002). [CrossRef]  

14. M. Stalder and M. Schadt, “Linearly polarized light with axial symmetry generated by liquid-crystal polarization converters,” Opt. Lett. 21, 1948 (1996). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

15. I. Iglesias and B. Vohnsen, “Polarization structuring for focal volume shaping in high-resolution microscopy,” Opt. Commun. 271, 40–47 (2007). [CrossRef]  

16. C. J. R. Sheppard and K. G. Larkin, “Optimal concentration of electromagnetic radiation,” J. Mod. Opt. 41, 1495–1505 (1994). [CrossRef]  

17. C. J. R. Sheppard and P. Török, “Electromagnetic field in the focal region of an electric dipole wave,” Optik 104, 175–177 (1997).

18. A. J. E. M. Janssen, S. van Haver, J. J. M. Braat, and P. Dirksen, “Strehl ratio and optimum focus of high-numerical-aperture beams,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 2, 07008 (2007). [CrossRef]  

19. V. Dhayalan and J. J. Stamnes, “Focusing of mixed-dipole waves,” Pure Appl. Opt. 6, 317–345 (1997). [CrossRef]  

20. R. Dorn, S. Quabis, and G. Leuchs, “Sharper focus for a radially polarized light beam,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 233901 (2003). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

21. S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “Focusing light to a tighter spot,” Opt. Commun. 179, 1–7 (2000). [CrossRef]  

22. S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “The focus of light–theoretical calculation and experimental tomographic reconstruction,” Appl. Phys. B 72, 109–113 (2001).

23. C. J. R. Sheppard and A. Choudhurry, “Annular pupils, radial polarization and superresolution,” Appl. Opt. 43, 4322–4327 (2004). [CrossRef]   [PubMed]  

24. H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “The field in focus with maximum longitudinal electric component,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 1233904 (2008). [CrossRef]  

25. H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 79, 013825 (2009). [CrossRef]  

26. H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Erratum: focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 81, 059903 (2010). [CrossRef]  

27. W. Chen and Q. Zhan, “Diffraction limited focusing with controllable arbitrary three-dimensional polarization,” J. Opt. 12, 045707 (2010) [CrossRef]  

28. E. Wolf and Y. Li, “Conditions for the validity of the Debye integral representation of focused fields,” Opt. Commun. 39, 205–210 (1981). [CrossRef]  

29. J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and P. Dirksen, “Assessment of optical systems by means of point-spread functions,” in “Progress in Optics,” Vol. 51, E. Wolf, ed. (Elsevier B.V., 2008), chap. 6, pp. 349–468. [CrossRef]  

30. R. Aarts, J. J. M. Braat, P. Dirksen, S. van Haver, C. van Heesch, and A. Janssen, “Analytic expressions and approximations for the on-axis, aberration-free Rayleigh and Debye integral in the case of focusing fields on a circular aperture,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08039 (2008). [CrossRef]  

31. J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and S. F. Pereira, “Image formation in a multilayer using the extended Nijboer-Zernike theory,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 4, 09048 (2009). [CrossRef]  

32. L. Novotny and B. Hecht, “Principles of nano-optics,” Section 2.10.2, (Cambridge University Press, 2008).

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. V. S. Ignatowsky, “Diffraction by a lens having arbitrary opening,” Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd I, paper IV (1919), (in Russian).
  2. V. S. Ignatowsky, “Diffraction by a parabolic mirror having arbitrary opening,” Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd,  I, paper V (1920), (in Russian).
  3. E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems I. An integral repesentation of the image field,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 349–357 (1959).
    [Crossref]
  4. B. Richards and E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems II. structure of the image field in an aplanatic system,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 358–379 (1959).
    [Crossref]
  5. X. S. Xie and R. C. Dunn, “Probing single molecule dynamics,” Science 265, 361–364 (1994).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  6. L. Novotny, M. R. Beverluis, K. S. Youngworth, and T. G. Brown, “Longitudinal field modes probed by single molecules,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5251–5254 (2001).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  7. Q. W. Zhan, “Trapping metallic Rayleigh particles with radial polarization,” Opt. Express 12, 3377–3382 (2004).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  8. L. E. Helseth, “Focusing of atoms with strongly confined light potentials,” Opt. Commun. 212, 343–352 (2002).
    [Crossref]
  9. M. Meier, V. Romano, and T. Feurer, “Material processing with pulsed radially and azimuthally polarized laser radiation,” Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 86, 329–334 (2007).
    [Crossref]
  10. Q. Zhan and J. Leger, “Focus Shaping using cylindrical vector beams,” Opt. Express 10, 324–331 (2002).
    [PubMed]
  11. J. Wang, W. Chen, and Q. Zhan, “Engineering of high purity ultra-long optical needle field through reversing the electric dipole array radiation,” Opt. Express 18, 21965–21972 (2010).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  12. N. Sanner, N. Huot, E. Audouard, C. Larat, J.-P. Huignard, and B. Loiseaux, “Programmable focal spot shaping of amplified femtosecond laser pulses,” Opt. Lett. 30, 1479–1481 (2005).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  13. M. A. A. Neil, F. Massoumian, R. Juskaitis, and T. Wilson, “Method for the generation of arbitrary complex vector wave fronts,” Opt. Lett. 27, 1929–1931 (2002).
    [Crossref]
  14. M. Stalder and M. Schadt, “Linearly polarized light with axial symmetry generated by liquid-crystal polarization converters,” Opt. Lett. 21, 1948 (1996).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  15. I. Iglesias and B. Vohnsen, “Polarization structuring for focal volume shaping in high-resolution microscopy,” Opt. Commun. 271, 40–47 (2007).
    [Crossref]
  16. C. J. R. Sheppard and K. G. Larkin, “Optimal concentration of electromagnetic radiation,” J. Mod. Opt. 41, 1495–1505 (1994).
    [Crossref]
  17. C. J. R. Sheppard and P. Török, “Electromagnetic field in the focal region of an electric dipole wave,” Optik 104, 175–177 (1997).
  18. A. J. E. M. Janssen, S. van Haver, J. J. M. Braat, and P. Dirksen, “Strehl ratio and optimum focus of high-numerical-aperture beams,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 2, 07008 (2007).
    [Crossref]
  19. V. Dhayalan and J. J. Stamnes, “Focusing of mixed-dipole waves,” Pure Appl. Opt. 6, 317–345 (1997).
    [Crossref]
  20. R. Dorn, S. Quabis, and G. Leuchs, “Sharper focus for a radially polarized light beam,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 233901 (2003).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  21. S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “Focusing light to a tighter spot,” Opt. Commun. 179, 1–7 (2000).
    [Crossref]
  22. S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “The focus of light–theoretical calculation and experimental tomographic reconstruction,” Appl. Phys. B 72, 109–113 (2001).
  23. C. J. R. Sheppard and A. Choudhurry, “Annular pupils, radial polarization and superresolution,” Appl. Opt. 43, 4322–4327 (2004).
    [Crossref] [PubMed]
  24. H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “The field in focus with maximum longitudinal electric component,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 1233904 (2008).
    [Crossref]
  25. H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 79, 013825 (2009).
    [Crossref]
  26. H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Erratum: focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 81, 059903 (2010).
    [Crossref]
  27. W. Chen and Q. Zhan, “Diffraction limited focusing with controllable arbitrary three-dimensional polarization,” J. Opt. 12, 045707 (2010)
    [Crossref]
  28. E. Wolf and Y. Li, “Conditions for the validity of the Debye integral representation of focused fields,” Opt. Commun. 39, 205–210 (1981).
    [Crossref]
  29. J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and P. Dirksen, “Assessment of optical systems by means of point-spread functions,” in “Progress in Optics,” Vol. 51, E. Wolf, ed. (Elsevier B.V., 2008), chap. 6, pp. 349–468.
    [Crossref]
  30. R. Aarts, J. J. M. Braat, P. Dirksen, S. van Haver, C. van Heesch, and A. Janssen, “Analytic expressions and approximations for the on-axis, aberration-free Rayleigh and Debye integral in the case of focusing fields on a circular aperture,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08039 (2008).
    [Crossref]
  31. J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and S. F. Pereira, “Image formation in a multilayer using the extended Nijboer-Zernike theory,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 4, 09048 (2009).
    [Crossref]
  32. L. Novotny and B. Hecht, “Principles of nano-optics,” Section 2.10.2, (Cambridge University Press, 2008).

2010 (3)

J. Wang, W. Chen, and Q. Zhan, “Engineering of high purity ultra-long optical needle field through reversing the electric dipole array radiation,” Opt. Express 18, 21965–21972 (2010).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Erratum: focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 81, 059903 (2010).
[Crossref]

W. Chen and Q. Zhan, “Diffraction limited focusing with controllable arbitrary three-dimensional polarization,” J. Opt. 12, 045707 (2010)
[Crossref]

2009 (2)

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 79, 013825 (2009).
[Crossref]

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and S. F. Pereira, “Image formation in a multilayer using the extended Nijboer-Zernike theory,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 4, 09048 (2009).
[Crossref]

2008 (2)

R. Aarts, J. J. M. Braat, P. Dirksen, S. van Haver, C. van Heesch, and A. Janssen, “Analytic expressions and approximations for the on-axis, aberration-free Rayleigh and Debye integral in the case of focusing fields on a circular aperture,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08039 (2008).
[Crossref]

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “The field in focus with maximum longitudinal electric component,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 1233904 (2008).
[Crossref]

2007 (3)

A. J. E. M. Janssen, S. van Haver, J. J. M. Braat, and P. Dirksen, “Strehl ratio and optimum focus of high-numerical-aperture beams,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 2, 07008 (2007).
[Crossref]

M. Meier, V. Romano, and T. Feurer, “Material processing with pulsed radially and azimuthally polarized laser radiation,” Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 86, 329–334 (2007).
[Crossref]

I. Iglesias and B. Vohnsen, “Polarization structuring for focal volume shaping in high-resolution microscopy,” Opt. Commun. 271, 40–47 (2007).
[Crossref]

2005 (1)

2004 (2)

2003 (1)

R. Dorn, S. Quabis, and G. Leuchs, “Sharper focus for a radially polarized light beam,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 233901 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

2002 (3)

2001 (2)

L. Novotny, M. R. Beverluis, K. S. Youngworth, and T. G. Brown, “Longitudinal field modes probed by single molecules,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5251–5254 (2001).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “The focus of light–theoretical calculation and experimental tomographic reconstruction,” Appl. Phys. B 72, 109–113 (2001).

2000 (1)

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “Focusing light to a tighter spot,” Opt. Commun. 179, 1–7 (2000).
[Crossref]

1997 (2)

V. Dhayalan and J. J. Stamnes, “Focusing of mixed-dipole waves,” Pure Appl. Opt. 6, 317–345 (1997).
[Crossref]

C. J. R. Sheppard and P. Török, “Electromagnetic field in the focal region of an electric dipole wave,” Optik 104, 175–177 (1997).

1996 (1)

1994 (2)

C. J. R. Sheppard and K. G. Larkin, “Optimal concentration of electromagnetic radiation,” J. Mod. Opt. 41, 1495–1505 (1994).
[Crossref]

X. S. Xie and R. C. Dunn, “Probing single molecule dynamics,” Science 265, 361–364 (1994).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

1981 (1)

E. Wolf and Y. Li, “Conditions for the validity of the Debye integral representation of focused fields,” Opt. Commun. 39, 205–210 (1981).
[Crossref]

1959 (2)

E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems I. An integral repesentation of the image field,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 349–357 (1959).
[Crossref]

B. Richards and E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems II. structure of the image field in an aplanatic system,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 358–379 (1959).
[Crossref]

1920 (1)

V. S. Ignatowsky, “Diffraction by a parabolic mirror having arbitrary opening,” Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd,  I, paper V (1920), (in Russian).

1919 (1)

V. S. Ignatowsky, “Diffraction by a lens having arbitrary opening,” Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd I, paper IV (1919), (in Russian).

Aarts, R.

R. Aarts, J. J. M. Braat, P. Dirksen, S. van Haver, C. van Heesch, and A. Janssen, “Analytic expressions and approximations for the on-axis, aberration-free Rayleigh and Debye integral in the case of focusing fields on a circular aperture,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08039 (2008).
[Crossref]

Audouard, E.

Beverluis, M. R.

L. Novotny, M. R. Beverluis, K. S. Youngworth, and T. G. Brown, “Longitudinal field modes probed by single molecules,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5251–5254 (2001).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Braat, J. J. M.

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and S. F. Pereira, “Image formation in a multilayer using the extended Nijboer-Zernike theory,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 4, 09048 (2009).
[Crossref]

R. Aarts, J. J. M. Braat, P. Dirksen, S. van Haver, C. van Heesch, and A. Janssen, “Analytic expressions and approximations for the on-axis, aberration-free Rayleigh and Debye integral in the case of focusing fields on a circular aperture,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08039 (2008).
[Crossref]

A. J. E. M. Janssen, S. van Haver, J. J. M. Braat, and P. Dirksen, “Strehl ratio and optimum focus of high-numerical-aperture beams,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 2, 07008 (2007).
[Crossref]

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and P. Dirksen, “Assessment of optical systems by means of point-spread functions,” in “Progress in Optics,” Vol. 51, E. Wolf, ed. (Elsevier B.V., 2008), chap. 6, pp. 349–468.
[Crossref]

Brown, T. G.

L. Novotny, M. R. Beverluis, K. S. Youngworth, and T. G. Brown, “Longitudinal field modes probed by single molecules,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5251–5254 (2001).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Chen, W.

Choudhurry, A.

Dhayalan, V.

V. Dhayalan and J. J. Stamnes, “Focusing of mixed-dipole waves,” Pure Appl. Opt. 6, 317–345 (1997).
[Crossref]

Dirksen, P.

R. Aarts, J. J. M. Braat, P. Dirksen, S. van Haver, C. van Heesch, and A. Janssen, “Analytic expressions and approximations for the on-axis, aberration-free Rayleigh and Debye integral in the case of focusing fields on a circular aperture,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08039 (2008).
[Crossref]

A. J. E. M. Janssen, S. van Haver, J. J. M. Braat, and P. Dirksen, “Strehl ratio and optimum focus of high-numerical-aperture beams,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 2, 07008 (2007).
[Crossref]

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and P. Dirksen, “Assessment of optical systems by means of point-spread functions,” in “Progress in Optics,” Vol. 51, E. Wolf, ed. (Elsevier B.V., 2008), chap. 6, pp. 349–468.
[Crossref]

Dorn, R.

R. Dorn, S. Quabis, and G. Leuchs, “Sharper focus for a radially polarized light beam,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 233901 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “The focus of light–theoretical calculation and experimental tomographic reconstruction,” Appl. Phys. B 72, 109–113 (2001).

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “Focusing light to a tighter spot,” Opt. Commun. 179, 1–7 (2000).
[Crossref]

Dunn, R. C.

X. S. Xie and R. C. Dunn, “Probing single molecule dynamics,” Science 265, 361–364 (1994).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Eberler, M.

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “The focus of light–theoretical calculation and experimental tomographic reconstruction,” Appl. Phys. B 72, 109–113 (2001).

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “Focusing light to a tighter spot,” Opt. Commun. 179, 1–7 (2000).
[Crossref]

Feurer, T.

M. Meier, V. Romano, and T. Feurer, “Material processing with pulsed radially and azimuthally polarized laser radiation,” Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 86, 329–334 (2007).
[Crossref]

Glöckl, O.

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “The focus of light–theoretical calculation and experimental tomographic reconstruction,” Appl. Phys. B 72, 109–113 (2001).

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “Focusing light to a tighter spot,” Opt. Commun. 179, 1–7 (2000).
[Crossref]

Hecht, B.

L. Novotny and B. Hecht, “Principles of nano-optics,” Section 2.10.2, (Cambridge University Press, 2008).

Helseth, L. E.

L. E. Helseth, “Focusing of atoms with strongly confined light potentials,” Opt. Commun. 212, 343–352 (2002).
[Crossref]

Huignard, J.-P.

Huot, N.

Iglesias, I.

I. Iglesias and B. Vohnsen, “Polarization structuring for focal volume shaping in high-resolution microscopy,” Opt. Commun. 271, 40–47 (2007).
[Crossref]

Ignatowsky, V. S.

V. S. Ignatowsky, “Diffraction by a parabolic mirror having arbitrary opening,” Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd,  I, paper V (1920), (in Russian).

V. S. Ignatowsky, “Diffraction by a lens having arbitrary opening,” Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd I, paper IV (1919), (in Russian).

Janssen, A.

R. Aarts, J. J. M. Braat, P. Dirksen, S. van Haver, C. van Heesch, and A. Janssen, “Analytic expressions and approximations for the on-axis, aberration-free Rayleigh and Debye integral in the case of focusing fields on a circular aperture,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08039 (2008).
[Crossref]

Janssen, A. J. E. M.

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and S. F. Pereira, “Image formation in a multilayer using the extended Nijboer-Zernike theory,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 4, 09048 (2009).
[Crossref]

A. J. E. M. Janssen, S. van Haver, J. J. M. Braat, and P. Dirksen, “Strehl ratio and optimum focus of high-numerical-aperture beams,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 2, 07008 (2007).
[Crossref]

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and P. Dirksen, “Assessment of optical systems by means of point-spread functions,” in “Progress in Optics,” Vol. 51, E. Wolf, ed. (Elsevier B.V., 2008), chap. 6, pp. 349–468.
[Crossref]

Juskaitis, R.

Larat, C.

Larkin, K. G.

C. J. R. Sheppard and K. G. Larkin, “Optimal concentration of electromagnetic radiation,” J. Mod. Opt. 41, 1495–1505 (1994).
[Crossref]

Leger, J.

Leuchs, G.

R. Dorn, S. Quabis, and G. Leuchs, “Sharper focus for a radially polarized light beam,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 233901 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “The focus of light–theoretical calculation and experimental tomographic reconstruction,” Appl. Phys. B 72, 109–113 (2001).

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “Focusing light to a tighter spot,” Opt. Commun. 179, 1–7 (2000).
[Crossref]

Li, Y.

E. Wolf and Y. Li, “Conditions for the validity of the Debye integral representation of focused fields,” Opt. Commun. 39, 205–210 (1981).
[Crossref]

Loiseaux, B.

Massoumian, F.

Meier, M.

M. Meier, V. Romano, and T. Feurer, “Material processing with pulsed radially and azimuthally polarized laser radiation,” Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 86, 329–334 (2007).
[Crossref]

Neil, M. A. A.

Novotny, L.

L. Novotny, M. R. Beverluis, K. S. Youngworth, and T. G. Brown, “Longitudinal field modes probed by single molecules,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5251–5254 (2001).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

L. Novotny and B. Hecht, “Principles of nano-optics,” Section 2.10.2, (Cambridge University Press, 2008).

Pereira, S. F.

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Erratum: focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 81, 059903 (2010).
[Crossref]

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 79, 013825 (2009).
[Crossref]

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and S. F. Pereira, “Image formation in a multilayer using the extended Nijboer-Zernike theory,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 4, 09048 (2009).
[Crossref]

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “The field in focus with maximum longitudinal electric component,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 1233904 (2008).
[Crossref]

Quabis, S.

R. Dorn, S. Quabis, and G. Leuchs, “Sharper focus for a radially polarized light beam,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 233901 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “The focus of light–theoretical calculation and experimental tomographic reconstruction,” Appl. Phys. B 72, 109–113 (2001).

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “Focusing light to a tighter spot,” Opt. Commun. 179, 1–7 (2000).
[Crossref]

Richards, B.

B. Richards and E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems II. structure of the image field in an aplanatic system,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 358–379 (1959).
[Crossref]

Romano, V.

M. Meier, V. Romano, and T. Feurer, “Material processing with pulsed radially and azimuthally polarized laser radiation,” Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 86, 329–334 (2007).
[Crossref]

Sanner, N.

Schadt, M.

Sheppard, C. J. R.

C. J. R. Sheppard and A. Choudhurry, “Annular pupils, radial polarization and superresolution,” Appl. Opt. 43, 4322–4327 (2004).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

C. J. R. Sheppard and P. Török, “Electromagnetic field in the focal region of an electric dipole wave,” Optik 104, 175–177 (1997).

C. J. R. Sheppard and K. G. Larkin, “Optimal concentration of electromagnetic radiation,” J. Mod. Opt. 41, 1495–1505 (1994).
[Crossref]

Stalder, M.

Stamnes, J. J.

V. Dhayalan and J. J. Stamnes, “Focusing of mixed-dipole waves,” Pure Appl. Opt. 6, 317–345 (1997).
[Crossref]

Török, P.

C. J. R. Sheppard and P. Török, “Electromagnetic field in the focal region of an electric dipole wave,” Optik 104, 175–177 (1997).

Urbach, H. P.

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Erratum: focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 81, 059903 (2010).
[Crossref]

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 79, 013825 (2009).
[Crossref]

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “The field in focus with maximum longitudinal electric component,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 1233904 (2008).
[Crossref]

van Haver, S.

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and S. F. Pereira, “Image formation in a multilayer using the extended Nijboer-Zernike theory,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 4, 09048 (2009).
[Crossref]

R. Aarts, J. J. M. Braat, P. Dirksen, S. van Haver, C. van Heesch, and A. Janssen, “Analytic expressions and approximations for the on-axis, aberration-free Rayleigh and Debye integral in the case of focusing fields on a circular aperture,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08039 (2008).
[Crossref]

A. J. E. M. Janssen, S. van Haver, J. J. M. Braat, and P. Dirksen, “Strehl ratio and optimum focus of high-numerical-aperture beams,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 2, 07008 (2007).
[Crossref]

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and P. Dirksen, “Assessment of optical systems by means of point-spread functions,” in “Progress in Optics,” Vol. 51, E. Wolf, ed. (Elsevier B.V., 2008), chap. 6, pp. 349–468.
[Crossref]

van Heesch, C.

R. Aarts, J. J. M. Braat, P. Dirksen, S. van Haver, C. van Heesch, and A. Janssen, “Analytic expressions and approximations for the on-axis, aberration-free Rayleigh and Debye integral in the case of focusing fields on a circular aperture,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08039 (2008).
[Crossref]

Vohnsen, B.

I. Iglesias and B. Vohnsen, “Polarization structuring for focal volume shaping in high-resolution microscopy,” Opt. Commun. 271, 40–47 (2007).
[Crossref]

Wang, J.

Wilson, T.

Wolf, E.

E. Wolf and Y. Li, “Conditions for the validity of the Debye integral representation of focused fields,” Opt. Commun. 39, 205–210 (1981).
[Crossref]

B. Richards and E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems II. structure of the image field in an aplanatic system,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 358–379 (1959).
[Crossref]

E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems I. An integral repesentation of the image field,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 349–357 (1959).
[Crossref]

Xie, X. S.

X. S. Xie and R. C. Dunn, “Probing single molecule dynamics,” Science 265, 361–364 (1994).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Youngworth, K. S.

L. Novotny, M. R. Beverluis, K. S. Youngworth, and T. G. Brown, “Longitudinal field modes probed by single molecules,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5251–5254 (2001).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Zhan, Q.

Zhan, Q. W.

Appl. Opt. (1)

Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. (1)

M. Meier, V. Romano, and T. Feurer, “Material processing with pulsed radially and azimuthally polarized laser radiation,” Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 86, 329–334 (2007).
[Crossref]

Appl. Phys. B (1)

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “The focus of light–theoretical calculation and experimental tomographic reconstruction,” Appl. Phys. B 72, 109–113 (2001).

J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. (3)

R. Aarts, J. J. M. Braat, P. Dirksen, S. van Haver, C. van Heesch, and A. Janssen, “Analytic expressions and approximations for the on-axis, aberration-free Rayleigh and Debye integral in the case of focusing fields on a circular aperture,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 3, 08039 (2008).
[Crossref]

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and S. F. Pereira, “Image formation in a multilayer using the extended Nijboer-Zernike theory,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 4, 09048 (2009).
[Crossref]

A. J. E. M. Janssen, S. van Haver, J. J. M. Braat, and P. Dirksen, “Strehl ratio and optimum focus of high-numerical-aperture beams,” J. Eur. Opt. Soc. Rapid Publ. 2, 07008 (2007).
[Crossref]

J. Mod. Opt. (1)

C. J. R. Sheppard and K. G. Larkin, “Optimal concentration of electromagnetic radiation,” J. Mod. Opt. 41, 1495–1505 (1994).
[Crossref]

J. Opt. (1)

W. Chen and Q. Zhan, “Diffraction limited focusing with controllable arbitrary three-dimensional polarization,” J. Opt. 12, 045707 (2010)
[Crossref]

Opt. Commun. (4)

E. Wolf and Y. Li, “Conditions for the validity of the Debye integral representation of focused fields,” Opt. Commun. 39, 205–210 (1981).
[Crossref]

S. Quabis, R. Dorn, M. Eberler, O. Glöckl, and G. Leuchs, “Focusing light to a tighter spot,” Opt. Commun. 179, 1–7 (2000).
[Crossref]

L. E. Helseth, “Focusing of atoms with strongly confined light potentials,” Opt. Commun. 212, 343–352 (2002).
[Crossref]

I. Iglesias and B. Vohnsen, “Polarization structuring for focal volume shaping in high-resolution microscopy,” Opt. Commun. 271, 40–47 (2007).
[Crossref]

Opt. Express (3)

Opt. Lett. (3)

Optik (1)

C. J. R. Sheppard and P. Török, “Electromagnetic field in the focal region of an electric dipole wave,” Optik 104, 175–177 (1997).

Phys. Rev. A (2)

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 79, 013825 (2009).
[Crossref]

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “Erratum: focused fields of given power with maximum electric field components,” Phys. Rev. A 81, 059903 (2010).
[Crossref]

Phys. Rev. Lett. (3)

R. Dorn, S. Quabis, and G. Leuchs, “Sharper focus for a radially polarized light beam,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 233901 (2003).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

H. P. Urbach and S. F. Pereira, “The field in focus with maximum longitudinal electric component,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 1233904 (2008).
[Crossref]

L. Novotny, M. R. Beverluis, K. S. Youngworth, and T. G. Brown, “Longitudinal field modes probed by single molecules,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5251–5254 (2001).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A (2)

E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems I. An integral repesentation of the image field,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 349–357 (1959).
[Crossref]

B. Richards and E. Wolf, “Electromagnetic diffraction in optical systems II. structure of the image field in an aplanatic system,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 253, 358–379 (1959).
[Crossref]

Pure Appl. Opt. (1)

V. Dhayalan and J. J. Stamnes, “Focusing of mixed-dipole waves,” Pure Appl. Opt. 6, 317–345 (1997).
[Crossref]

Science (1)

X. S. Xie and R. C. Dunn, “Probing single molecule dynamics,” Science 265, 361–364 (1994).
[Crossref] [PubMed]

Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd (2)

V. S. Ignatowsky, “Diffraction by a lens having arbitrary opening,” Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd I, paper IV (1919), (in Russian).

V. S. Ignatowsky, “Diffraction by a parabolic mirror having arbitrary opening,” Trans. Opt. Inst. Petrograd,  I, paper V (1920), (in Russian).

Other (2)

J. J. M. Braat, S. van Haver, A. J. E. M. Janssen, and P. Dirksen, “Assessment of optical systems by means of point-spread functions,” in “Progress in Optics,” Vol. 51, E. Wolf, ed. (Elsevier B.V., 2008), chap. 6, pp. 349–468.
[Crossref]

L. Novotny and B. Hecht, “Principles of nano-optics,” Section 2.10.2, (Cambridge University Press, 2008).

Cited By

OSA participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (7)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

Spherical coordinates in image space with respect to wave unit vector .

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

The relationship between the optimization angle ϑ v for which problem 1 is solved and angle ϑ u between the direction of the optimum electric field vector E(0) and the z-axis, for several values of the numerical aperture NA.

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Left: The electric field E 1 v ^ (0) projected along and û as functions of ϑ v for several values of the numerical aperture. : The projections of the optimum electric fields E 1 v ^ (0) and E 2 v ^ (0) along the direction , as function of ϑ v for several values of the numerical aperture.

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

The focusing lens with numerical aperture NA.

Fig. 5
Fig. 5

Left: Snapshots of the electric field in the entrance pupil, E p , which after focusing yields the field with maximum component along obtained by solving 1() (left) and the optimum pupil field that is solution of 2() (right), where is such that vy = 0 and ϑ v = 45°. In both cases NA/n = 0.75.

Fig. 6
Fig. 6

The two lens system that is used to image the optimum electric field in image space when a dipole source is placed in object space. The focal length f 1 denotes the radius of entrance pupil sphere 1, focal length f 2 that of exit pupil sphere 2.

Fig. 7
Fig. 7

Schematics of the imaging of a dipole using the two lens system with (paraxial) magnification equal to 1. The dipole produces the electric field at the focal point which has maximum amplitude in the direction of and which has maximum amplitude and is linearly polarized in the direction of û.

Equations (61)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

( r , t ) = Re [ E ( r ) e i ω t ] = 1 4 π 2 Re [ k x 2 + k y 2 k 0 N A A ( k x , k y ) e i ( k · r ω t ) d k x d k y ] ,
A ( k x , k y ) · k = 0.
P ( A ) = 1 2 Re [ E ( r ) × H ( r ) * ] · z ^ d x d y = 1 8 π 2 k 0 ( ɛ 0 μ 0 ) 1 / 2 Ω | A ( k x , k y ) | 2 k z d k x d k y .
( 0 , t ) · v ^ = Re [ E ( 0 ) · v ^ e i ω t ] .
Im [ E ( 0 ) · v ^ ] = 1 4 π 2 Ω Im [ A ( k x , k y ) · v ^ ] d k x d k y = 0.
1 ( v ^ ) : max A 0 E v ( A ) E ( 0 ) · v ^ , under the constraint P ( A ) P 0 ,
A ( k x , k y ) = ( 8 π P 0 n ) 1 / 2 ( μ 0 ɛ 0 ) 1 / 4 1 k z 1 Γ ( α max , v z ) [ v ^ ( v ^ · k ^ ) k ^ ] ,
Γ ( α max , v z ) = { 4 3 cos α max 1 3 cos 3 α max v z 2 cos α max sin 2 α max } 1 / 2 ,
sin α max = NA / n .
k x = k sin α cos β ,
k y = k sin α sin β ,
k z = k cos α ,
E ( ρ , φ , z ) = 2 π n P 0 λ 0 ( μ 0 ɛ 0 ) 1 / 4 1 Γ ( α max , v z ) ¯ ¯ ( ρ , φ , z ) ( v x v y v z ) ,
¯ ¯ ( ρ , φ , z ) = ( g 0 0 , 1 ( ρ , z ) + g 0 2 , 1 ( ρ , z ) 0 0 0 g 0 0 , 1 ( ρ , z ) + g 0 2 , 1 ( ρ , z ) 0 0 0 2 g 0 0 , 3 ( ρ , z ) ) + ( g 2 0 , 3 ( ρ , z ) cos ( 2 φ ) g 2 0 , 3 ( ρ , z ) sin ( 2 φ ) 2 i g 1 1 , 2 ( ρ , z ) cos φ g 2 0 , 3 ( ρ , z ) sin ( 2 φ ) g 2 0 , 3 ( ρ , z ) cos ( 2 φ ) 2 i g 1 1 , 2 ( ρ , z ) sin φ 2 i g 1 1 , 2 ( ρ , z ) cos φ 2 i g 1 1 , 2 ( ρ , z ) sin φ 0 ) ,
g l ν , μ ( ρ , z ) = 0 α max e i k 0 n z cos α cos ν α sin μ α J l ( k 0 n ρ sin α ) d α .
E ( 0 ) = [ g 0 0 , 1 ( 0 ) + g 0 2 , 1 ( 0 ) ] v x x ^ + [ g 0 0 , 1 ( 0 ) + g 0 2 , 1 ( 0 ) ] v y y ^ + 2 g 0 0 , 3 ( ρ , z ) v z z ^ ,
g 0 0 , 1 ( 0 ) = 0 α max sin α d α = 1 cos α max ,
g 0 2 , 1 ( 0 ) = 0 α max cos 2 α sin α d α = 1 3 1 3 cos 3 α max ,
g 0 0 , 3 ( 0 ) = 0 α max sin 3 α d α = 2 3 cos α max + 1 3 cos 3 α max .
γ + g 0 0 , 1 ( 0 ) + g 0 2 , 1 ( 0 ) = 4 3 cos α max 1 3 cos 3 α max ,
γ 2 [ g 0 0 , 1 ( 0 ) g 0 2 , 1 ( 0 ) ] = 4 3 2 cos α max + 2 3 cos 3 α max .
Γ ( α max , v z ) = { γ + ( γ + γ ) v z 2 } 1 / 2 ,
E ( 0 ) = γ + ( v x x ^ + v y y ^ ) + γ v z z ^ .
u ^ = E ( 0 ) | E ( 0 ) | = γ + ( v x x ^ + v y y ^ ) + γ v z z ^ γ + 2 ( v x 2 + v y 2 ) + γ 2 v z 2 .
v x = sin ϑ v , v z = cos ϑ v ,
u x = sin ϑ u , u z = cos ϑ u ,
E ( 0 ) · ( v ^ × z ^ ) = 0 and E ( 0 ) · [ v ^ × ( v ^ × z ^ ) ] = 0.
2 ( v ^ ) : max A 0 E v ( A ) = E ( 0 ) · v ^ , under the constraints P ( A ) P 0 and ( 26 ) ,
E 1 v ^ = E 2 u ^ .
0 < E 1 v ^ ( 0 ) · u ^ E 2 u ^ ( 0 ) · u ^ .
E 1 v ^ ( 0 ) · v ^ E 2 u ^ ( 0 ) · v ^ .
v ^ = γ ( u x x ^ + u y y ^ ) + γ + u z z ^ γ 2 ( u x 2 + u y 2 ) + γ + 2 u z 2 = γ u ^ + ( γ + γ ) u z z ^ γ 2 ( u x 2 + u y 2 ) + γ + 2 u z 2 .
A ( k x , k y ) = ( 8 π P 0 n ) 1 / 2 ( μ 0 ɛ 0 ) 1 / 4 1 k z 1 Γ ( α max , v z ) [ v ^ ( v ^ · k ^ ) k ^ ] = ( 8 π P 0 n ) 1 / 2 ( μ 0 ɛ 0 ) 1 / 4 1 k z 1 Γ ˜ ( α max , u z ) × { γ [ u ^ ( u ^ · k ^ ) k ^ ] + ( γ + γ ) u z [ z ^ ( z ^ · k ^ ) k ^ ] } ,
Γ ˜ ( α max , u z ) Γ ( α max , v z ) γ 2 ( u x 2 + u y 2 ) + γ + 2 u z 2 = γ + γ { γ ( γ + γ ) u z 2 } 1 / 2 ,
E ( ρ , φ , z ) = 2 π n P 0 λ 0 ( μ 0 ɛ 0 ) 1 / 4 1 Γ ˜ ( α max , u z ) ¯ ¯ ( ρ , φ , z ) ( γ u x γ u y γ + u z ) ,
x p = ρ p cos φ p , y p = ρ p sin φ p .
ρ ^ p = cos φ p x ^ p + sin φ p y ^ p ,
φ ^ p = sin φ p x ^ p + cos φ p · y ^ p ,
E p ( ρ p , φ p ) = E ρ p ( ρ p , φ p ) ρ ^ p + E φ p ( ρ p , φ p ) φ ^ p ,
f λ 0 n sin 2 ( α max ) ,
k x = k x p f = k ρ p f cos φ p , k y = k y p f = k ρ p f sin φ p .
i S ^ ( k ^ ) = k ^ × z ^ | k ^ × z ^ | = 1 k x 2 + k y 2 ( k y k x 0 ) ,
i P ^ ( k ^ ) = i S ^ ( k ^ ) × k ^ | i S ^ ( k ^ ) × k ^ | = 1 k 1 k x 2 + k y 2 ( k x k z k y k z k x 2 + k y 2 ) .
A ( k x , k y ) = A P ( k x , k y ) i P ^ ( k ^ ) + A S ( k x , k y ) i S ^ ( k ^ ) .
E ρ p ( ρ p , φ p ) = k k z 2 π i f A P ( k ρ p f cos φ p , k ρ p f sin φ p ) ,
E φ p ( ρ p , φ p ) = k k z 2 π i f A S ( k ρ p f cos φ p , k ρ p f sin φ p ) ,
k z = k 1 ρ p 2 f 2 .
E p ( ρ p , φ p ) = i ( 2 P 0 π n ) 1 / 2 ( μ 0 ɛ 0 ) 1 / 4 1 f Γ ( α max , v z ) × { [ ( f 2 ρ p 2 ) 1 / 4 f 1 / 2 ( cos φ p v x + sin φ p v y ) + ρ p f 1 / 2 ( f 2 ρ p 2 ) 1 / 4 v z ] ρ ^ p + f 1 / 2 ( f 2 ρ p 2 ) 1 / 4 ( cos φ p v y sin φ p v x ) φ ^ p } .
E p ( ρ p , φ p ) = i ( 2 P 0 π n ) 1 / 2 ( μ 0 ɛ 0 ) 1 / 4 1 f Γ ˜ ( α max , u z ) × { [ ( f 2 ρ p 2 ) 1 / 4 f 1 / 2 γ ( cos φ p u x + sin φ p u y ) + ρ p f 1 / 2 ( f 2 ρ p 2 ) 1 / 4 γ + u z ] ρ ^ p + f 1 / 2 ( f 2 ρ p 2 ) 1 / 4 γ ( cos φ p u y sin φ p u x ) φ ^ p } .
E d ( r ) = k 2 ɛ 0 p G ( r ) ( · p ɛ 0 G ( r ) ) ,
G ( r ) = e i k r 4 π r .
[ E d ] ( k x o , k y o , z ) = [ k 2 p ( k o · p ) k o ] e i k z o z 2 i ɛ 0 k z o ,
A o ( k x o , k y o ) = [ E d ] ( k x o , k y o , 0 )
= 1 2 i ɛ 0 k z o [ k 2 p ( k o · p ) k o ] .
A i ( k x i , k y i ) · k ^ i = A o ( k x o , k y o ) · k ^ o = 0 ,
A i ( k x i , k y i ) · i P ^ i = A o ( k x o , k y o ) · i P ^ o ,
A i ( k x i , k y i ) · i S ^ i = A o ( k x o , k y o ) · i S ^ o ,
A i ( k x , k y ) = 1 2 i ɛ 0 k z [ k 2 p ˜ ( p ˜ · k ) k ] ,
| p ˜ | = ( 32 π ɛ 0 P 0 n ) 1 / 2 ( ɛ 0 μ 0 ) 1 / 4 Γ ( α max , v z ) ,
v ^ = ( v x , v y , v z ) = ( p x , p y , p z ) / | p ˜ | = p ˜ / | p ˜ | ,
u ^ = γ + ( p x x ^ + p y y ^ ) γ p z z ^ γ + 2 ( p x 2 + p y 2 ) + γ 2 p z 2 ,

Metrics