Differences between emission patterns and internal modes of optical resonators

Creagh, Stephen C.; White, Michael M.

doi:10.1103/physreve.85.015201

Cited by 16 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their coupling, nevertheless, gives an alternative explanation to the contrasting intracavity and farfield intensity patterns found in Ref. [33], similar to what we have shown in Figs. 4 and 7. …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Controlling multimode coupling by boundary-wave scattering

Song

Redding

et al. 2013

Phys. Rev. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We show that coupling among multiple resonances can be conveniently introduced and controlled by boundary wave scattering. We demonstrate this principle in optical microcavities of quasicircular shape, where the couplings of multiple modes are determined by the scattering from different harmonic boundary deformations. We analyze these couplings using a perturbation theory, which gives an intuitive understanding of the first-order and higher-order scattering processes. Different scattering paths between two boundary waves can either enhance or reduce their coupling strength. The effect of controlled multimode coupling is most pronounced in the direction of output from an open cavity, which can cause a dramatic change of the external cavity field distribution.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Controlling multimode coupling by boundary-wave scattering

Song

Redding

et al. 2013

Phys. Rev. A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 where approximations for Im(S(χ)) are developed by applying canonical perturbation theory to the ray families. We also note that the integrand e −2krIm(S(χ)−S0) provides a leading-order measure of the intensity of the emitted field and has already been calculated in that context in [14]. The simple perturbative procedure pursued in this paper applies in the generic case where the unperturbed ray family is not too close to resonances of the ray dynamics.…”

Section: Approximation Of the Herring Integralmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…1) with momentum p = (0, ±1), so that a general point on them has coordinates (x, y) = (±a cosh U 1 , y 0 + t), t ∈ C. The imaginary part of the action is therefore the imaginary part of the y displacement needed to get to real coordinate space, which is ImS = p y Im(y 0 ) = b sinh U 1 . It remains to evaluate the Poisson bracket in the denominator of (14), which, from (16), takes the form. n 4 {M, M * } = 4i{A − B 2 + C 2 , BC}.…”

Section: Wilkinson's Formula For the Ellipsementioning

confidence: 99%

Quality factors of deformed dielectric cavities

White¹,

Creagh²

2012

J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An analysis is provided of the degradation that arises in the quality factor of a whispering gallery mode when a circular or spherical dielectric cavity is deformed. The large quality factors of such resonators are important to their use in applications such as sensors, wavelength filters or lasers. Yet a straightforward analysis of the effect of shape deformation on quality factors cannot given because the underlying complex ray data demanded by a standard eikonal approximation frequently does not exist. In this paper we exploit an approach that has been successfully used elsewhere to describe the strong directional emission of such systems, based on a perturbative treatment of the relevant complex ray families. Applicable when the radial perturbation is formally of the order of a wavelength, the resulting approximation successfully describes changes to the quality factor using the ray geometry in a neighbourhood of a discrete set of escaping rays guiding the directions of maximum emitted intensity.

show abstract

“…For a weakly deformed cavity, evanescent tunneling dominates over refractive escape. Although the intracavity mode patterns remain nearly unaltered by slight shape deformation, the external emission can be much more sensitive [9][10][11][12][13] . Even a tiny boundary variation may lead to wildly varying external fields, producing large intensity contrast between the directions of maximal and minimal emission.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%