Engineering topics

Roychoudhuri, Chandrasekhar

Publications and source records attributed to Roychoudhuri, Chandrasekhar.

5 records

NASA NTRS2010

Time-Gating Processes in Intra-Cavity Mode-Locking Devices Like Saturable Absorbers and Kerr Cells

Photons are non-interacting entities. Light beams do not interfere by themselves. Light beams constituting different laser modes (frequencies) are not capable of re-arranging their energies from extended time-domain to ultra-short time-domain by themselves without the aid of light-matter interactions with suitable intra-cavity devices. In this paper we will discuss the time-gating properties of intra-cavity "mode-locking" devices that actually help generate a regular train of high energy wave packets.

Prasad, Narasimha↗

NASA NTRS2009

Exploring Divisibility and Summability of 'Photon' Wave Packets in Nonlinear Optical Phenomena

Formulations for second and higher harmonic frequency up and down conversions, as well as multi photon processes directly assume summability and divisibility of photons. Quantum mechanical (QM) interpretations are completely congruent with these assumptions. However, for linear optical phenomena (interference, diffraction, refraction, material dispersion, spectral dispersion, etc.), we have a profound dichotomy. Most optical engineers innovate and analyze all optical instruments by propagating pure classical electromagnetic (EM) fields using Maxwell s equations and gives only lip-service to the concept "indivisible light quanta". Further, irrespective of linearity or nonlinearity of the phenomena, the final results are always registered through some photo-electric or photo-chemical effects. This is mathematically well modeled by a quadratic action (energy absorption) relation. Since QM does not preclude divisibility or summability of photons in nonlinear & multi-photon effects, it cannot have any foundational reason against these same possibilities in linear optical phenomena. It implies that we must carefully revisit the fundamental roots behind all light-matter interaction processes and understand the common origin of "graininess" and "discreteness" of light energy.

Prasad, Narasimha↗

NASA NTRS2007

Can the Hypothesis 'Photon Interferes only with Itself' be Reconciled with Superposition of Light from Multiple Beams or Sources?

Any superposition effect as measured (SEM) by us is the summation of simultaneous stimulations experienced by a detector due to the presence of multiple copies of a detectee each carrying different values of the same parameter. We discus the cases with light beams carrying same frequency for both diffraction and multiple beam Fabry-Perot interferometer and also a case where the two superposed light beams carry different frequencies. Our key argument is that if light really consists of indivisible elementary particle, photon, then it cannot by itself create superposition effect since the state vector of an elementary particle cannot carry more than one values of any parameter at the same time. Fortunately, semiclassical model explains all light induced interactions using quantized atoms and classical EM wave packet. Classical physics, with its deeper commitment to Reality Ontology, was better prepared to nurture the emergence of Quantum Mechanics and still can provide guidance to explore nature deeper if we pay careful attention to successful classical formulations like Huygens-Fresnel diffraction integral.

Roychoudhuri, Chandrasekhar↗

NASA NTRS2007

A Deeper Look at the Fundamentals of Heterodyne Detection Requirements

We generally accept the experimentally observed criteria for heterodyne detections that the two waves that are mixed must (i) be collinear, (ii) have matched wave fronts and (iii) cannot be orthogonally polarized. We have not found in the literature adequate physical explanations for these requirements. The purpose of this paper is to find deeper physical understanding of the coherent heterodyne detection processes that could lead to better coherent laser radar system designs1. We find that there are a number of unresolved paradoxes in classical and quantum optics regarding the definitions and understanding of the "interference" and "coherence" properties of light, which are attributed as essentially due to inherent properties of the EM waves. A deeper exploration indicates that it is the various quantum mechanical properties of the detecting material dipoles that make light detectable (visible, or measurable) to us. Accordingly, all the properties that we generally attribute to only light, are in reality manifestations of collective properties of dipole-light interactions. "Interference" and "coherence" can be better understood in terms of this mutual interaction, followed by energy absorption by the dipoles from EM wave fields, manifesting in some measurable transformation of the detecting dipoles. Light beams do not interfere by themselves. The superposition effects due to light beams become manifest through the response characteristics of the detecting dipoles. In this paper, we will show some preliminary expe rimental results that clearly demonstrate that the heterodyning wave fronts have quantitative degradation in signal generation as the angle between them deviates from perfect collinearity. Subsequently, we will propose a hypothesis for this behavior. We will present experimental data establishing that the so called incoherent light can be detected through heterodyne mixing as long as the pulse length contained in the "incoherent" light is longer than the response time of the detector. We will also present a correspondingly better interpretation of two distinguishable coherence properties, temporal coherence and spectral coherence. Our investigation provides a deeper insight into how to rela x various system requirements for heterodyne detection and accordingly develop systems that are simpler, more reliable and lower in cost. Also, we believe that engineering of detector architecture by appropriately modifying dipole behavior using emerging nanotechnology to optimize heterodyne efficiency will be advantageous.

Roychoudhuri, Chandrasekhar↗

NASA NTRS2006

Various Ambiguities in Re-constructing Laser Pulse Parameters

We think that mode lock laser pulses are generated by the summation process that take place between the monochromatic EM filed frequencies as if they interact with each other as shown in equation 1. In reality, the pulse generation is a collaborative interaction process between EM fields and various material medium. When we carry out the actual mode lock analysis, we do take into account of interpaly between all the temporal dynamics of the cavity gain medium, cavity round trip time and the response time of the intra cavity element (saturable absorber, Kerr medium, etc.). that really enforces the locking of the phase of the cavity spontaneous emissions. On a conceptual level, this simplistic representation of the mode locking by Eq.1 ignores all these critical physical processes. When we try to analyze a pulsed field, again we start by representing it very much like this equation, even though we can only detect the square modulus of this complex field and loose a lot of phase related information to the detectors quantum whims and their time constants. The key parameters for a light pulse are as follows. Foremost is the (i) carrier frequency, which cannot be described or imagined without its state of undulation expressed as its (ii) phase. Next is our imagined time finite (iii) carrier envelope that provides the temporal boundary of the field amplitude strength of the undulating E-field. The final parameter is the (iv) state of polarization or the unique plane along which the strength of the E-field gradient undulates. None of these filed characteristics are made self-evident to us by the fields themselves. We do not see light. Light does not see light. Light beams pass through each other without altering each others energy distribution unless there are interacting material molecules (dipoles) within the physical volume of superposition of the beams. In contrast, we can sense the material particles. Material particles sense each other and they cannot pass through each other without interacting with (scattering from) each other. Thus the interpretation of the superposition phenomenon of multiple fields on detectors should not be lumped under the mysterious "wave-particle duality" philosophy. The phenomenon of superposition can be understood better when we focus on the actual process experienced by the detecting dipoles when allowed by QM rules, they respond to and sum all the induced stimulations due to all the superposed fields followed by the proportionate energy absorption giving rise to the fringes we observe. We will present various experimental results to illustrate our arguments. Our position is that such detector behavior driven interpretations rather than the generally implied field-field interaction driven explanations, will help us better understand the ultimate nature of light and hence invent better and newer devices and instruments.

Roychoudhuri, Chandrasekhar↗