Advertisement

Strong Departures from Uniform Plane Wave Pulse Propagation as a Result of Coherent Transverse Effects

  • F. P. Mattar
  • M. C. Newstein
  • P. E. Serafim
  • H. M. Gibbs
  • B. Bölger
  • G. Forster
  • P. E. Toschek
Conference paper

Abstract

Analytic and numerical treatments of the coupled Maxwell-Bloch[1] equations, including transverse and time-dependent phase terms, predict a new self-focusing (SF) effect that does not vanish on resonance and requires coherent pulse-matter interaction.[2] This new SF falls in the category of transient SF problems associated with the inertial response of coherent nonlinear active media.[3] The evolution of this new SF effect (for a given pulse shape and beam profile), its strength and location, the sharpness of its threshold, and the spacing between multiple foci depend on the Fresnel number, absorption coefficient, relaxation times, laser-absorber frequency mismatch, and input on-axis electric field “area”.[4] The effect also occurs in the presence of inhomogeneous broadening.[5] Recently two independent experiments demonstrating coherent self-focusing were reported with as much as a factor of 2 increase in fluency on-resonance and 4.5 off-resonance. The first of these[6] was made in inhomogeneously broadened Na; SF and temporal reshaping were also studied as a function of laser detuning. The observation of SF on-resonance for coherent pulses (but not for cw light[7]) clearly illustrates that coherent transient SF is different from previous SF involving resonant interactions and investigated either in the rate-equation[8] or in the adiabatic-following[9] approximations. The second experiment[10] involved the investigation of the on-resonance coherent SF in quasi-nondegenerate inhomogeneously broadened Ne and its dependence on input pulse on-axis “area” and on pulse duration.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    S.L. McCall and E.L. Hahn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18, 308 (1967) and Phys. Rev. 183, 457 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    N. Wright and M.C. Newstein, Opt. Commun. 1, 8 (1973); M.C. Newstein and F.P. Mattar, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 65, 1181 (1975) and Opt. Commun. 18, 70 (1976).ADSGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Marburger, in Progress in Quantum Electronics, Vol. 4, ed. J.H. Sanders and S. Stenholm ( Pergamon, New York, 1975 ) p. 35Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    F.P. Mattar and M.C. Newstein. Electr. 13, 507 (1977); in Cooperative Effects in Matter and Radiation, ed. C.M. Bowden, D.W. Howgate and H.R. Robl (Plenum Press, New York, 1977) p.139; and in Recent Advances in Optical Physics, ed. B. Havelka and J. Blabla ( Society of Czechoslovak Mathematicians and Physicists, Prague, 1976 ) p. 299.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    F.P. Mattar and M.C. Newstein (unpublished calculations).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    H.M. Gibbs, B. Bölger and L. Baede, Opt. Commun. 18, 199 (1976).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    J.E. Bjorkholm and A. Ashkin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, 28 (1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Javan and P.L. Kelley, IEEE J. Quant. Electr. 2, 470 (1966); J.A. Fleck, Jr. and R.L. Carman, Appl. Phys. Lett. 22, 546 (1973).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Grischkowsky, Phys. Rev. Lett. 24, 866 (1970); D. Grischkowsky and J. Armstrong, in Coherence and Quantum Optics, ed. L. Mandel and E. Wolf ( Plenum Press, New York, 1973 ) p. 829.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    W. Krieger, G. Gaida and P.E. Toschek, Z. Physik B 25, 297 (1976).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    V.I. Bestalov and V.I. Talanov, JETP Lett. 3, 307 (1966); B.R. Suydam, in Laser Induced Damage in Optical Material (N.B.S. Special Publication 387, 1973) p.42; IEEE J. Quant. Electr. 10, 837 (1974) and 11, 225 (1975).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Perhaps the reason this effect has not been seen clearly before is that it becomes significant only after the reshaping region, i.e. aL 5, on which most SIT experiments have concentrated. Much higher absorption (aL%25) was used by McCall and Hahn in the first SIT experiment; they reported hot spots in the output (also seen in the Na experiment for large input diameters) which they attributed to transverse instabilities. Zembrod and Gruhl (Ref. 13) used aLtill and Ftil0-2, so self-focusing should be beginning; their Fig. lc has an output about 14% higher than the input and most of their data have higher transmissions than expected by uniform plane-wave simulations. Rhodes and Szöke (Ref. 14) also reported transverse effects seen in SF6 with a1ti20, which may have resulted from self-focusing.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. Zembrod and T. Gruhl, Phys. Rev. Lett. 27, 287 (1971).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    C.K. Rhodes and A. Szöke, Phys. Rev. 184, 25 (1969); C.K. Rhodes, A. Szöke and A. Javan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 21, 1151 (1968); F.A. Hopf, C.K. Rhodes and A. Szöke, Phys. Rev. B 1, 2833 (1970).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    The concept of “effective absorption coefficient” has been introduced by Gibbs and Slusher in their discussion of coherent propagation in the regime where the inhomogeneous width (Tz*)-1 was greater than the homogeneous width (T2)-1 but less than the inverse pulse duration (Tp)-1. Under these conditions, the pulse behavior corresponds to that in medium with a homogeneously broadened line. [See for example, H.M. Gibbs and R.E. Slusher, Appl. Phys. Lett. 18,505 (1971); Phys. Rev. A 5,1634 (1972); Phys. Rev. A 6,2326 (1972).]Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    S.L. McCall, Phys. Rev. A 9, 1515 (1974).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    F.A. Hopf and M.O. Scully, Phys. Rev. B 1, 50 (1970).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    For details see F.P. Mattar, Ph.D. Thesis, Transverse Effects Associated with the Propagation of Coherent Optical Pulses in Resonant Absorbing Media (Polytechnic Institute of New York, December 1975)(distributed by University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Mich., U.S.A.).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    H.M. Gibbs, B. Bölger, F.P. Mattar, M.C. Newstein, G. Forster and P.E. Toschek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 37, 1743 (1976).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    F.P. Mattar, G. Forster and P.E. Toschek, Spring meeting of the German Physical Society, Mayence, West Germany, 1977.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    H. Kogelnik and T. Li, Appl. Opt. 5, 1550 (1966).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. P. Mattar
    • 1
  • M. C. Newstein
    • 2
  • P. E. Serafim
    • 3
  • H. M. Gibbs
    • 4
    • 7
  • B. Bölger
    • 5
  • G. Forster
    • 6
  • P. E. Toschek
    • 6
  1. 1.University of RochesterRochesterUSA
  2. 2.Polytechnic Institute of New YorkFarmingdaleUSA
  3. 3.Naval Research LaboratoriesUSA
  4. 4.Bell Telephone LaboratoriesMurray HillUSA
  5. 5.Philips Research LaboratoriesEindhovenThe Netherlands
  6. 6.University of HeidelbergHeidelbergGermany
  7. 7.Philips Research LaboratoryEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations