Advertisement

What Does Spontaneous Emission Look Like?

  • L. Allen
  • S. P. Kravis
  • J. S. Plaskett
Conference paper

Abstract

It appears that Amplified Spontaneous Emission [1], A.S.E., the emission process which occurs when a population inversion exists in an extended distribution of atoms in the absence of a laser cavity, is singularly well named. Sources of A.S.E. can be c.w. or pulsed. It is found in some pulse systems that the output has a granular structure (Fig. 1), or what another literature [2] describes as speckles. Such a structure does not occur in c.w. sources of A.S.E., in certain pulsed A.S.E. systems or in lasers; it is, however, well known that laser light scattered from rough surfaces gives rise to the speckles mentioned above. We are able to explain why speckles are, or are not, seen. The explanation forces a re-examination of the nature of the radiation from a source of spontaneous emission, derives the van Cittert-Zernike theorem [3] in an alternative way and relates the predicted coherence area to the size of the speckle structure. The explanation may be extended to demonstrate why different frequencies appear in different parts of the A.S.E. output [4].

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    L. Allen and G.I. Peters, Phys. Rev. A 8, 2031 (1973).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J.C. Dainty, Ed: Laser Speckle and Related Phenomena ( Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1975 );CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. J.C. Dainty, in Progress in Optics Vol. XIV, ed. E. Wolf (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1976 ).Google Scholar
  4. 3.
    M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics (Pergamon, Oxford, 1964), see Section 10. 4. 2.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    F.A. Korolev, G.V. Abrosimov, A.I. Odintsov and V.P. Yakunin, Opt. and Spect. 28, 290 (1970).Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    H. Maeda and A. Yariv, Phys. Letts. 43A, 383 (1973);Google Scholar
  7. H. Gamo, J.S. Ostrem and S. Chuang, J. Appl. Phys. 44, 2750 (1973).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 6.
    F.A. Korolev, A.I. Odintsov, N.G. Turkin and V.P. Yakunin, Sov. J. Qu. Elec. 5, 237 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 7.
    V.I. Ischenko, V.N. Lisitsyn, A.M. Razhev, S.E. Rautian and A.M. Shalagin, J.E.T.P. Letts. 19, 346 (1974).ADSGoogle Scholar
  10. 8.
    D.A. Leonard and W.R. Zinky, Appl. Phys. Letts. 12, 113 (1968);ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. G.I. Peters and L. Allen, J. Phys. A 5, 546 (1972);ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. G.V. Abrosimov, Opt. and Spect. 31, 54 (1971).Google Scholar
  13. 9.
    A. Bark and S.R. Smith, Phys. Rev. A 15, 269 (1977).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 10.
    N.B. Abraham and S.R. Smith, Phys. Rev. A 15, 421 (1977);ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. L. Mandel, Phys. Rev. A 14, 2351 (1976).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. Allen
    • 1
  • S. P. Kravis
    • 1
  • J. S. Plaskett
    • 1
  1. 1.University of SussexBrightonEngland

Personalised recommendations