Huygens–Fresnel principle: Difference between revisions
imported>Arjayay m Reword |
imported>FBuHL09 m Updated short description |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Method of analysis}} | {{Short description|Method of analysis applied to problems wave propagation}} | ||
The '''Huygens–Fresnel principle''' (named after [[Netherlands|Dutch]] [[physicist]] [[Christiaan Huygens]] and [[France|French]] physicist [[Augustin-Jean Fresnel]]) states that every point on a [[wavefront]] is itself the source of spherical wavelets | The '''Huygens–Fresnel principle''' (named after [[Netherlands|Dutch]] [[physicist]] [[Christiaan Huygens]] and [[France|French]] physicist [[Augustin-Jean Fresnel]]) states that every point on a [[wavefront]] is itself the source of spherical wavelets and that the secondary wavelets emanating from different points mutually [[Wave interference|interfere]].<ref name="MathPages">{{cite web | title=Huygens' Principle | website=MathPages | url=https://www.mathpages.com/home/kmath242/kmath242.htm | access-date=2017-10-03}}</ref> The sum of these spherical wavelets forms a new wavefront. As such, the Huygens–Fresnel principle is a method of analysis applied to problems of luminous [[wave propagation]] both in the [[Far-field diffraction pattern|far-field limit]] and in near-field [[diffraction]] as well as [[Reflection (physics)|reflection]]. | ||
==History== | ==History== | ||
In 1678, Huygens proposed<ref>Chr. Huygens, ''[[Treatise on Light|Traité de la Lumière]]'' '' (drafted 1678; published in Leyden by Van der Aa, 1690), translated by [[Silvanus P. Thompson]] as ''[[iarchive:treatiseonlight031310mbp|Treatise on Light]]'' (London: Macmillan, 1912; [https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/14725 Project Gutenberg edition], 2005), p.19.''</ref> that every point reached by a luminous disturbance becomes a source of a spherical wave. The sum of these secondary waves determines the form of the wave at any subsequent time; the overall procedure is referred to as '''Huygens' construction'''.<ref name = "Born and Wolf"/>{{rp|132}} He assumed that the secondary waves | In 1678, Huygens proposed<ref>Chr. Huygens, ''[[Treatise on Light|Traité de la Lumière]]'' '' (drafted 1678; published in Leyden by Van der Aa, 1690), translated by [[Silvanus P. Thompson]] as ''[[iarchive:treatiseonlight031310mbp|Treatise on Light]]'' (London: Macmillan, 1912; [https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/14725 Project Gutenberg edition], 2005), p.19.''</ref> that every point reached by a luminous disturbance becomes a source of a spherical wave. The sum of these secondary waves determines the form of the wave at any subsequent time; the overall procedure is referred to as '''Huygens' construction'''.<ref name = "Born and Wolf"/>{{rp|132}} He assumed that the secondary waves traveled only in the "forward" direction, but it is not explained in the theory why this is the case. He was able to provide a qualitative explanation of linear and spherical wave propagation, and to derive the laws of reflection and refraction using this principle, but could not explain the deviations from rectilinear propagation that occur when light encounters edges, apertures and screens, commonly known as [[diffraction]] effects.<ref name = "Insight into Optics">{{Cite book |last=Heavens |first=Oliver S. |title=Insight into optics |last2=Ditchburn |first2=R. W. |date=1993 |publisher=Wiley |isbn=978-0-471-92901-7 |edition=Reprint with corrections August 1993 |location=Chichester}}</ref> | ||
In 1818, Fresnel<ref>A. Fresnel, "Mémoire sur la diffraction de la lumière" (deposited 1818, "crowned" 1819), in ''Oeuvres complètes'' (Paris: Imprimerie impériale, 1866–70), vol.1, pp. 247–363; partly translated as "Fresnel's prize memoir on the diffraction of light", in H. Crew (ed.), ''[https://archive.org/details/wavetheoryofligh00crewrich The Wave Theory of Light: Memoirs by Huygens, Young and Fresnel]'', American Book Co., 1900, pp. 81–144. (Not to be confused with the earlier work of the same title in ''Annales de Chimie et de Physique'', 1:238–81, 1816.)</ref> showed that Huygens' | In 1818, Fresnel<ref>A. Fresnel, "Mémoire sur la diffraction de la lumière" (deposited 1818, "crowned" 1819), in ''Oeuvres complètes'' (Paris: Imprimerie impériale, 1866–70), vol.1, pp. 247–363; partly translated as "Fresnel's prize memoir on the diffraction of light", in H. Crew (ed.), ''[https://archive.org/details/wavetheoryofligh00crewrich The Wave Theory of Light: Memoirs by Huygens, Young and Fresnel]'', American Book Co., 1900, pp. 81–144. (Not to be confused with the earlier work of the same title in ''Annales de Chimie et de Physique'', 1:238–81, 1816.)</ref> showed that Huygens' principle, together with his own principle of [[Interference (wave propagation)|interference]], could explain both the rectilinear propagation of light and also diffraction effects. To obtain agreement with the experimental results, he had to include additional arbitrary assumptions about the phase and amplitude of the secondary waves, as well as an obliquity factor. These assumptions have no obvious physical foundation, but led to predictions that agreed with many experimental observations, including the [[Poisson spot]]. | ||
[[Siméon Denis Poisson|Poisson]] was a member of the French Academy, which reviewed Fresnel's work. He used Fresnel's theory to predict that a bright spot ought to appear in the center of the shadow of a small disc, and deduced from this that the theory was incorrect. However, [[Fran%C3%A7ois Arago]], another member of the committee, performed the experiment and showed that [[Arago spot|the prediction was correct]].<ref name = "Born and Wolf">{{cite book |first1=Max |last1=Born |author-link=Max Born |first2=Emil |last2=Wolf |title=[[Principles of Optics]] |year=1999 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-64222-4 }}</ref> This success was important evidence in favor of the wave theory of light over then predominant [[corpuscular theory]]. | [[Siméon Denis Poisson|Poisson]] was a member of the French Academy, which reviewed Fresnel's work. He used Fresnel's theory to predict that a bright spot ought to appear in the center of the shadow of a small disc, and deduced from this that the theory was incorrect. However, [[Fran%C3%A7ois Arago]], another member of the committee, performed the experiment and showed that [[Arago spot|the prediction was correct]].<ref name = "Born and Wolf">{{cite book |first1=Max |last1=Born |author-link=Max Born |first2=Emil |last2=Wolf |title=[[Principles of Optics]] |year=1999 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0-521-64222-4 }}</ref> This success was important evidence in favor of the wave theory of light over then predominant [[corpuscular theory]]. | ||
In 1882, [[Gustav Kirchhoff]] analyzed Fresnel's theory in a rigorous mathematical formulation, as an approximate form of an integral theorem.<ref name = "Born and Wolf"/>{{rp|375}} Very few rigorous solutions to diffraction problems are known however, and most problems in optics are adequately treated using the | In 1882, [[Gustav Kirchhoff]] analyzed Fresnel's theory in a rigorous mathematical formulation, as an approximate form of an integral theorem.<ref name = "Born and Wolf"/>{{rp|375}} Very few rigorous solutions to diffraction problems are known, however, and most problems in optics are adequately treated using the Huygens–Fresnel principle.<ref name = "Born and Wolf"/>{{rp|370}} | ||
In 1939 [[Edward Copson]], extended | In 1939 [[Edward Copson]], extended Huygens' original principle to consider the polarization of light, which requires a vector potential, in contrast to the scalar potential of a simple [[Gravity wave|ocean wave]] or [[Longitudinal wave|sound wave]].<ref name="TheoryOfHuygens">{{cite web | title=TheoryOfHuygens|website=Archive.org|year=1939|url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.84565}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|author=Bleick, Willard Evan|title=Review: ''The Mathematical Theory of Huygens' Principle'' by B. B. Baker and E. T. Copson|journal=Bull. Amer. Math. Soc.|year=1940|volume=46|issue=5|pages=386–388|url=https://www.ams.org/journals/bull/1940-46-05/S0002-9904-1940-07203-9/S0002-9904-1940-07203-9.pdf|doi=10.1090/s0002-9904-1940-07203-9|doi-access=free}}</ref> | ||
In [[antenna (radio)|antenna theory]] and engineering, the reformulation of the Huygens–Fresnel principle for radiating current sources is known as [[surface equivalence principle]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Balanis|first= Constantine A.|author-link=Constantine A. Balanis|title=Advanced Engineering Electromagnetics|date=2012|publisher=John Wiley & Sons|isbn=978-0-470-58948-9|pages=328–331}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Balanis |first=Constantine A.|author-link=Constantine A. Balanis |title=Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design |edition=3rd |publisher=John Wiley and Sons |date=2005|isbn=047166782X|page=333}}</ref> | In [[antenna (radio)|antenna theory]] and engineering, the reformulation of the Huygens–Fresnel principle for radiating current sources is known as [[surface equivalence principle]].<ref>{{cite book|last=Balanis|first= Constantine A.|author-link=Constantine A. Balanis|title=Advanced Engineering Electromagnetics|date=2012|publisher=John Wiley & Sons|isbn=978-0-470-58948-9|pages=328–331}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Balanis |first=Constantine A.|author-link=Constantine A. Balanis |title=Antenna Theory: Analysis and Design |edition=3rd |publisher=John Wiley and Sons |date=2005|isbn=047166782X|page=333}}</ref> | ||
Issues in | Issues in Huygens–Fresnel theory continue to be of interest. In 1991, [[David A. B. Miller]] suggested that treating the source as a dipole (not the monopole assumed by Huygens) will cancel waves propagating in the reverse direction, making Huygens' construction quantitatively correct.<ref>{{cite journal |first=David A. B. |last=Miller |title=Huygens' wave propagation principle corrected |journal=Optics Letters |volume=16 |issue= 18|pages=1370–1372 |date=1991 |doi=10.1364/OL.16.001370 |pmid=19776972 |bibcode=1991OptL...16.1370M |s2cid=16872264 }}</ref> In 2021, Forrest L. Anderson showed that treating the wavelets as [[Dirac delta function]]s, summing and differentiating the summation is sufficient to cancel reverse propagating waves.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Anderson |first=Forrest L. |date=2021-10-12 |title=Huygens' Principle geometric derivation and elimination of the wake and backward wave |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-99049-7 |journal=Scientific Reports |language=en |volume=11 |issue=1 |doi=10.1038/s41598-021-99049-7 |issn=2045-2322 |pmc=8511121 |pmid=34642401}}</ref> | ||
==Examples== | ==Examples== | ||
===Refraction=== | ===Refraction=== | ||
The apparent change in direction of a light ray as it enters a sheet of glass at angle can be understood by the Huygens construction. Each point on the surface of the glass gives a secondary wavelet. These wavelets propagate at a slower velocity in the glass, making less forward progress than their counterparts in air. When the wavelets are summed, the resulting wavefront propagates at an angle to the direction of the wavefront in air.<ref name=Wood-1905> | The apparent change in direction of a light ray as it enters a sheet of glass at an angle can be understood by the Huygens construction. Each point on the surface of the glass gives a secondary wavelet. These wavelets propagate at a slower velocity in the glass, making less forward progress than their counterparts in air. When the wavelets are summed, the resulting wavefront propagates at an angle to the direction of the wavefront in air.<ref name=Wood-1905> | ||
{{cite book|author=Wood, R. W.|title=Physical Optics|year=1905|isbn=978-1-172-70918-2|publisher=MacMillan|location=New York|url=https://archive.org/details/physicaloptics00wooduoft}}</ref>{{rp|56}} | {{cite book|author=Wood, R. W.|title=Physical Optics|year=1905|isbn=978-1-172-70918-2|publisher=MacMillan|location=New York|url=https://archive.org/details/physicaloptics00wooduoft}}</ref>{{rp|56}} | ||
[[File:Refraction - Huygens-Fresnel principle.svg|thumb|Wave [[refraction]] in the manner of Huygens|center]] | [[File:Refraction - Huygens-Fresnel principle.svg|thumb|Wave [[refraction]] in the manner of Huygens|center]] | ||
In an inhomogeneous medium with a variable index of refraction, different parts of the wavefront propagate at different speeds. Consequently the wavefront bends around in the direction of higher index.<ref name=Wood-1905/>{{rp|68}} | In an inhomogeneous medium with a variable index of refraction, different parts of the wavefront propagate at different speeds. Consequently, the wavefront bends around in the direction of the higher index.<ref name=Wood-1905/>{{rp|68}} | ||
[[File:HuygensRefractionVariableIndex.svg|thumb| | [[File:HuygensRefractionVariableIndex.svg|thumb|Huygens–Fresnel construction of wave refraction in a medium with variable index of refraction|center]] | ||
{{clear}} | {{clear}} | ||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
{{clear}} | {{clear}} | ||
==Huygens' principle as a microscopic model== | ==Huygens' principle as a microscopic model== | ||
The Huygens–Fresnel principle provides a reasonable basis for understanding and predicting the classical wave propagation of light. However, there are limitations to the principle, namely the same approximations | The Huygens–Fresnel principle provides a reasonable basis for understanding and predicting the classical wave propagation of light. However, there are limitations to the principle, namely the same approximations made for deriving the [[Kirchhoff's diffraction formula]] and the approximations of [[Near and far field|near field]] due to Fresnel. These can be summarized in the fact that the wavelength of light is much smaller than the dimensions of any optical components encountered.<ref name="Born and Wolf"/> | ||
[[Kirchhoff's diffraction formula]] provides a rigorous mathematical foundation for diffraction, based on the wave equation. The arbitrary assumptions made by Fresnel to arrive at the Huygens–Fresnel equation emerge automatically from the mathematics in this derivation.<ref>{{cite book |first1=M. V. |last1=Klein |first2=T. E. |last2=Furtak |title=Optics |year=1986 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |location=New York |edition=2nd |isbn=0-471-84311-3 }}</ref> | [[Kirchhoff's diffraction formula]] provides a rigorous mathematical foundation for diffraction, based on the wave equation. The arbitrary assumptions made by Fresnel to arrive at the Huygens–Fresnel equation emerge automatically from the mathematics in this derivation.<ref>{{cite book |first1=M. V. |last1=Klein |first2=T. E. |last2=Furtak |title=Optics |year=1986 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |location=New York |edition=2nd |isbn=0-471-84311-3 }}</ref> | ||
A simple example of the operation of the principle can be | A simple example of the operation of the principle can be observed when an open doorway connects two rooms and a sound is produced in a remote corner of one of them. A person in the other room will hear the sound as if it originated at the doorway. As far as the second room is concerned, the vibrating air in the doorway is the source of the sound. | ||
==Mathematical expression of the principle== | ==Mathematical expression of the principle== | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
Note that [[amplitude|magnitude]] decreases in inverse proportion to the distance traveled, and the phase changes as ''k'' times the distance traveled. | Note that [[amplitude|magnitude]] decreases in inverse proportion to the distance traveled, and the phase changes as ''k'' times the distance traveled. | ||
Using Huygens' | Using Huygens' theory and the [[superposition principle|principle of superposition]] of waves, the complex amplitude at a further point '''P''' is found by summing the contribution from each point on the sphere of radius ''r''<sub>0</sub>. In order to obtain agreement with experimental results, Fresnel found that the individual contributions from the secondary waves on the sphere had to be multiplied by a constant, −''i''/λ, and by an additional inclination factor, ''K''(χ). The first assumption implies that the secondary waves oscillate at a quarter of a cycle out of phase with respect to the primary wave and that the magnitude of the secondary waves is in a ratio of 1:λ to the primary wave. He also assumed that ''K''(χ) had a maximum value when χ = 0, and was equal to zero when χ = π/2, where χ is the angle between the normal of the primary wavefront and the normal of the secondary wavefront. The complex amplitude at '''P''', due to the contribution of secondary waves, is then given by:<ref name = "Introduction to Fourier Optics">{{cite book|author=J. Goodman|year=2005|title=Introduction to Fourier Optics|edition=3rd|publisher=Roberts & Co Publishers|isbn=978-0-9747077-2-3|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=ow5xs_Rtt9AC}}</ref> | ||
:<math> U(P) = -\frac{i}{\lambda} U(r_0) \int_{S} \frac {e^{iks}}{s} K(\chi)\,dS </math> | :<math> U(P) = -\frac{i}{\lambda} U(r_0) \int_{S} \frac {e^{iks}}{s} K(\chi)\,dS </math> | ||
| Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
''K'' has a maximum value at χ = 0 as in the Huygens–Fresnel principle; however, ''K'' is not equal to zero at χ = π/2, but at χ = π. | ''K'' has a maximum value at χ = 0 as in the Huygens–Fresnel principle; however, ''K'' is not equal to zero at χ = π/2, but at χ = π. | ||
The above derivation of ''K''(χ) assumed that the diffracting aperture is illuminated by a single spherical wave with a sufficiently large radius of curvature. However, the principle holds for more general illuminations.<ref name="Introduction to Fourier Optics"/> An arbitrary illumination can be decomposed into a collection of point sources, and the linearity of the wave equation can be invoked to apply the principle to each point source individually. ''K''(χ) can be generally expressed as:<ref name="Introduction to Fourier Optics"/> | |||
:<math>~K(\chi )= \cos \chi</math> | :<math>~K(\chi )= \cos \chi</math> | ||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
==Generalized Huygens' principle== | ==Generalized Huygens' principle== | ||
The generalized Huygen's principle can be expressed for <math>t'>t </math> in the form:<ref name="Greiner">{{Cite book |last=Greiner |first=Walter |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-662-05246-4 |title=Quantum Electrodynamics |last2=Reinhardt |first2=Joachim |date=2003 |publisher=Springer Berlin Heidelberg |isbn=978-3-540-44029-1 |location=Berlin, Heidelberg |language=en |doi=10.1007/978-3-662-05246-4}}</ref>{{rp|3}}<ref name="Enders">{{cite journal |last1=Enders |first1=Peter |title=Huygens' Principle as Universal Model of Propagation |journal=Latin-American Journal of Physics Education |date=2009 |volume=3 |issue=1 |pages=19–32 |url=https://lajpe.org/jan09/04_Peter_Enders.pdf }}</ref> | |||
:<math>\psi(\mathbf{x}',t') = i \int d^3x \, G(\mathbf{x}',t';\mathbf{x},t)\psi(\mathbf{x},t)</math> | |||
where ''G'' is known as the [[Green's function]] or ''propagator'', which propagates the wave function <math>\psi</math> in time. | |||
Feynman | This generalized principle is the basis for Feynman's approach to quantum electrodynamics.<ref name="Greiner"/> Feynman described the generalized principle in the following way:<ref name="Fey1">{{cite journal |last1=Feynman |first1=R. P. |title=Space-Time Approach to Non-Relativistic Quantum Mechanics |journal=Reviews of Modern Physics |date=1 April 1948 |volume=20 |issue=2 |pages=367–387 |doi=10.1103/RevModPhys.20.367 |bibcode=1948RvMP...20..367F |url=https://resolver.caltech.edu/CaltechAUTHORS:20140731-165931911 }}</ref> | ||
{{bquote| "Actually Huygens’ principle is not correct in optics. It is replaced by Kirchoff’s [sic] modification which requires that both the amplitude and its derivative must be known on the adjacent surface. This is a consequence of the fact that the wave equation in optics is second order in | {{bquote| "Actually, Huygens’ principle is not correct in optics. It is replaced by Kirchoff’s [sic] modification which requires that both the amplitude and its derivative must be known on the adjacent surface. This is a consequence of the fact that the wave equation in optics is second order in time. The wave equation of quantum mechanics is first order in time; therefore, Huygens’ principle is correct for matter waves, action replacing time."}} | ||
==Feynman's path integral and the modern photon wave function== | ==Feynman's path integral and the modern photon wave function== | ||
Huygens' theory served as a fundamental explanation of the wave nature of light interference and was further developed by Fresnel and Young but did not fully resolve all observations such as the low-intensity [[double-slit experiment]] first performed by G. I. Taylor in 1909. It was not until the early and mid-1900s that quantum theory discussions, particularly the early discussions at the 1927 Brussels [[Solvay Conference]], where [[Louis de Broglie]] proposed his de Broglie hypothesis that the photon is guided by a wave function.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Baggott|first1=Jim|title=The Quantum Story|url=https://archive.org/details/quantumstoryhist00bagg|url-access=limited|date=2011|publisher=Oxford Press|isbn=978-0-19-965597-7|page=[https://archive.org/details/quantumstoryhist00bagg/page/n136 116]}}</ref> | Huygens' theory served as a fundamental explanation of the wave nature of light interference and was further developed by Fresnel and Young, but did not fully resolve all observations, such as the low-intensity [[double-slit experiment]] first performed by G. I. Taylor in 1909. It was not until the early and mid-1900s that quantum theory discussions, particularly the early discussions at the 1927 Brussels [[Solvay Conference]], where [[Louis de Broglie]] proposed his de Broglie hypothesis that the photon is guided by a wave function.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Baggott|first1=Jim|title=The Quantum Story|url=https://archive.org/details/quantumstoryhist00bagg|url-access=limited|date=2011|publisher=Oxford Press|isbn=978-0-19-965597-7|page=[https://archive.org/details/quantumstoryhist00bagg/page/n136 116]}}</ref> | ||
The wave function presents a much different explanation of the observed light and dark bands in a double slit experiment. In this conception, the photon follows a path | The wave function presents a much different explanation of the observed light and dark bands in a double slit experiment. In this conception, the photon follows a path that is a probabilistic choice of one of many possible paths in the electromagnetic field. These probable paths form the pattern: in dark areas, no photons are landing, and in bright areas, many photons are landing. The set of possible photon paths is consistent with Richard Feynman's path integral theory, the paths determined by the surroundings: the photon's originating point (atom), the slit, and the screen and by tracking and summing phases. The wave function is a solution to this geometry. The wave function approach was further supported by additional double-slit experiments in Italy and Japan in the 1970s and 1980s with electrons.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Peter|first1=Rodgers|title=The double-slit experiment|url=https://physicsworld.com/a/the-double-slit-experiment/|website=www.physicsworld.com|publisher=Physics World|access-date=10 Sep 2018|date=September 2002}}</ref> | ||
==Quantum field theory== | ==Quantum field theory== | ||
Huygens' principle can be seen as a consequence of the [[homogeneous space|homogeneity]] of space—space is uniform in all locations.<ref name="veselov"/> Any disturbance created in a sufficiently small region of homogeneous space (or in a homogeneous medium) propagates from that region in all geodesic directions. The waves produced by this disturbance, in turn, create disturbances in other regions, and so on. The [[superposition principle|superposition]] of all the waves results in the observed pattern of wave propagation. | Huygens' principle can be seen as a consequence of the [[homogeneous space|homogeneity]] of space—space is uniform in all locations.<ref name="veselov"/> Any disturbance created in a sufficiently small region of homogeneous space (or in a homogeneous medium) propagates from that region in all geodesic directions. The waves produced by this disturbance, in turn, create disturbances in other regions, and so on. The [[superposition principle|superposition]] of all the waves results in the observed pattern of wave propagation. | ||
Homogeneity of space is fundamental to [[quantum field theory]] (QFT) where the [[wave function]] of any object propagates along all available unobstructed paths. When [[partition function (quantum field theory)|integrated along all possible paths]], with a [[Phase (waves)|phase]] factor proportional to the [[action (physics)|action]], the interference of the wave-functions correctly predicts observable phenomena. Every point on the wavefront acts as the source of secondary wavelets that spread out in the light cone with the same speed as the wave. The new wavefront is found by constructing the surface tangent to the secondary wavelets. | Homogeneity of space is fundamental to [[quantum field theory]] (QFT), where the [[wave function]] of any object propagates along all available unobstructed paths. When [[partition function (quantum field theory)|integrated along all possible paths]], with a [[Phase (waves)|phase]] factor proportional to the [[action (physics)|action]], the interference of the wave-functions correctly predicts observable phenomena. Every point on the wavefront acts as the source of secondary wavelets that spread out in the light cone with the same speed as the wave. The new wavefront is found by constructing the surface tangent to the secondary wavelets. | ||
==In other spatial dimensions== | ==In other spatial dimensions== | ||
Latest revision as of 19:04, 7 November 2025
The Huygens–Fresnel principle (named after Dutch physicist Christiaan Huygens and French physicist Augustin-Jean Fresnel) states that every point on a wavefront is itself the source of spherical wavelets and that the secondary wavelets emanating from different points mutually interfere.[1] The sum of these spherical wavelets forms a new wavefront. As such, the Huygens–Fresnel principle is a method of analysis applied to problems of luminous wave propagation both in the far-field limit and in near-field diffraction as well as reflection.
History
In 1678, Huygens proposed[2] that every point reached by a luminous disturbance becomes a source of a spherical wave. The sum of these secondary waves determines the form of the wave at any subsequent time; the overall procedure is referred to as Huygens' construction.[3]Template:Rp He assumed that the secondary waves traveled only in the "forward" direction, but it is not explained in the theory why this is the case. He was able to provide a qualitative explanation of linear and spherical wave propagation, and to derive the laws of reflection and refraction using this principle, but could not explain the deviations from rectilinear propagation that occur when light encounters edges, apertures and screens, commonly known as diffraction effects.[4]
In 1818, Fresnel[5] showed that Huygens' principle, together with his own principle of interference, could explain both the rectilinear propagation of light and also diffraction effects. To obtain agreement with the experimental results, he had to include additional arbitrary assumptions about the phase and amplitude of the secondary waves, as well as an obliquity factor. These assumptions have no obvious physical foundation, but led to predictions that agreed with many experimental observations, including the Poisson spot.
Poisson was a member of the French Academy, which reviewed Fresnel's work. He used Fresnel's theory to predict that a bright spot ought to appear in the center of the shadow of a small disc, and deduced from this that the theory was incorrect. However, François Arago, another member of the committee, performed the experiment and showed that the prediction was correct.[3] This success was important evidence in favor of the wave theory of light over then predominant corpuscular theory.
In 1882, Gustav Kirchhoff analyzed Fresnel's theory in a rigorous mathematical formulation, as an approximate form of an integral theorem.[3]Template:Rp Very few rigorous solutions to diffraction problems are known, however, and most problems in optics are adequately treated using the Huygens–Fresnel principle.[3]Template:Rp
In 1939 Edward Copson, extended Huygens' original principle to consider the polarization of light, which requires a vector potential, in contrast to the scalar potential of a simple ocean wave or sound wave.[6][7]
In antenna theory and engineering, the reformulation of the Huygens–Fresnel principle for radiating current sources is known as surface equivalence principle.[8][9]
Issues in Huygens–Fresnel theory continue to be of interest. In 1991, David A. B. Miller suggested that treating the source as a dipole (not the monopole assumed by Huygens) will cancel waves propagating in the reverse direction, making Huygens' construction quantitatively correct.[10] In 2021, Forrest L. Anderson showed that treating the wavelets as Dirac delta functions, summing and differentiating the summation is sufficient to cancel reverse propagating waves.[11]
Examples
Refraction
The apparent change in direction of a light ray as it enters a sheet of glass at an angle can be understood by the Huygens construction. Each point on the surface of the glass gives a secondary wavelet. These wavelets propagate at a slower velocity in the glass, making less forward progress than their counterparts in air. When the wavelets are summed, the resulting wavefront propagates at an angle to the direction of the wavefront in air.[12]Template:Rp
In an inhomogeneous medium with a variable index of refraction, different parts of the wavefront propagate at different speeds. Consequently, the wavefront bends around in the direction of the higher index.[12]Template:Rp
Diffraction
Huygens' principle as a microscopic model
The Huygens–Fresnel principle provides a reasonable basis for understanding and predicting the classical wave propagation of light. However, there are limitations to the principle, namely the same approximations made for deriving the Kirchhoff's diffraction formula and the approximations of near field due to Fresnel. These can be summarized in the fact that the wavelength of light is much smaller than the dimensions of any optical components encountered.[3]
Kirchhoff's diffraction formula provides a rigorous mathematical foundation for diffraction, based on the wave equation. The arbitrary assumptions made by Fresnel to arrive at the Huygens–Fresnel equation emerge automatically from the mathematics in this derivation.[13]
A simple example of the operation of the principle can be observed when an open doorway connects two rooms and a sound is produced in a remote corner of one of them. A person in the other room will hear the sound as if it originated at the doorway. As far as the second room is concerned, the vibrating air in the doorway is the source of the sound.
Mathematical expression of the principle
Consider the case of a point source located at a point P0, vibrating at a frequency f. The disturbance may be described by a complex variable U0 known as the complex amplitude. It produces a spherical wave with wavelength λ, wavenumber Template:Math. Within a constant of proportionality, the complex amplitude of the primary wave at the point Q located at a distance r0 from P0 is:
Note that magnitude decreases in inverse proportion to the distance traveled, and the phase changes as k times the distance traveled.
Using Huygens' theory and the principle of superposition of waves, the complex amplitude at a further point P is found by summing the contribution from each point on the sphere of radius r0. In order to obtain agreement with experimental results, Fresnel found that the individual contributions from the secondary waves on the sphere had to be multiplied by a constant, −i/λ, and by an additional inclination factor, K(χ). The first assumption implies that the secondary waves oscillate at a quarter of a cycle out of phase with respect to the primary wave and that the magnitude of the secondary waves is in a ratio of 1:λ to the primary wave. He also assumed that K(χ) had a maximum value when χ = 0, and was equal to zero when χ = π/2, where χ is the angle between the normal of the primary wavefront and the normal of the secondary wavefront. The complex amplitude at P, due to the contribution of secondary waves, is then given by:[14]
where S describes the surface of the sphere, and s is the distance between Q and P.
Fresnel used a zone construction method to find approximate values of K for the different zones,[3] which enabled him to make predictions that were in agreement with experimental results. The integral theorem of Kirchhoff includes the basic idea of Huygens–Fresnel principle. Kirchhoff showed that in many cases, the theorem can be approximated to a simpler form that is equivalent to the formation of Fresnel's formulation.[3]
For an aperture illumination consisting of a single expanding spherical wave, if the radius of the curvature of the wave is sufficiently large, Kirchhoff gave the following expression for K(χ):[3]
K has a maximum value at χ = 0 as in the Huygens–Fresnel principle; however, K is not equal to zero at χ = π/2, but at χ = π.
The above derivation of K(χ) assumed that the diffracting aperture is illuminated by a single spherical wave with a sufficiently large radius of curvature. However, the principle holds for more general illuminations.[14] An arbitrary illumination can be decomposed into a collection of point sources, and the linearity of the wave equation can be invoked to apply the principle to each point source individually. K(χ) can be generally expressed as:[14]
In this case, K satisfies the conditions stated above (maximum value at χ = 0 and zero at χ = π/2).
Generalized Huygens' principle
The generalized Huygen's principle can be expressed for in the form:[15]Template:Rp[16]
where G is known as the Green's function or propagator, which propagates the wave function in time.
This generalized principle is the basis for Feynman's approach to quantum electrodynamics.[15] Feynman described the generalized principle in the following way:[17] Template:Bquote
Feynman's path integral and the modern photon wave function
Huygens' theory served as a fundamental explanation of the wave nature of light interference and was further developed by Fresnel and Young, but did not fully resolve all observations, such as the low-intensity double-slit experiment first performed by G. I. Taylor in 1909. It was not until the early and mid-1900s that quantum theory discussions, particularly the early discussions at the 1927 Brussels Solvay Conference, where Louis de Broglie proposed his de Broglie hypothesis that the photon is guided by a wave function.[18]
The wave function presents a much different explanation of the observed light and dark bands in a double slit experiment. In this conception, the photon follows a path that is a probabilistic choice of one of many possible paths in the electromagnetic field. These probable paths form the pattern: in dark areas, no photons are landing, and in bright areas, many photons are landing. The set of possible photon paths is consistent with Richard Feynman's path integral theory, the paths determined by the surroundings: the photon's originating point (atom), the slit, and the screen and by tracking and summing phases. The wave function is a solution to this geometry. The wave function approach was further supported by additional double-slit experiments in Italy and Japan in the 1970s and 1980s with electrons.[19]
Quantum field theory
Huygens' principle can be seen as a consequence of the homogeneity of space—space is uniform in all locations.[20] Any disturbance created in a sufficiently small region of homogeneous space (or in a homogeneous medium) propagates from that region in all geodesic directions. The waves produced by this disturbance, in turn, create disturbances in other regions, and so on. The superposition of all the waves results in the observed pattern of wave propagation.
Homogeneity of space is fundamental to quantum field theory (QFT), where the wave function of any object propagates along all available unobstructed paths. When integrated along all possible paths, with a phase factor proportional to the action, the interference of the wave-functions correctly predicts observable phenomena. Every point on the wavefront acts as the source of secondary wavelets that spread out in the light cone with the same speed as the wave. The new wavefront is found by constructing the surface tangent to the secondary wavelets.
In other spatial dimensions
In 1900, Jacques Hadamard observed that Huygens' principle was broken when the number of spatial dimensions is even.[21][22][23] From this, he developed a set of conjectures that remain an active topic of research.[24][25] In particular, it has been discovered that Huygens' principle holds on a large class of homogeneous spaces derived from the Coxeter group (so, for example, the Weyl groups of simple Lie algebras).[20][26]
The traditional statement of Huygens' principle for the D'Alembertian gives rise to the KdV hierarchy; analogously, the Dirac operator gives rise to the AKNS hierarchy.[27][28]
See also
Template:Sister project Template:Div col
- Fraunhofer diffraction
- Kirchhoff's diffraction formula
- Green's function
- Green's theorem
- Green's identities
- Near-field diffraction pattern
- Double-slit experiment
- Knife-edge effect
- Fermat's principle
- Fourier optics
- Surface equivalence principle
- Wave field synthesis
- Kirchhoff integral theorem
References
Further reading
- Stratton, Julius Adams: Electromagnetic Theory, McGraw-Hill, 1941. (Reissued by Wiley – IEEE Press, Template:ISBN).
- B.B. Baker and E.T. Copson, The Mathematical Theory of Huygens' Principle, Oxford, 1939, 1950; AMS Chelsea, 1987.
Template:Christiaan Huygens Template:Authority control
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Chr. Huygens, Traité de la Lumière (drafted 1678; published in Leyden by Van der Aa, 1690), translated by Silvanus P. Thompson as Treatise on Light (London: Macmillan, 1912; Project Gutenberg edition, 2005), p.19.
- ↑ a b c d e f g h Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ A. Fresnel, "Mémoire sur la diffraction de la lumière" (deposited 1818, "crowned" 1819), in Oeuvres complètes (Paris: Imprimerie impériale, 1866–70), vol.1, pp. 247–363; partly translated as "Fresnel's prize memoir on the diffraction of light", in H. Crew (ed.), The Wave Theory of Light: Memoirs by Huygens, Young and Fresnel, American Book Co., 1900, pp. 81–144. (Not to be confused with the earlier work of the same title in Annales de Chimie et de Physique, 1:238–81, 1816.)
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b c Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ a b Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".
- ↑ Script error: No such module "Citation/CS1".