Supermirror phase anisotropy measurement (original) (raw)

Abstract

The high sensitivity of the eigenstates of a large-finesse passive Fabry-Perot cavity is used to measure the residual anisotropy of supermirrors at strictly normal incidence. An experimental demonstration leads to the measurement of phase retardances of the order of 10 26 rad.

Figures (3)

Fig. 1. Principle of the experiment. A linearly x- polarized beam E” is injected into a FP made of two mirrors, M, and Msg. a; and ae, angles between the mirrors’ slow axes and the x axis; E°"’ and E$", linearly polarized components of the output field. The principle of the experiment is shown in Fig. 1. The FP is composed of two supermirrors, M, and M,. The intensity reflection and transmission coef- ficients for M; (¢ = 1, 2) are R; and T;. The slow axis of M; is at an angle a; relative to the x axis, and the phase retardance for M; is g;. A linearly x-polarized light field E™ is injected into the FP. If the birefringences of the mirrors are not aligned with the incident polarization direction, the intra- cavity field is projected onto the the cavity. These two orthogonal two eigenstates of y polarized eigen- states have slightly different resonance frequencies. This frequency nondegeneracy gives rise to an ellipti- cally polarized transmitted field wi th two components Ee" and E§"*. Their values can be deduced from the transfer matrix, i.e., the equivalen the interferometer cavity. When t Jones matrix,® of the FP is at reso-

Fig. 1. Principle of the experiment. A linearly x- polarized beam E” is injected into a FP made of two mirrors, M, and Msg. a; and ae, angles between the mirrors’ slow axes and the x axis; E°"’ and E$", linearly polarized components of the output field. The principle of the experiment is shown in Fig. 1. The FP is composed of two supermirrors, M, and M,. The intensity reflection and transmission coef- ficients for M; (¢ = 1, 2) are R; and T;. The slow axis of M; is at an angle a; relative to the x axis, and the phase retardance for M; is g;. A linearly x-polarized light field E™ is injected into the FP. If the birefringences of the mirrors are not aligned with the incident polarization direction, the intra- cavity field is projected onto the the cavity. These two orthogonal two eigenstates of y polarized eigen- states have slightly different resonance frequencies. This frequency nondegeneracy gives rise to an ellipti- cally polarized transmitted field wi th two components Ee" and E§"*. Their values can be deduced from the transfer matrix, i.e., the equivalen the interferometer cavity. When t Jones matrix,® of the FP is at reso-

Fig. 2. Experimental setup. Ref., reference signal.

Fig. 2. Experimental setup. Ref., reference signal.

Fig. 3. Experimental results. The filled circles corre- spond to experimental data and the solid curve to the theoretical equation (2), with g, = 4.4 x 10-6 rad and o2 = 1.0 X 10-6. The back mirror was held fixed at ag = —45°, and the front mirror was rotated about its Figure 3 shows the experimental data for one pair of supermirrors. These results lead to g,; = 4.4 X 10-6 rad and g, = 1.0 X 10°* rad. Here F is equal

Fig. 3. Experimental results. The filled circles corre- spond to experimental data and the solid curve to the theoretical equation (2), with g, = 4.4 x 10-6 rad and o2 = 1.0 X 10-6. The back mirror was held fixed at ag = —45°, and the front mirror was rotated about its Figure 3 shows the experimental data for one pair of supermirrors. These results lead to g,; = 4.4 X 10-6 rad and g, = 1.0 X 10°* rad. Here F is equal

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (14)

  1. M. A. Bouchiat and C. C. Bouchiat, Phys. Lett. B 48, 111 (1974);
  2. S. L. Gilbert and C. E. Wieman, Phys. Rev. A 34, 792 (1986).
  3. J. Y. Vinet, B. Mears, C. N. Man, and A. Brillet, Phys. Rev. D 38, 433 (1988);
  4. A. Abramovici, W. E. Althouse, R. W. P. Drever, Y. G ürsel, S. Kawamura, F. J. Raab, D. Shoemaker, L. Sievers, R. E. Spero, K. S. Thorne, R. E. Vogt, R. Weiss, S. E. Whitcomb, and M. E. Zucker, Nature (London) 256, 325 (1992).
  5. G. J. Martin, Proc. Soc. Photo-Opt. Instrum. Eng. 487, 94 (1984);
  6. H. Statz, T. A. Dorschner, M. Holtz, and I. W. Smith, in Laser Handbook, M. L. Stitch and M. Bass, eds. (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1985), Vol. 4, p. 229; H. R. Bilger, G. E. Stedman, and P. V. Wells, Opt. Commun. 80, 133 (1990).
  7. P. Micossi, F. Della Valle, E. Milotti, E. Zavattini, C. Rizzo, and G. Ruoso, Appl. Phys. B 57, 95 (1993).
  8. M. A. Bouchiat, J. Guena, and L. Pottier, J. Phys. (Paris) 47, 1175 (1986);
  9. S. Carusotto, E. Polacco, E. Iacopini, G. Stefanini, E. Zavattini, and F. Scuri, Appl. Phys. B 48, 231 (1989).
  10. D. Jacob, F. Bretenaker, P. Pourcelot, P. Rio, M. Dumont, and A. Doré, Appl. Opt. 33, 3175 (1994).
  11. C. Fabre, R. G. DeVoe, and R. G. Brewer, Opt. Lett. 11, 365 (1986);
  12. G. Rempe, R. J. Thompson, H. J. Kimble, and R. Lalezari, Opt. Lett. 17, 363 (1992).
  13. A. Le Floch and R. Le Naour, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 288, 225 (1979).
  14. R. W. Drever, J. L. Hall, F. V. Kowalski, J. Hough, G. M. Ford, A. J. Munley, and H. Ward, Appl. Phys. B 31, 97 (1983).