PX263 - Fresnel Equations

We rst start with the boundary conditions :

1. E
1,
E
2,
= 0
2. D
1,
D
2,
=
free
3. B
1,
B
2,
= 0
4. H
1,
H
2,
= K
free
In the case of a linear, homogeneous and isotropic dielectric with no free surface charge
or current these devolve to
E
1,
E
2,
= 0

1
E
1,

2
E
2,
= 0
B
1,
B
2,
= 0
1

1
B
1,

2
H
2,
= 0
0.0.1 Wave normally incident on a boundary
Suppose we have a wave approaching a boundary between two dielectrics at normal inci-
dence. There will be a transmitted and reected wave as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Wave normally incident on a boundary.
Both the electric and magnetic elds are parallel to the boundary at all times in this
instance. Boundary condition one tell us that
E
I
+E
R
= E
T
and boundary condition four tells us that
E
I

1
v
1

E
R

1
v
1
=
E
T

2
v
2
or
E
I
Z
1

E
R
Z
1
=
E
T
Z
2
1
Solving for reectivity and transmissivity we have
r =
Z
2
Z
1
Z
2
+Z
1
t =
2Z
2
Z
2
+Z
1
which, in terms, of refractive index, in a medium where
1

0
and
2

0
gives
r =
n
1
n
2
n
1
+n
2
t =
2n
1
n
1
+n
2
0.0.2 The Perpendicular Fresnel Equations
Now lets try one of the Fresnel equations. Suppose the incoming wave is polarised in
such a way that the electric eld vector points out of the plane of the page - the so-
called perpendicular polarisation, since the electric eld is perpendicular to the plane of
incidence. The diagram is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Wave polarised with electric eld perpendicular to the plane of incidence.
The electric eld is always tangential to the interface so we use boundary conditions
one and four.
E
I
+E
R
= E
T
H
I,
+H
R,
= H
T,
A bit of geometry should show that H
(I,T),
= H
(I,T)
cos
(I,T)
. So for a linear dielectric
with no surface current we have
E
I
+E
R
= E
T
E
I
cos
I
Z
1
+E
R
cos
I
Z
1
= E
T
cos
T
Z
2
The solution to this is
r

=
Z
2
cos
I
Z
1
cos
T
Z
2
cos
I
+Z
1
cos
T
t

=
2Z
2
cos
I
Z
2
cos
I
+Z
1
cos
T
2
In terms of the refractive indices, assuming that
1

2
=
0
we have
r

=
n
1
cos
I
n
2
cos
T
n
1
cos
I
+n
2
cos
T
t

=
2n
1
cos
I
n
1
cos
I
+n
2
cos
T
0.0.3 The Parallel Fresnel Equations
Now suppose that the incoming wave is polarised so that the electric eld vector is parallel
to the plane of incidence, as shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3: Wave polarised with electric eld parallel to the plane of incidence.
In this case the magnetic eld is always tangential to the interface, so the boundary
conditions become
E
I
cos
I
E
R
cos
R
= E
T
cos
T
H
I
+H
R
= H
T
or
E
I
cos
I
E
R
cos
R
= E
T
cos
T
E
I
Z
1
+
E
R
Z
1
=
E
T
Z
2
Solving we obtain
r

=
Z
1
cos
I
Z
2
cos
T
Z
1
cos
I
+Z
2
cos
T
t

=
2Z
2
cos
I
Z
1
cos
I
+Z
2
cos
T
and in terms of the refractive indices we have
r

=
n
2
cos
I
n
1
cos
T
n
2
cos
I
+n
1
cos
T
t

=
2n
1
cos
I
n
2
cos
I
+n
1
cos
T
3
0.0.4 Summary
So our Fresnel equations are,
Electric eld perpendicular to plane of incidence :
r

=
Z
2
cos
I
Z
1
cos
T
Z
2
cos
I
+Z
1
cos
T
t

=
2Z
2
cos
I
Z
2
cos
I
+Z
1
cos
T
Electric eld parallel to the plane of incidence :
r

=
Z
1
cos
I
Z
2
cos
T
Z
1
cos
I
+Z
2
cos
T
t

=
2Z
2
cos
I
Z
1
cos
I
+Z
2
cos
T
Now, consider the limit as the angle of incidence and angle of transmissions all tend
to zero. This should be consistent with the results from the waves at normal incidence:
Electric eld perpendicular to plane of incidence :
r

=
Z
2
Z
1
Z
2
+Z
1
t

=
2Z
2
Z
2
+Z
1
Electric eld parallel to the plane of incidence :
r

=
Z
1
Z
2
Z
1
+Z
2
t

=
2Z
2
Z
1
+Z
2
If we denote the reectivity and transmissivity at normal incidence from subsection
0.0.1 as r
90
and t
90
then we have
r

= r
90
r

= r
90
and
t

= t
90
t

= t
90
So in the limit of zero angle of incidence, the parallel and perpendicular transmissivities
are the same and the perpendicular reectivity is the same as the calculation at normal
incidence. What is going on with the parallel reectivity?
4
Well, the answer turns out to be an ambiguity in the relative phase of the incident
and reected rays in the case where the electric eld is polarised parallel to the plane of
incidence. We have been assuming that, in the diagram we drew in gure 3, the incident
set of arrows and the reected set of arrows are in phase. As it happens they arent. The
reected electric eld points downwards on the reected ray and upwards on the incident
ray, display a -radian phase shift at the boundary. However we could also draw this
diagram as shown in Figure 4. This still has the electric eld polarised in the plane of
incidence, but the reected ray is now pointing in the same direction as the incident wave.
This diagram has no phase shift on reection.
Figure 4: Wave polarised with electric eld parallel to the plane of incidence - now with
a phase shift on reection.
E
I
cos
I
+E
R
cos
R
= E
T
cos
T
H
I
H
R
= H
T
The reectivity and transmissivity for this diagram are
r
,2
=
Z
1
cos
I
+Z
2
cos
T
Z
1
cos
I
+Z
2
cos
T
t
,2
=
2Z
2
cos
I
Z
1
cos
I
+Z
2
cos
T
Note that the reectivity now is minus that of the rst derivation : r

= r
,2
, but that
the transmissivity hasnt been aected. If we take the limit of zero angle incidence now
we obtain r
,2
= r
90
as expected. Both equations are right - and they will both lead to the
same reectance. The issue lies in the choice of phase of the reected ray in the parallel
case.
This ags up an ambiguity in the Fresnel equations. A set of Fresnel equations are
correct in the context of the specic phase assumptions that have gone into the derivation.
In the rst example in Figure 3 the phase shift is included in the diagram, so it isnt in
the calculation. In the second diagram the phase dierence is not in the diagram and
is therefore in the reectivity calculation. For the diagrams in the lecture notes, the
reectivities and transmissivities are
5
Electric eld perpendicular to plane of incidence :
r

=
Z
2
cos
I
Z
1
cos
T
Z
2
cos
I
+Z
1
cos
T
t

=
2Z
2
cos
I
Z
2
cos
I
+Z
1
cos
T
Electric eld parallel to the plane of incidence :
r

=
Z
1
cos
I
Z
2
cos
T
Z
1
cos
I
+Z
2
cos
T
t

=
2Z
2
cos
I
Z
1
cos
I
+Z
2
cos
T
0.0.5 Pictures
Figure 5 shows a plot of the reectivity and transmissivity for a situation where a light
ray is entering an optically dense medium (glass here with n = 1.5) from an optically light
one (air). You can see in the parallel case that there is a particular angle at which there
Angle of incidence
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
fresnel_r_para
Parallel Reflectivity
Parallel Transmissivity
Angle of incidence
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
fresnel_r_perp
Perpendicular Reflectivity
Perpendicular Transmissivity
Figure 5: Parallel and perpendicular reectivities for an EM wave entering a glass block
from air.
is no reected EM radiation. This is the Brewster angle. The perpendicular polarisation
case has no such angle. The case of an EM wave trying to enter air from glass is shown
in Figure 6.
Note that in this case the parallel reectivity also has a Brewster angle - this is a
function of the power radiation mechanism not the medium. There is also another special
6
Angle of incidence
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
fresnel_r_para
Parallel Reflectivity
Angle of incidence
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
fresnel_r_perp
Perpendicular Reflectivity
Figure 6: Parallel and perpendicular reectivities for an EM wave leaving a glass block
to air as a function of the angle of incidence.
angle, called the critical angle at which total internal reection happens. At this point
the reectivities go to one and all power is reected back into the glass.
7