I'm trying to understand second harmonic generation / frequency doubling of coherent light in non-linear crystals, which is a specific case of sum frequency generation, where two phase matched input lights of variable frequencies, combine in matter to create a higher frequency output light. I am wondering about the quantum mechanics of the two phase matched light beams and how they create a higher frequency output light ie. like in this image:
formatting link
If the two input light beams with different frequencies are able to create an output light beam with a summed frequency, how is this described with quantum mechanics, or atomic/molecular electron orbitals?
I think you may need to be a member of IOP to read this latter link, but the abstract should give you keywords to use in a wider Google search. Might also be worth a look on ADS abstracts too...
IIRC the usual method is to define a second-order dielectric susceptibility operator, and then hit it with two copies of the bra and ket vectors to compute the expectation value.
We classical types just measure the second-order susceptibility, compute the output beam strength using the slowly-varying envelope approximation, and put the shot noise in by hand afterwards.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
845-480-2058
hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net
It sounds like quantum mechanics/electron orbitals aren't able to explain this phenomenon.
From your explanation I guess the two input light beams are polarizing the matter (at three discrete frequencies f1, f2, f1+f2), and the second order susceptibility is the polarization that occurs at the summed frequency of the two beams, which creates the new higher frequency EM field starting with a new electric field.
So if you have three in-phase input beams of variable frequencies, there would be three discrete summed frequencies (f1+f2, f1+f3, f1+f2+f3)?
That link makes sum frequency generation sound like a quantum process. Maybe there is always a classical sum frequency output, but as the spectroscope frequency is shifted there are peaks based on atomic/molecular quantum orbitals. It sounds like it is two separate phenomenon.
Not at all. It's well understood quantum-mechanically, and if I reach back far enough into the archives, I probably still understand the quantum bit well enough to do calculations, though I don't usually need a lot of quantum for what I do. Nico Bloembergen's book, published in (iirc) 1963, has all that stuff in it.
Quantum mechanics is a helpful shortcut for some things, interestingly enough, e.g. the sum and difference frequency mixing in an acousto-optic cell. Conservation of energy and momentum tells you that the light beam that gets bent along the acoustic propagation direction has been upshifted, because each photon has notionally absorbed a phonon; light diffracted backwards (against the acoustic propagation direction) has been downshifted, again because notionally each photon has produced a phonon by stimulated emission.
If you want to find things that QM has trouble with, you'll have to look a bit harder than that.
Does that mean that every time light passes through a crystal that there are material vibrations in the crystal called phonons? Or are there only phonons in special cases of light interacting with crystals such as sum frequency generation?
Phonons are present all the time -- they are the quantum mechanical vibrations of a crystal. If you imagine a crystal as a ball-and-spring lattice, you can imagine waves traveling through it. The quantum picture says these vibrations are quantized in energy levels. These vibrations contain energy, so this represents a bulk material property which contains energy, throughout the space of the crystal. If you touch a crystal to another, it's going to transfer this shaking, until both are shaking with about as much energy (note, not the same velocity or frequency, because that's material dependent). Starting to sound like the transfer of heat, right? Great!
Phonons are also acoustic vibrations. Whereas thermal vibrations are randomly distributed, acoustic vibrations are coherent (or generally much more so). Although the frequencies are fairly low, the energy levels are fairly high, since the mass is a lot higher than the effective mass of a photon (MHz acoustic phonons might be closer in energy to ~THz optical photons, but you'd have to check the equations to see if that's the right order of magnitude).
Last piece of the puzzle, photons can interact with phonons because phonons cause changes in density, and therefore permittivity, etc. This modulates the wavelength at least, and can lead to exchanges in energy by coherent or incoherent (scattering) processes.
Finally, I'm not big on the whole acousto-optical statistical quantum mechanical systems thing, so I leave lots of room to be very wrong here, and will let others continue...
Tim
--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms
You have to get your head around a couple of things to understand QM, assuming that that's your intention. The first is that a photon, or a phonon, is an elementary excitation of a normal mode of some system, i.e. the electromagnetic field in a laser cavity or an elastic wave in some solid, respectively. The usual classical differential equations continue to apply, but the excitations are quantized. (There are higher order corrections that lead to all sorts of field theory that I've never studied, but at ordinary energies and field strengths, this is the case.)
A system containing bits of vacuum and dielectric will have certain electromagnetic normal modes, which when quantized give you photons. It'll also have acoustic normal modes, which when quantized give you phonons. But the fact that they have names shouldn't make you think that they qualify as _things_ in the same way that electrons do, for instance.
The second is linearity. The basic equations of mathematical physics are all linear, i.e. if you have two forcing functions, the resulting response is the sum of the responses to the two functions separately.
All _materials_ become nonlinear eventually, at some level, but the vacuum doesn't, or not until you get to ridiculous energy densities, and you need quantum field theory to handle that.
Coupling between photons and phonons is called the acousto-optic effect, or at short acoustic wavelengths, Brillouin scattering. It's normally a very weak effect, much weaker than optical absorption, say.
Optical frequency doubling and four-wave mixing don't require phonons to exist at all--all they need is a nonlinear electric susceptibility term. You apply one or more pump beams to the crystal, which sets up a dielectric polarization at 2f and DC, or f1+-f2, and that polarization in turn starts radiating. Since the phase of the polarization is controlled by the phase(s) of the pump beam(s) at each point in space, its direction is also controlled.
You need to pick crystal orientations and beam k vectors appropriately to get the radiation from each peak to add coherently, which doesn't happen by accident, which is why there isn't a whole lot of second harmonic generation in most optical systems.
Thanks for all the information, I agree a difficulty in understanding photons/phonons is they don't qualify as material things as you say!
Sum frequency generation is a linear process by definition, so I don't see how the "phonons" could be thought of as quantized for that case where two frequencies add up.
Sum frequency generation is bilinear, not linear linear--i.e. it's linear in each of the two input amplitudes, like an analogue multiplier chip. If it were purely linear, there wouldn't be any cross products generated.
Well I was trying to imply that if there can be an arbitrary frequency generated by the two input frequencies, then that would indicate that the intermediate phonon would not be quantized perhaps.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.