3. Experimental Verification Of The Concept
Figure 9.
Stokes vector intensity distributions for the type beam. Left column: experimental results, right column numerical simulation. The simulation parameters are the decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus , and the wavelength .
Figure 9.
Stokes vector intensity distributions for the type beam. Left column: experimental results, right column numerical simulation. The simulation parameters are the decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus , and the wavelength .
For the validation of the concept described in the previous Section and the creation of high-power ultrafast non-homogeneously polarized Airy beams, an experiment was conducted, High average power ultra-short pulsed laser ("Pharos", Light Conversion) was used. This laser generates pulses as short as
with the ability to control the duration up to
, while the maximum pulse energy can be
and
power. In this setup, the laser generates a
width (at
intensity) Gaussian beam of
. The power of the laser was controlled using a motorized external attenuator, consisting of a rotating half-waveplate and a pair of Brewster polarizers. The optical schematic is presented in
Figure 5. Firstly, a linearly polarized Gaussian beam is emitted at wavelength
. The half-waveplate and polarizer (P1), together, work as a power attenuator, and the quarter-waveplate is used to prepare a circularly polarized Gaussian beam for the Airy geometrical phase element (Ai GPE), see
Figure 6(a,b), to produce an Airy phase distribution. After the Gaussian beam propagates through an Ai GPE element, the beam’s polarization remains circular with additional cubic phase distribution. An appearance of the difference in the phase is rooted in the phenomena that were discovered by S. Pancharatnam and M. Berry [
51,
52]. When two states of polarization are achieved from the initial polarization state a geodesic triangle can be drawn on the surface of the Poincare sphere and half of the encompassed solid angle of the sphere is the so-called geometrical angle. The concept was further investigated not only in the time domain but also for transversely inhomogeneous space-invariant beams [
53].
To produce an inhomogeneously polarized Airy beam, a Fourier spectra of the beam type or must first be obtained. For this purpose, we have a P2 polarizer that converts circularly polarized light to linearly without disturbing the intensity distribution.
Further, depending on the desired vector beam type, the S-wp (S-waveplate, see
Figure 6(c)) element’s orientation must be set. For the beam of type
, the S-wp element must be rotated by
degrees with respect to the polarizer P2, and for the beam of type
the polarization axis must align with the S-wp element.
In general, the gray-marked area in
Figure 5 is the physical representation of Eqs.
9 and
10, because each element can be represented in the Jones matrix formalism and the propagation through multiple elements in the mathematical sense is equal to matrix multiplication. Furthermore, to obtain the nonhomogeneously polarized Airy beam, a prepared spectrum is Fourier transformed by the lens (L1), so the element Ai GPE is placed in one focal spot and the magnifying objective in another. After the Fourier spectra are transformed and the vector beam is magnified, it is collected and observed with the CCD camera, see
Figure 7.
To ensure that the experimentally observed vector fields are the same as described by Equations (
6) and (
7), the Stokes parameters were measured. The measurement setup is also similar to the one shown in
Figure 5, but additionally contains a rotating quarter-waveplate and fixed linear polarizer after the L2 collecting lens, see [
54]. The Stokes parameters of the electromagnetic beams, see [
55], are described as
where
are Stokes parameters,
and
are electric field components in the
x and
y direction, the asterisk indicates complex conjugation and
i is the imaginary number.
The Stokes vector for analytically calculated and experimentally measured data for the vector beam
is given in
Figure 8, the left column of the picture corresponds to the measured data, and the right to the numerical simulations. Numerical calculations for the Stokes parameters of the vector beam
were obtained using Equations (
6) and (12) and the best agreement with the measurements corresponds to the decay parameter
, the scaling constant
and the propagation coordinate
with wavelength
. It can be seen that the parameter
that corresponds to the total intensity of the beam agrees very well. The two main lobes of the
-type beam are visible, as well as the more peculiar inner structure. Next, from the component
, which shows the polarized light in the direction of
and
, one can notice that half of the beam has orientation in one direction and another half in the other, which agrees well both the in experiment and analytical calculations. The parameter
corresponds to the linearly polarized but rotated by
degrees to the
and
components. The experimentally obtained components sustain the main features of the analytically calculated ones but also exhibit some intensity redistribution on one "arm" of the beam. Comparison of the calculated and measured Stokes parameters
, see
Figure 8, reveals that the analyzed vector beams at the focal plane are described only by non-uniformly linearly polarized light, without any circular polarization. In case there is a shift in the direction of propagation, when the propagation distance
, the circularly polarized components are observed. Quantitatively, the intensity of the
parameter agrees within the experiment with the numerically simulated one, but slight rotation of the central part is observed, the reasons for that will be discussed later.
Next, we investigate the Stokes parameters of the
type beam which were obtained in the same way as for the
type beam given in
Figure 9. The experimentally obtained data is best matched with the analytically calculated one using Equations
7 and
11 with the decay parameter
, the scaling constant
and the propagation coordinate
with wavelength
. The experimentally obtained Stokes parameters
and
show good agreement with the numerically predicted ones. Two lobes in the distribution of the parameter
in the measurement merge, but in the calculations, a clear gap is seen, although the main lobe is observed both experimentally and numerically. The parameter
seems to agree less with a small rotation of the center observed when compared to the numerically evaluated one.
Figure 10.
Poincare-like sphere representation of the azimuthally polarized Airy beam. (a) Analytical simulation, where the decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus , and the wavelength , and (b) experimental results. The color bar and radius of the simulation sample points are given by the Stokes vector .
Figure 10.
Poincare-like sphere representation of the azimuthally polarized Airy beam. (a) Analytical simulation, where the decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus , and the wavelength , and (b) experimental results. The color bar and radius of the simulation sample points are given by the Stokes vector .
Figure 11.
Conventional Poincare sphere representation of the azimuthally polarized Airy beam. (a) Simulation, where the decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus and the wavelength , and (b) experimental results. The colorbar is given by the Stokes vector and the sample points are placed at .
Figure 11.
Conventional Poincare sphere representation of the azimuthally polarized Airy beam. (a) Simulation, where the decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus and the wavelength , and (b) experimental results. The colorbar is given by the Stokes vector and the sample points are placed at .
Figure 12.
Poincare-like sphere representation of the radially polarized Airy beam. (a) Simulation, where the decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus and the wavelength , (b) experimental results. The color bar and radius of the simulation sample points are given by the Stokes vector .
Figure 12.
Poincare-like sphere representation of the radially polarized Airy beam. (a) Simulation, where the decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus and the wavelength , (b) experimental results. The color bar and radius of the simulation sample points are given by the Stokes vector .
Figure 13.
Conventional Poincare sphere representation of the radially polarized Airy beam. (a) Simulation, where the decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus and the wavelength , (b) experimental results. The simulation colorbar is given by the Stokes vector and sample points are placed at .
Figure 13.
Conventional Poincare sphere representation of the radially polarized Airy beam. (a) Simulation, where the decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus and the wavelength , (b) experimental results. The simulation colorbar is given by the Stokes vector and sample points are placed at .
A few things were noticed by a detailed comparison of the experimentally obtained and analytically calculated Stokes parameters for radially and azimuthally polarized Airy-like vector beams. Firstly, the intensity profile, corresponding to the Stokes parameter , is similar for both beams and resembles the conventional Airy scalar beam, with the main lobe divided into two equal-intensity lobes. The intensity distribution of the parameter for the and type beams differs only in that it is reflected around the diagonal . The parameter , when comparing two beams, is antisymmetric in the value of the amplitude. They differ by a small amount due to the different propagation distances: the azimuthally polarized beam was measured and calculated at and the radially polarized beam at . This confirms that in the vicinity of the focal point, the parameter is sensitive to the exact location of the measurement. The most noticeable mismatch between the analytically calculated and experimentally obtained data appears in the distribution of the Stokes parameter . Although they seem to be the same, there are small differences. The difference could be explained by two operations, the inversion in the amplitude of the parameter and the rotation of the two main lobes of this component in opposite directions.
Multiple factors can be attributed to possible experimental imperfections, which can be accounted for by the inaccuracies in the Stokes parameters. Let us start with the fact that the AiGPE element in addition to the Airy phase mask is superimposed with a blaze-grating mask. It has been realized that the refracted Airy beam has a cleaner intensity distribution compared to one without a blaze grating. The blaze-grated Airy beam does not interfere with the incoming Gaussian beam at the element’s output. On the downside, it makes it more difficult to align the refracted Airy beam with the rest of the experimental setup, as it requires additional precision in placing elements and introduces an angle between the refracted Airy beam and the optical axis.
The second type of inaccuracy might be caused by the polarizer P2, which may not be fully aligned with the x or y axis, depending on the type of vector beam produced, and does not produce a perfect polarization of the incoming beam. Consequently, even very small misalignment angles in the construction of the Airy beam might bring an additional circular polarization component after the P2 polarizer. The misalignment of the S-wp element with the incoming Airy beam means that the output is a coherent addition of the azimuthally and radially polarized vector beams. Moreover, the Stokes parameter measurement setup includes a rotating quarter-waveplate and a fixed polarizer that must also be perfectly aligned with the resulting beam. The last type of error might be due to the uncertainty in the positive or negative direction of the reference focal plane at . This possibly results in the fact that although the Stokes parameters , , remain unchanged, the parameter is slightly rotated and inverted.
Figure 14.
Distribution of the normalized imaginary part of the radially polarized Airy beam, when , and . The decay factor , the normalization distances , distance from the focus , and the wavelength were used in modeling of the radially polarized beam. The colorbar indicates the value of the component and arrows depict the direction of the transverse components of the n field.
Figure 14.
Distribution of the normalized imaginary part of the radially polarized Airy beam, when , and . The decay factor , the normalization distances , distance from the focus , and the wavelength were used in modeling of the radially polarized beam. The colorbar indicates the value of the component and arrows depict the direction of the transverse components of the n field.
Figure 15.
Distribution of the normalized imaginary part of the radially polarized Airy beam, when , and . The decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus , and the wavelength were used in the modeling of the N type beam. Insets: representation of the calculated skyrmionic density of the field n, blue corresponds to the zero value and red to the max value of a skyrmionic density. Arrows indicate the direction of the transverse components of the n field.
Figure 15.
Distribution of the normalized imaginary part of the radially polarized Airy beam, when , and . The decay factor , the normalization distances , the distance from the focus , and the wavelength were used in the modeling of the N type beam. Insets: representation of the calculated skyrmionic density of the field n, blue corresponds to the zero value and red to the max value of a skyrmionic density. Arrows indicate the direction of the transverse components of the n field.
We continue our discussion by examining the Stokes parameter distribution on the Poincare-like sphere for both azimuthally and radially polarized Airy beams. Each measurement point of the Stokes vector
is mapped to the Poincare-like sphere with
being orientation angle and
ellipticity, of the polarization ellipse, see [
55], as
where the angles
and
also represent the latitude and longitude angles of the Poincare sphere. For both types of beams in addition to the conventional Poincare sphere (
Figure 11 and
Figure 13), where the radius of each measurement sample is normalized to the total intensity at that sample point, we introduce an alternative Poincare-like sphere where all sample points are normalized to the maximum intensity point of the whole beam and not to each measurement sample (
Figure 10 and
Figure 12). In our opinion, this addition gives us different insights into the internal structure of the beams. The color scheme of the Poincare plots coincides with the color scheme of the
Figure 10 and
Figure 12 parameter’s
color scheme (
Figure 8 and
Figure 9).
Figure 16.
(Left column) distribution of the normalized Stokes vector of the radially polarized Airy beam, when , and . a) experimental measurement of the beam with wavelength . b) modeling, when the decay factor , normalization distances , distance from the focus , and wavelength were used. (Right column) the topological charge density representation of the calculated and measured field n. Arrows indicate the direction of the transverse components of the n field.
Figure 16.
(Left column) distribution of the normalized Stokes vector of the radially polarized Airy beam, when , and . a) experimental measurement of the beam with wavelength . b) modeling, when the decay factor , normalization distances , distance from the focus , and wavelength were used. (Right column) the topological charge density representation of the calculated and measured field n. Arrows indicate the direction of the transverse components of the n field.
The Poincare sphere of azimuthally polarized Airy beams is depicted in
Figure 10 and
Figure 11. Each figure contains two plots with theoretical calculations (left) and experimental measurements (right).
Figure 10 is an unconventional Poincare-like sphere, where each point is not only color-coded by
but is also located at the distance from the center, proportional to
. As a result, the beam is represented as a two-leaf structure oriented along the
axis. One leaf is rotated
degrees around the
axis with respect to the other leaf. A similar structure is observed in the experimental measurement.
The conventional color-coded Poincare sphere is shown in
Figure 11. This plot can be thought of as being obtained by projecting each point in
Figure 10 onto the surface of the sphere. This method gives us additional insights into the structure of the polarization of the azimuthally polarized Airy beam. As mentioned above, the state of polarization in the focus, when
, is a non-homogeneous linear polarization, so the Poincare sphere representation in that case resembles a line around the equator with the most intense points located around the axis
. Although
Figure 11 presents some of the differences between the theoretical and experimental results, the main characteristics are maintained, and the observable differences are due to the reasons discussed above.
Figure 12 and
Figure 13 show the two variants of the Poincare spheres for the radially polarized Airy beam. The logic of the beam representation is the same as it was for the azimuthally polarized beam. By comparing the theoretical and experimental results in
Figure 12 one can observe that experiment measurement points of the polarization structure are more dispersed than those predicted by the authors numerically and the high values are shifted towards the negative direction of
axes rather than equally distributed along it. However, in general, an elongated beam structure that is extended in the
direction is still clearly recognized in theoretical and experimental results. In
Figure 13 the theory and the experiment show an acceptable resemblance.
When comparing the distributions of azimuthally and radially polarized beams, it should be noted that the different locations along the longitudinal axis were used, this extends the Poincare sphere representation more towards the
axis. Another feature that can be deduced from the
Figure 11 and
Figure 13 is that the points on the Poincare sphere for the azimuthally polarized Airy beam surround the
axis from one side and for the radially polarized Airy beam from the opposite side.