Talk:Circular polarization
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ] | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics. | |
|
Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
||
Citation:
Circular (and eliptical) polarization is possible because the propagating electric (and magnetic) fields can have two orthogonal components with independent amplitudes and phases (and the same frequency).
I would understand circular polarisation if E and M fields could have DIFFERENT frequencies. But with same frequencies, as stated here, I don't see why there should be circular polarization. Thanks, --Abdull 20:51, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] direction of helices
Citation: "When looking toward the source, right hand circular polarized light rotates clockwise as time increases, and describes a right hand helix along the propagation axis."
Logic dictates that exactly one of these two statements is correct: (1) "When looking toward the source, right-hand circular polarized light rotates clockwise as time increases." (2) "[P]olarized light […] describes a right-hand helix along the propagation axis."
Anyone know which is true and which needs to be corrected?
[edit] direction of helices (2)
I agree with the inconsistency in the article.
the probelm is to differ between circular polarization helicity and handedness
Let's take light that describes a clockwise rotation along its direction:
- it has positive helicity.
- it is right-handed
- but left circular polarized, as the definition for circular polarisation comes from the "classic" spectroscopists who defined by looking into the beam /at the source, and not along the beam.
see: http://courses.washington.edu/phys55x/Physics%20557_lec9_App.htm
