TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

The dark side of light: negative frequency photons

102 pointsby aquarkover 12 years ago

9 comments

ChuckMcMover 12 years ago
The interesting bit is that solving the equations gives you a solution with a negative frequency. Generally those negative frequencies are ignored because for most people a negative light frequency doesn't make sense. But if you extend the analysis further you get a positive frequency light out of interactions with that negative frequency light. And the paper talks a bit about observing those second order effects:<p><i>"Here, we have shown how the same process generates a second, so-far-unnoticed peak that corresponds to resonant transfer of energy to the negative-frequency branch of the dispersion relation. "</i><p>which means the negative frequency light was <i>something</i> but what it means isn't clear. It could be the tip of a new way at looking at light, or it could be nothing. Some of the experiments it suggests with respect to gravity waves are interesting.
评论 #4429754 未加载
crussoover 12 years ago
I love the way that math reveals ultimate truths. We consider math to be some abstract thing that we're applying to help explain reality. Instead, it often appears that the abstraction is somehow the True Reality(tm), and our reality is really just an imperfect view of Math(tm).<p>We view math about like we view electromagnetic waves with our eyes. We see effects of it and reflections and complex interactions of only small parts of the em spectrum.<p>It's interesting to wonder if we could develop a way to "see math" in its pure form.<p>(Sorry, Friday afternoon speculation... not currently taking any drugs.)
评论 #4429693 未加载
评论 #4430469 未加载
评论 #4430921 未加载
gruefulover 12 years ago
Here's the paper (PDF):<p><a href="http://physics.aps.org/featured-article-pdf/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.253901" rel="nofollow">http://physics.aps.org/featured-article-pdf/10.1103/PhysRevL...</a><p>It's about observations &#38; theory where you can get waves in Cherenkov radiation which propagate against the dominant direction.
rcthompsonover 12 years ago
This reminds me a lot of the observation that the double-slit experiment still produces interference patterns when you send particles instead of waves, and them even when you send those particles one-by-one in order to exclude the possibility of inter-particle interference.
gus_massaover 12 years ago
I read the original article that is much clearer about the details ( <a href="http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4429424" rel="nofollow">http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4429424</a> ).<p>My explanation of the effect is long a bit technical. I hope that it is intelligible.<p>(To keep this simple, I will ignore the phases of the waves.)<p>* * * Complex notation:<p>First, the equation for the electric field of the light is<p><pre><code> E = A cos(kz-wt) </code></pre> It's more convenient to write it as a sum of complex exponentials<p><pre><code> E = A [exp(i(kz-wt)) + exp(i(-kz-(-w)t))] /2 E = Re( A [exp(i(kz-wt))]) </code></pre> By the linearity of the equations, the exp(i(kz-wt)) part and the exp(i(-kz-(-w)t)) have the same behavior, so you usually write simply<p><pre><code> "E" = A exp(i(kz-wt)) </code></pre> and solve everything as if it where a complex function, but just before writing the final version or going to the laboratory you must remember that the other part was there, and that the real physical object is the real part of the function.<p>* * * Standard non linearity effects:<p>If the media is linear but not uniform, there appear other waves that travel in other direction z' (reflection/refractions). All of them have the same w.<p><pre><code> "E_tot" = A exp(i(kz-wt)) + A' exp(i(kz'-wt)) </code></pre> Really all of them have two parts, one with w and the other with -w,<p><pre><code> E_tot = A/2 [exp(i(kz-wt))+ exp(i(-kz-(-w)t))] + A'/2 [exp(i(k'z-wt))+ exp(i(-kz-(-w)t))] </code></pre> but usually you simply ignore that details, and only put a +cc (complex conjugate) or Re at the last minute.<p>If the media is no linear there can appear waves with a different frequency w'.<p><pre><code> "E_tot" = A exp(i(kz-wt)) + A' exp(i(k'z-w't)) </code></pre> (There can appear more than two exponentials.)<p>Again they have two parts, and the real thing is the real part. It's more clear to choose w' as a positive number, because (-w') will appear in the hidden part of the equation.<p><pre><code> E_tot = Re("E_tot") </code></pre> * * * New non linearity effects in this article:<p>In this article they use a very sharp pulse in a very non linear material. So, from the<p><pre><code> "E" = A exp(i(kz-wt)) </code></pre> part they get two new exponentials<p><pre><code> "E_tot" = A exp(i(kz-wt)) + A' exp(i(k'z-w't)) + A'' exp(i(k_n''z-w_n''t)) </code></pre> where k' and w' are positive numbers as expected. But k_n'' and w_n'' are negative numbers!! They get this numbers from the same equation that has k' and w' as a solution, so all of them appear from the same mathematical term. They call this negative solution "NRR".<p>But it is important to remember that the original E has two exponentials, so you must repeat all the computations with the other part<p><pre><code> "E*" = A exp(i(-kz-(-w)t)) </code></pre> everything is equivalent, so after some recalculations you get<p><pre><code> "E*_tot" = A exp(i(-kz-(-w)t)) + A' exp(i(-k'z-(-w')t)) + A'' exp(i(-k_n''z-(-w_n'')t)) </code></pre> where every k and every w has an additional "-". They call this part "NRR* ". But now -k_n'' and -w_n'' are positive numbers. We can change the names, and call<p><pre><code> k'' = - k_n'' w'' = - w_n'' </code></pre> and now k'' and w'' are positive numbers. So the first part of the solution is now<p><pre><code> "E_tot" = A exp(i(kz-wt)) + A' exp(i(k'z-w't)) + A'' exp(i(-k''z-(-w'')t)) </code></pre> and the second part is<p><pre><code> "E*_tot" = A exp(i(-kz-(-w)t)) + A' exp(i(-k'z-(-w')t)) + A'' exp(i(k''z-w''t)) </code></pre> And the real physical object is<p><pre><code> E_tot = ("E_tot"+"E*_tot")/2 </code></pre> So we can regroup the term. We exchange the terms with k'' and w'' that have the wrong signs from on part to the other, because the sum doesn't change.<p><pre><code> "E_totx" = A exp(i(kz-wt)) + A' exp(i(k'z-w't)) + A'' exp(i(k''z-w''t)) </code></pre> and the second part is<p><pre><code> "E*_totx" = A exp(i(-kz-(-w)t)) + A' exp(i(-k'z-(-w')t)) + A'' exp(i(-k''z-(-w'')t)) </code></pre> and as before<p><pre><code> E_tot = ("E_totx"+"E*_totx")/2 </code></pre> Now the interpretation of "E_totx" is straightforward. From the original field "E" you get three waves, with frequencies w, w' and w'', all of them positive. And in "E* _totx" is the complex conjugate part, so the final result is real.<p>And they can measure the three waves.<p>* * * Notes:<p>Usually, the A'' coefficient is so small that all this strange part can be ignored, but they were able to measure it in the laboratory.<p>One important detail is that k/w, k'/w' and k_n''/w_n''= k''/w'' are all positive, so they represent waves that travel in the same direction.
评论 #4431425 未加载
phaedrusover 12 years ago
This reminds me of P and N silicon; the negative frequency light is like hole current. (N silicon has "extra" electrons. P silicon has "missing" electrons that leave "holes", and you can have current where it's the holes that are moving.)
WiseWeaselover 12 years ago
I still don't get what a negative frequency is. The frequency is the number of times something happens in a given amount of time. Would a negative frequency be the number of events that were expected to happen but didn't? If so, how could this be differentiated from an error in our expectations.
评论 #4429656 未加载
评论 #4429715 未加载
sponkover 12 years ago
How exactly would light at "negative green" frequency be perceived by an eye/camera, when mixed with an equal amount of regular green? Would it cancel out, would the negative light have no effect, or would the powers add constructively?
评论 #4430396 未加载
nsxwolfover 12 years ago
Ok, so, this doesn't mean I can have a light bulb that makes the room dark?
评论 #4430691 未加载