1. Introduction
In the early years of the study of photonic band gap systems, the principal aim usually was to create structures having total band gaps, i.e., ranges of frequency in which electromagnetic waves were non-propagating irrespective of their direction. With this achieved, researchers went on to study the creation of defects in photonic crystals [
1
J. D. Joannopoulos, R. D. Meade, and J. N. Winn, Photonic crystals: molding the flow of light (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1995).
] that form the foundation of useful devices such as cavities, waveguides, etc. In recent years, a number of workers have turned their attention to unusual properties of photonic crystals in frequency ranges for which electromagnetic waves can propagate, e.g., high dispersion and slow light. The latter case has drawn attention [
2
M. Ibanescu, S. G. Johnson, D. Roundy, C. Luo, Y. Fink, and J. D. Joannopoulos, “Anomalous dispersion relations by symmetry breaking in axially uniform waveguides,” Phys. Rev. Lett.
92, 063903 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
,
3
A. Figotin and I. Vitebskiy, “Slow light in photonic crystals,” Waves in Random and Complex Media
16, 293–382 (2006). [CrossRef]
] to the band-edge properties of photonic crystals, where manipulation of the photonic dispersion relation for frequencies very close to a band gap edge can lead to low group velocities over extended frequency ranges.
Here, we direct our attention to the gap-edge properties of photonic crystals, and in particular to the properties of defect modes in two-dimensional (2D) photonic crystals, created by making a small perturbation of small, finite extent in an otherwise infinite, periodic photonic crystal (PC). Such defect modes are well understood for electrons [
4
E. N. Economou, Green’s functions in quantum physics , 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983).
], and since the wave equation and the boundary conditions are similar for the 2D electromagnetic case in which the electric field is polarized parallel to the cylinder axes (i.e.,
E
∥ or TM polarization), one might be confident that the behaviour for electrons should carry over to photons. However, for an electric field polarized perpendicular to the axes (i.e,
H
∥ or TE polarization), the boundary conditions for electrons and photons differ, and so it is an open issue whether the asymptotics for TE polarization are similar to, or quite different from, that for electrons.
The approach we adopt here combines both analytic and numerical studies which yield results that are analogous to those obtained by Economou [
4
E. N. Economou, Green’s functions in quantum physics , 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983).
] in quantum mechanics. In particular, the scalar results obtained in Ref. [
4
E. N. Economou, Green’s functions in quantum physics , 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983).
] by the tight binding method carry over to the vector case for photons. Our method requires us to express the Green function as the superposition of quasiperiodic field problems [
5
R. C. McPhedran, L. C. Botten, J. McOrist, A. A. Asatryan, C. M. de Sterke, and N. A. Nicorovici, “Density of states functions for photonic crystals,” Phys. Rev. E
69, 016609 (2004). [CrossRef]
]. We show that in the vicinity of a band edge, the Green function in this 2D system is dominated by the contribution of the edge mode, which has a logarithmic dependence on the frequency difference between the given frequency and the band edge frequency. The domination of the Green function by the contribution of a single mode is a key requirement of the method, allowing us to undertake a first-order perturbation treatment, and leading to the exponential dependence of the difference between the defect mode frequency and the frequency of the band edge on the reciprocal of the defect perturbation parameter.
The numerical studies discussed in Secs 3 and 4 exploit the Fictitious Source Superposition (FSS) method [
6
S. Wilcox, L. C. Botten, R. C. McPhedran, C. G. Poulton, and C. M. de Sterke, “Modeling of defect modes in photonic crystals using the fictitious source superposition method,” Phys. Rev. E
71, 056606 (2005). [CrossRef]
,
7
L. C. Botten, K. B. Dossou, S. Wilcox, R. C. McPhedran, C. M. de Sterke, N. A. Nicorovici, and A. A. Asatryan, “Highly accurate modelling of generalized defect modes in photonic crystals using the FSS method,” Int. J. Microwave and Optical Technology
1, 133–145 (2006).
] that we developed especially for the purpose of studying the characteristics of highly extended defect modes that occur near band edges. In Sec. 4, we consider a range of examples for both TM and TE polarizations, for square and hexagonal lattices, and for the first and second band gaps, and show that the analytically derived exponential dependence holds quite generally for 2D photonic crystals and accurately fits the evolution of the defect mode with increasing perturbation.
2. Analytic method
We consider a two-dimensional photonic crystal (PC), specified by periodically varying functions n(r) and ε(r) = n
2(r), respectively giving the refractive index and dielectric constant (permittivity) in the array. In our treatment, we assume that ε(
r
) is a real function of position so that the system is lossless. The Green function for the PC is expanded as a superposition of quasiperiodic Green functions. In turn, each of these is expanded in the basis of Bloch functions {ψm
(
k
0,
r
)} which obey the Helmholtz equation, the Bloch condition associated with the Bloch vector
k
0, and polarization dependent boundary conditions on the interfaces between cylindrical inclusions and the matrix material in which they are placed.
We introduce functions characterizing the field (ψ
∥) in the PC: for TM (E
∥) polarization, we define ψ = Ez
, p(
r
) = 1, s(
r
) = ε(
r
), and, for TE (H
∥) polarization, we introduce ψ = Hz
, p(
r
) = 1/ε(
r
),s(
r
) = 1. In terms of these, the Helmholtz equation, for either polarization, can be written as
Fig. 1. Band surface for TE polarization for a hole-type hexagonal lattice with holes of normalized radius
a/
d = 0.2 and refractive index
nc
= 1, in a background of refractive index
nb
= 3. The frequency range corresponds to the lower edge of the first band gap shown in
Fig. 3 (b), and shows the maxima (in red) at the six equivalent
K points that characterize the band edge.
where ℒ is the operator
which is Hermitian with respect to the inner product
where the integration runs over the Wigner-Seitz (WSC) cell. The Bloch functions {ψm
} are orthogonal with respect to this inner product and satisfy
where Mn
= 〈ψn
, ψn
〉.
The Green function G that we require represents the electromagnetic field corresponding to a single source at a point
r
′, and satisfies the differential equation
that holds everywhere, also encapsulating the field continuity conditions. It is expressed as a superposition [
5
R. C. McPhedran, L. C. Botten, J. McOrist, A. A. Asatryan, C. M. de Sterke, and N. A. Nicorovici, “Density of states functions for photonic crystals,” Phys. Rev. E
69, 016609 (2004). [CrossRef]
] of the quasiperiodic Green functions (expanded in the Bloch mode basis), with the superposition requiring an integration over the 2D Brillouin zone (BZ)
We next consider the situation where the frequency ω lies in a complete band gap, and close to a gap edge which has the frequency ωL
, using L to denote the closest band to the frequency ω. We begin with the simplest (nondegenerate) case for which the band edge occurs when the Bloch vector k
0 = k
L
. To lowest order, we will assume that the L
th band surface is parabolic near its edge, i.e.,
where
CL
characterizes the band curvature and is equivalent to the effective mass of the electron in semiconductor theory. Using this parabolic form, we can approximate the required integral in Eq. (
6) to leading order. When the band edge corresponds to a single, nondegenerate Bloch vector
k
0 that is contained completely within the Brillouin zone (BZ), we have
The presence of the logarithm term [
5
R. C. McPhedran, L. C. Botten, J. McOrist, A. A. Asatryan, C. M. de Sterke, and N. A. Nicorovici, “Density of states functions for photonic crystals,” Phys. Rev. E
69, 016609 (2004). [CrossRef]
,
8
D. P. Fussell, R. C. McPhedran, and C. M. de Sterke, “Two-dimensional treatment of the level shift and decay rate in photonic crystals,” Phys. Rev. E
72, 046605 (2005). [CrossRef]
] in Eq. (
8) ensures that the contribution from band edge
L to the Green function (6) dominates all other contributions, provided that
ω is very close to
ωL
. We thus deduce
In cases of high symmetry, the band edge can correspond to several values of
k
0, each of which can contribute to the Green function. For example, for a hexagonal lattice, the lower edge of the first band gap (see
Fig. 1) is characterized by maxima in the frequency surface at the six equivalent
K points of the BZ, with each necessitating an integration over an internal angle of
ϕL,j
= 2
π/3. Correspondingly, the upper edge of this band gap is characterized by minima at the six equivalent
M points, each with internal angle
ϕL,j
=
π. Accordingly, the expression on the right hand side of Eq. (
9), corresponding to the single Bloch vector
k
L
, must thus be replaced by a sum over those
k
L,j
, values that correspond to the band edge, with each contribution weighted by
θL,j
=
ϕL,j
/(2
π).
The final step in the derivation of the dispersion relation for the defect mode (when it is close to the band edge) is to apply Green’s Theorem to an infinite photonic crystal in which the dielectric constant distribution is perturbed in some region C
0 to create the defect mode. The defect mode, which is localized and tends to zero exponentially with increasing distance from C
0, satisfies the Helmholtz equation ▽ ∙ (p̃(
r
)▽ψ(
r
)) + (ω
2/c
2)s̃(
r
) ψ(
r
) = 0, in which the perturbation is characterized by the quantities p̃(
r
) and s̃(
r
).
Then, using Green’s Theorem, we may derive the exact result
Up to this point, the treatment is general, applying to both TE and TM polarizations. We now consider the special case of TE (
H
∥) polarization, for which
p(
r
′) = 1/
ε(
r
′),
p̃(
r
′) = 1/
ε(
r
′), and
s(
r
′) =
s̃(
r
′) = 1, and substituting into Eq. (
10) the leading order estimate (9) for
G, we obtain
where j sums over all values of
k
0 =
k
L,j
that correspond to the edge of band L. The evaluation of this expression requires some delicacy, given the dependence on both the geometry of the Wigner-Seitz cell and the spatial characteristics of the mode. However, expression (11) simplifies considerably in cases of high symmetry, since the bulk modes at the band edge can be obtained from one another by an appropriate rotation transformation.
We now follow a particular example in order to outline clearly the approach, and which also allows us to infer some general conclusions. We consider the lower edge of the band gap, shown in
Fig. 1, for a hexagonal lattice, which is associated with the six equivalent
K points of the BZ. The
ψL,j
are almost circular symmetric near the cylinder and so may be taken to be effectively identical in the vicinity of
C
0. Furthermore, for this case,
θL,j
= 1/3,
CL,j
=
CL
, and
ML,j
=
ML
, for all
j.
We now work in the framework of first order perturbation theory, in which the eigenfunctions are not perturbed while the eigenvalues may vary. Accordingly, we make the approximation
ψ(
r
) =
ψ(
k
L,1,
r
), corresponding to a particular mode. The sum in Eq. (
11) now contains 6 identical terms each of which are weighted by
θL,j
= 1/3. This leads us to define a geometry factor
fL
, for which here
fL
, = 6 × 1/3 = 2. Of course, for a singularity that is completely enclosed within the BZ,
fL
= 1.
We can further simplify the combination of the integral of Eq. (
11) and the normalization term
ML
by noting that the transverse resolute of the electric field is
E
t
= -
i(
z̃ × ▽ψ)/(ωε). Thus, for all
j, this leads to
after recasting the normalization factor as
which follows from the differential equation and an application of Green’s Theorem. Apart from the factor
c
2/
ω
2
L
, the result in Eq. (
12) is the ratio of the change in the electric energy (∫
E
∙
D
d
2
r
) resulting from the defect, to the electric energy of the unperturbed mode within the Wigner-Seitz cell. Since the perturbed dielectric constant
(
r
) differs from ε(
r
) only in the region
C
0, it follows that the integral in the numerator can be calculated over the entire Wigner-Seitz cell. Thus,
in which 𝓔 denotes the electric energy contained within the region specified by the subscript and
where
NL
= |
CL
|
fLAWSC
(2
π) is the Density of States at the band edge
L[
4
E. N. Economou, Green’s functions in quantum physics , 2nd ed. (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983).
,
5
R. C. McPhedran, L. C. Botten, J. McOrist, A. A. Asatryan, C. M. de Sterke, and N. A. Nicorovici, “Density of states functions for photonic crystals,” Phys. Rev. E
69, 016609 (2004). [CrossRef]
].
Finally, we find the most general form of the result for the frequency shift generated by the introduction of a defect in terms of the relative change in the electric energy as
where 𝓐 is a constant which cannot be determined from first order perturbation theory. The results in the form presented in Eq. (
16) are entirely general, applying also for TM polarization. We briefly outline the derivation in this case which is somewhat simpler because it involves directly the electric field component
ψ =
Ez
. We now have
p(
r
′) =
p̃(
r
̃) = 1,
s(
r
′) = ε(
r
′) and
s̃(
r
′) =
(
r
′) and, as for TE polarization, the substitution of these relations into Eq. (
10) leads to
for the TM polarization; the relations (14)–(16) then follow from the fact that
E
= (0,0, ψ).
From the general result (16), we may derive particular forms. In Section 4 we consider PCs in which the each unit cell has a constant refractive index nb
, except for a circular inclusion which has the refractive index nc
. For a defect caused by changing the refractive index of a single cylinder to nd
, we have δ𝓔
C
0
/𝓔
C
0
= δε
C
0
/𝓔
C
0
and so we derive the result
which is applicable to either polarization, and in which
denotes the sensitivity parameter.
4. Defect modes
In this section, we demonstrate and validate the theory by studying the evolution of defect modes constructed by varying the refractive index of a single cylinder in both rod-type and hole-type PCs, for both square and hexagonal lattices. We compute the sensitivity parameter 𝓢asymp from the asymptotic analysis (19) and then compare this with the estimate 𝓢FSS obtained by fitting the evolution curve obtained from the FSS calculations to the model ln |
-
L
| = ln 𝓐FSS - ε
C
0
𝓢FSS/δε in the vicinity of the band edges (10-6 <|
-
L
| < 10-3). From this least squares fit, we determine values for the parameters 𝓐FSS and 𝓢FSS.
We begin with a square symmetric rod-type PC operated in TM polarized light, with the refractive index and radius of the unperturbed cylinders being
nc
= 3.0 and
a/
d =0.3, and with a background refractive index of
nb
= 1.
Fig. 2 (a) shows the band diagram which has band gaps for
ω̃ ≡
ωd/(2
πc) =
d/
λ ∈[0.265265,0.334947] and
ω̃ ∈ [0.468027,0.562353]. In
Fig. 2 (b) we show the evolution of a defect mode, in each of the first and second band gaps, generated by varying the refractive index (
nd
) of the single defect cylinder. For
nd
>
nc
in the second band gap, there are two additional defect modes indicated in blue. These originate at a higher band edge and are not considered in our analysis.
The dashed black curves in
Fig. 2 (b) indicate the analytic result (18), with 𝓐 = 𝓐
FSS and 𝓢 = 𝓢
FSS while the red curves display the results of the FSS calculations. Note the excellent agreement between the numerical and analytic results for frequencies close to the band edge, where the analytic result is valid. Note also the excellent agreement between the analytic (𝓢
asymp) and fitted (𝓢
FSS) values of the sensitivity parameter, shown in
Table 1, which confirm the validity of the asymptotic analytic method.
Table 1. Overview of the results for the structure in
Fig. 2. For the four lowest band edges we show the normalized frequency, the model fit parameters 𝓐
FSS and 𝓢
FSS, the analytic value 𝓢
asymp, and the relative difference between the latter.
|
L
| 𝓢FSS
| ε
C
0
𝓢FSS
| ε
C
0
𝓢asymp
|
|
|---|
| Gap 1—Lower edge | 0.265265 | 0.34303 | 13.379 | 13.254 | -0.00933 |
| Gap 1—Upper edge | 0.334947 | 1.6665 | 23.714 | 23.84 | 0.00533 |
| Gap 2—Lower edge | 0.468027 | 0.075919 | 3.2539 | 3.1949 | -0.0181 |
| Gap 2—Upper edge | 0.562353 | 2.6668 | 20.722 | 19.819 | -0.0436 |
The next example is for hexagonal lattices, for which we consider both rod-type structures in TM (
E
∥) polarization, and hole type structures in TE (
H
∥) polarization. The geometry for TM polarization comprises rods of refractive index
nc
= 3 and normalized radius
a/
d = 0.2 in a background of refractive index
nb
= 1, while for the TE polarization, we invert the lattice so that
nc
= 1,
nb
= 3, preserving the value of
a/
d = 0.2.
Fig. 3 shows band diagrams for (a) TM and (b) TE polarizations, which respectively exhibit band gaps for
∈ [0.31312,0.480299] and
∈ [0.225553,0.237806], respectively.
Fig. 4(a) is similar to
Fig. 2(b), but is for the hexagonal rod type lattice with TM polarization. To show the quality of the agreement between the analytic results and numerics we show in
Fig. 4(b) the same results (for
nd
>
nc
) on a logarithmic vertical scale: the curves overlap for a normalized frequency difference (off the band edge) of more than 4 orders of magnitude.
Figs 2(c) and
(d) are similar, but refer to the hole-type lattice with TE polarization. We only show data for
nd
>
nc
since for
nd
<
nc
we could not accurately find the defect mode numerically (see the discussion below). Note again the excellent agreement between the analytic and numerical results. This agreement is further illustrated in
Table 2, in which the data is presented as in
Table 1: in all cases the agreement between 𝓢
FSS and 𝓢
asymp is much better than 1% for all cases in
Table 2.
Table 2. Similar to
Table 1, but for the lowest band gap of the hexagonal lattices from
Fig. 4 for TE and TM polarization.
|
ṽ
L
| 𝓐FSS
| ε
C
0
𝓢FSS
| ε
C
0
𝓢asymp
|
|
|---|
| TM: Lower edge | 0.313183 | 0.14635 | 6.9536 | 6.9319 | -0.00312 |
| TM: Upper edge | 0.480299 | 0.76399 | 16.846 | 16.862 | 0.000973 |
| TE: Lower edge | 0.225548 | - | - | 923.96 | - |
| TE: Upper edge | 0.237806 | 0.011883 | 18.553 | 18.506 | -0.00255 |
Table 2 shows why we could not find defect modes in TE polarization for
nd
<
nc
using the FSS method: the computed value of the sensitivity ε
C
0
𝓢
asymp ≈ 900, implying that the defect modes are extremely close to the band edge, and thus difficult to locate. In turn, the origin of this high sensitivity can be seen from
Fig. 5 which shows the normalized electric energy distribution
f(
rthe bulk modes for the hexagonal lattice
) = ε∥
E(
r
)∥
2/
𝓔
WSC, so that ∫
WSC
f(
r
)
d
2
r
= 1.
Figs 5(a) and
5(b) show contour maps of the normalized electric energy distribution (on a base 10 logarithmic scale) for the bulk mode, respectively at the lower and upper edge of the first band gap, while
Figs 5(c) and
5(d) respectively show horizontal and vertical sections through the centre of the defect for modes at the lower (red) and upper (blue) edge of the band gap. Clearly evident from these is the very low energy density within the cylindrical inclusion for the mode at the lower edge of the band gap, thereby explaining the very high sensitivity factor (19).
Fig. 4. (a) Similar to
Fig. 2(b), but for a hexagonal lattice with TM polarization in a rod type structure. (b) Replotting of the data in (a) showing |
ω̃ -
ω̃
L
| for
nd
>
nc
for both the numerical (red dots) and the analytic (curve) results. Panels (c) and (d) are similar to (a) and (b) respectively, but for TE polarization and a hole-type structure.