Bright and dark helices of light

doi:10.1364/OE.20.014371

« Show journal navigation

Bright and dark helices of light

Ole Steuernagel »View Author Affiliations

Optics Express, Vol. 20, Issue 13, pp. 14371-14379 (2012)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.20.014371

View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (11949 KB)

Journal Search
Article Lookup

Article Tools

Citations

Alert me when this article is cited
Export Citation/Save

Full Text
Article Info
References (15)
Cited By
Figures (5)
Metrics

Abstract

Laser beams can be made to form bright and dark intensity helices of light. Such helices have a pitch length on the order of a wavelength and may have applications in lithography and the manipulation of particles through optical forces. The formation of bright helices is more strongly constrained by optical resolution limits than that of dark helices, corresponding scaling laws are derived and their relevance for photo-lithography pointed out. It is shown how to arrange dark helices on a grid in massively parallel fashion in order to create handed materials using photo-lithographic techniques.

1. Introduction

In recent years there has been considerable interest in monochromatic light beams, such as Laguerre-Gauss beams [1

L. Allen, M. W. Beijersbergen, R. J. C. Spreeuw, and J. P. Woerdman, “Orbital angular momentum of light and the transformation of Laguerre-Gaussian laser modes,” Phys. Rev. A 45, 8185–8189 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], carrying orbital angular momentum. These are known to have helical wave fronts [1

–3

M. Padgett, J. Courtial, and L. Allen, “Light’s Orbital Angular Momentum,” Phys. Today 57, 35–40 (2004). [CrossRef]

] which have been investigated using interferometric techniques [4

M. Harris, C. A. Hill, and J. M. Vaughan, “Optical helices and spiral interference fringes,” Opt. Commun. 106, 161–166 (1994). [CrossRef]

–6

J. Leach, S. Keen, M. J. Padgett, C. Saunter, and G. D. Love, “Direct measurement of the skew angle of the Poynting vector in a helically phased beam,” Opt. Express 14, 11919–11924 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Several approaches that create helical beams using the action of Gouy’s phase [7

O. Steuernagel, “Equivalence between focused paraxial beams and the quantum harmonic oscillator,” Am. J. Phys. 73, 625–629 (2005). [CrossRef]

] have been suggested [8

J. Lekner, “LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Helical light pulses,” J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt. 6, L29–L32 (2004). [CrossRef]

] and experimentally implemented [9

J. Hamazaki, Y. Mineta, K. Oka, and R. Morita, “Direct observation of Gouy phase shift in a propagating optical vortex,” Opt. Express 14, 8382–8392 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

,10

S. M. Baumann, D. M. Kalb, L. H. MacMillan, and E. J. Galvez, “Propagation dynamics of optical vortices due to Gouy phase,” Opt. Express 17, 9818–9827 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], combinations of plane waves have been used [11

J. Becker, P. Rose, M. Boguslawski, and C. Denz, “Systematic approach to complex periodic vortex and helix lattices,” Opt. Express 19, 9848–9862 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], whilst the use of Bessel-beams has also been suggested [12

K. Volke-Sepúlveda and R. Jáuregui, “All-optical 3D atomic loops generated with Bessel light fields,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 42, 085303 (2009). [CrossRef]

Few setups have been envisaged using counterpropagating monochromatic beams, although only these yield helices with pitch lengths on the order of their wavelength. Notable exceptions studying bright helices are [12

K. Volke-Sepúlveda and R. Jáuregui, “All-optical 3D atomic loops generated with Bessel light fields,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 42, 085303 (2009). [CrossRef]

–14

M. Bhattacharya, “Lattice with a twist: Helical waveguides for ultracold matter,” Opt. Commun. 279, 219–222 (2007). [CrossRef]

]. Here, dark helices are investigated for the first time; they are not resolution limited and therefore provide us with better contrast than bright helices.

In section 2 bright and dark intensity helices of light are introduced in terms of screw dislocations [15

J. F. Nye and M. V. Berry, “Dislocations in Wave Trains,” R. Soc. London Proc. Ser. A 336, 165–190 (1974). [CrossRef]

] of ordinary standing waves. This allows us to quantify some of their basic characteristics. In section 3 it is shown that using superpositions with unequal weight to generate the intensity helices allows us to control their widths. Section 4 describes the scaling of the electric field strength around dark and bright intensity helices and how this limits the resolution of bright helices compared to dark ones. Section 5 shows how both types can be arranged in large arrays in massively parallel fashion making them potentially suitable for the creation of helical metamaterial using bulk lithography. Section 6 concludes with a survey of applications and the outlook.

2. Helices through interference

Bright and dark interference fringes extending across a standing wave’s cross-section are ubiquitous. In optics they have found applications in Lippmann’s photography and Gabor’s holography. They arise in laser cavities and interferometry and are used as transporters [16

S. Kuhr, W. Alt, D. Schrader, M. Müller, V. Gomer, and D. Meschede, “Deterministic Delivery of a Single Atom,” Science 293, 278–281 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and imaging elements [17

D. Meschede and H. Metcalf, “Atomic nanofabrication: atomic deposition and lithography by laser and magnetic forces,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 36, R17–R38 (2003). [CrossRef]

] in atom optics. They are on the order of half a wavelength λ of the interfering light apart and since light beams are more than a wavelength wide and can overlap over considerable areas these bright fringes often resemble very tall stacks of pancakes [16

S. Kuhr, W. Alt, D. Schrader, M. Müller, V. Gomer, and D. Meschede, “Deterministic Delivery of a Single Atom,” Science 293, 278–281 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. They can also be slightly modified (the pancakes become deformed), due to the dispersive effects of Gouy’s phase, in interfering multimode beams [7

O. Steuernagel, “Equivalence between focused paraxial beams and the quantum harmonic oscillator,” Am. J. Phys. 73, 625–629 (2005). [CrossRef]

]. Instead of using the superposition of identical beams we want to consider the interference between two monochromatic, collinear, counterpropagating partial waves with different orbital angular momenta [1

M. Padgett and L. Allen, “Light with a twist in its tail,” Cont. Phys. 41, 275–285 (2000). [CrossRef]

]. In this case one can imagine the pancakes (which are centered on the beam axis, compare Fig. 1(a) top) to be cut open on one side, then splayed open and glued to the opposing cut faces of their neighbours, compare Fig. 1(a) middle. In the most tightly wound case such a screw dislocation [15

J. F. Nye and M. V. Berry, “Dislocations in Wave Trains,” R. Soc. London Proc. Ser. A 336, 165–190 (1974). [CrossRef]

] yields a helix with pitch length z₁ = λ/2, see Fig. 1. The common pancake stack scenario can be viewed as the special case of a degenerate helix with orbital angular momentum difference l − l′ = 0 and associated pitch length z₀ = 0. Alternatively to linking up nearest neighbours, the cut-open pancakes can be connected to their second nearest neighbour with pitch length z₂ = λ leaving the nearest neighbour to form part of a second helix on the opposite side of the beam axis, compare Fig. 1 (a) bottom and Fig. 2.

Fig. 1 (a) illustrates the ‘pancake’ scenario explaining that helices form with pitch heights which are integer multiples of λ/2. (b) shows the superposition

\frac{1}{2} u_{0, 0} (x, y, z) + u_{0, 1} (x, y, - z)

yielding a single bright helix (red line) enveloping a single dark helix (black line) with the minimal pitch length λ/2 [colored mesh was numerically determined as the locations with 90% of peak intensity]. (c) shows the magnitude |E| of its focal field distribution illustrating quadratic variation of |E| around the maximum and linear variation around the minimum. In (b) and (c) the x- and y-axes are given in units of focal beam radius w₀, z-axis in units of λ, in (c) the peak intensity is normalized to unity.

Fig. 2 Superposition

u_{0, 2} (x, y, z) + \frac{1}{2} u_{1, 0} (x, y, - z)

yields a pair of dark and bright helices with pitch λ (a); its focal intensity distribution (b) [all units as in Fig. 1, note that compared to Fig. 1 the helices’ orientation is reversed].

Fig. 3 The frequency anisotropy A = ω_x/ω_η = |∂_xE|/|∂_ηE| of the transversal trapping potential of dark helices of a single-helix beam ∑(C). The anisotropy A < 1, A ≈ 1 if one uses small helix radii (C small); qualitatively the same behaviour was seen for bright helices in reference [14

M. Bhattacharya, “Lattice with a twist: Helical waveguides for ultracold matter,” Opt. Commun. 279, 219–222 (2007). [CrossRef]

] [z_R measured in units of λ].

4. Dark helices are more sharply contoured than bright helices

In general the helices’ pitch lengths z_l−l_′ (orbital angular momentum quantization implies that l is an integer [1

]) are determined by the difference l − l′ in orbital angular momentum of the used laser beams and obey z_l−l_′ = λ(l − l′)/2. A negative helix length z_l−l_′ describes inverted handedness. Different superpositions can yield a larger number of intertwined helices and concentric shells of helices, compare Fig. 2. Per nodal shell, there tend to exist a number of |l − l′| separate bright helices with dark helically wound regions between them, see references [2

M. Padgett and L. Allen, “Light with a twist in its tail,” Cont. Phys. 41, 275–285 (2000). [CrossRef]

M. Padgett, J. Courtial, and L. Allen, “Light’s Orbital Angular Momentum,” Phys. Today 57, 35–40 (2004). [CrossRef]

] and text following Eq. (1) below. Details depend on the mode structures and relative weights of the employed superpositions, see sections 2 and 4.

The helices’ widths can be controlled through the width of the laser beams’ waists 2w₀. Their lengths are practically limited by the laser beams’ divergence. If the beams’ cross-sections are elliptically deformed, so are the helices. Suitable laser beam modes that carry orbital angular momentum, such as Laguerre-Gauss–modes [1

], are readily available [2

M. Padgett and L. Allen, “Light with a twist in its tail,” Cont. Phys. 41, 275–285 (2000). [CrossRef]

–5

J. M. Vaughan, “Interferometry, atoms and light scattering: one hundred years of optics,” J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt. 1, 750–768 (1999). [CrossRef]

,18

L. Marrucci, C. Manzo, and D. Paparo, “Optical spin-to-orbital angular momentum conversion in inhomogeneous anisotropic media,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 163905 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and the required superpositions are straightforward to implement [19

J. Leach, M. R. Dennis, J. Courtial, and M. J. Padgett, “Laser beams: Knotted threads of darkness,” Nature 432, 165–165 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The relative phases of the interfering beams can be shifted such that the intensity-helices revolve around their main axis (including very rapid rotations through frequency detuning between the two opposing beams [18

L. Marrucci, C. Manzo, and D. Paparo, “Optical spin-to-orbital angular momentum conversion in inhomogeneous anisotropic media,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 163905 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 20

M. P. MacDonald, L. Paterson, K. Volke-Sepulveda, J. Arlt, W. Sibbett, and K. Dholakia, “Creation and Manipulation of Three-Dimensional Optically Trapped Structures,” Science 296, 1101–1103 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]).

For specificity, we will consider the paraxial Laguerre-Gauss modes U_p,l(x, y, z) [1

, 21

F. Pampaloni and J. Enderlein, “Gaussian, Hermite-Gaussian, and Laguerre-Gaussian beams: A primer,” http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0410021 (2004).

] (formed from ‘generalized Laguerre polynomials’ L_p,|l| rather than, say, orbital angular momentum carrying Bessel-beams [12

K. Volke-Sepúlveda and R. Jáuregui, “All-optical 3D atomic loops generated with Bessel light fields,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 42, 085303 (2009). [CrossRef]

])

\begin{array}{l} U_{p, l} & (z_{R}, λ; r, ϕ, z) = \sqrt{\frac{2}{(1 + δ_{0, l}) π} \frac{p!}{(p + | l |)!}} \\ \times & {(\frac{\sqrt{2} r}{w (z)})}^{| l |} L_{p, | l |} (2 \frac{r^{2}}{w {(z)}^{2}}) (\frac{e^{i l ϕ}}{w (z)}) \\ \times & exp [- \frac{r^{2}}{w {(z)}^{2}} - i (2 p + | l | + 1) ζ (z) + \frac{i k r^{2}}{2 ρ (z)}] . \end{array}

(1)

Here λ is the laser’s wavelength and k = 2π/λ its wave number; x and y are the transverse coordinates, and z parameterizes the beam axis. Kronecker’s δ-function takes care of the correct normalization. The azimuthal angle ϕ is connected to the transverse coordinates via the relation e^ilϕ = (x+iy)^l: l is the integer orbital angular momentum index with the associated orbital angular momentum L_l = h̄l [1

M. Padgett and L. Allen, “Light with a twist in its tail,” Cont. Phys. 41, 275–285 (2000). [CrossRef]

]. The discrete radial index p counts the number of nodal rings in the radial direction

r = \sqrt{x^{2} + y^{2}}

. The beam radii are given by

w (z) = w_{0} \sqrt{1 + z^{2} / z_{R}^{2}}

with the beam waist radius

w_{0} = \sqrt{λ z_{R} / π}

where z_R is the Rayleigh-length which also parameterizes the Gouy-phase shifts ζ(z) = arctan(z/z_R) and the wavefront radii

ρ (z) = (z^{2} + z_{R}^{2}) / z

, 21

F. Pampaloni and J. Enderlein, “Gaussian, Hermite-Gaussian, and Laguerre-Gaussian beams: A primer,” http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0410021 (2004).

In order to form bright (or dark) light helices we have to create constructive (or destructive) interference along the entire phase front. For this it suffices to interfere two radially matching pure Laguerre-Gauss laser modes, with suitably chosen amplitudes C and C′, travelling in opposite directions, namely, to form a superposition

E (x, y, z; t) = E (x, y, z; t) \cdot P = [C u_{p, l} (x, y, z) + C^{'} {u^{'}}_{p^{'}, l^{'}} (x, y, - z)] \cdot e^{- i ω t} \cdot P,

(2)

where we used ω = c₀k for the angular frequency of the light and the paraxial solutions

u_{p, l} (x, y, z) = U_{p, l} (x, y, z) e^{i k z} .

(3)

We assume that the laser is uniformly polarized and the wave front curvatures can be neglected. Thus the electric field E is a scalar field multiplied with the polarization vector P [22

H. A. Haus, Electromagnetic Noise and Quantum Optical Measurements (Springer, Heidelberg, 2000).

]. From this superposition we can extract the spatially fast-oscillating term e^i(kz+lϕ) which yields the interference term cos(2kz + (l − l′)ϕ). When a full turn (Δϕ = 2π) along the intensity helix is tracked the ensuing spatial shift yields the pitch length in the z-direction

z_{l - l^{'}} = (l - l^{'}) 2 π / (2 k) = λ (l - l^{'}) / 2 .

(4)

This confirms the intuitive description in terms of a screw dislocation given above. Note that the interference between two beams travelling in the same direction yields interference fringes [4

M. Harris, C. A. Hill, and J. M. Vaughan, “Optical helices and spiral interference fringes,” Opt. Commun. 106, 161–166 (1994). [CrossRef]

] but not helical intensity spirals on the wavelength scale; instead it forms intensity rods which are modulated by Gouy’s phase thus forming rods with a twist [8

J. Lekner, “LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Helical light pulses,” J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt. 6, L29–L32 (2004). [CrossRef]

, 23

L. Paterson, M. P. MacDonald, J. Arlt, W. Sibbett, P. E. Bryant, and K. Dholakia, “Controlled Rotation of Optically Trapped Microscopic Particles,” Science 292, 912–914 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], very similar to those displayed in Fig. 1 of reference [24

K. Dholakia, G. C. Spalding, and M. MacDonald, “Optical tweezers: The next generation,” Phys. World 15, 31–35 (2002).

Intuitively, this should not be too surprising since in a forward-only configuration light following a helical path would travel superluminally. The effects discussed here are not a consequence of Gouy’s phase, unlike the helical intensity distributions considered in references [8

J. Lekner, “LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Helical light pulses,” J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt. 6, L29–L32 (2004). [CrossRef]

] and [25

M. P. MacDonald, K. Volke-Sepulveda, L. Paterson, J. Arlt, W. Sibbett, and K. Dholakia, “Revolving interference patterns for the rotation of optically trapped particles,” Opt. Commun. 201, 21–28 (2002). [CrossRef]

] or the nodal lines investigated in reference [19

J. Leach, M. R. Dennis, J. Courtial, and M. J. Padgett, “Laser beams: Knotted threads of darkness,” Nature 432, 165–165 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], all giving rise to ‘half-oscillations’ [7

O. Steuernagel, “Equivalence between focused paraxial beams and the quantum harmonic oscillator,” Am. J. Phys. 73, 625–629 (2005). [CrossRef]

] on the scale of the beam’s Rayleigh length.

The effects discussed here necessarily require interference of two counterpropagating partial waves; this implies that the medium needs to be sufficiently transparent. Also note that reflection by a mirror inverts the helicity of a mode and therefore beams carrying orbital angular momentum, say within a laser cavity, form intensity helices (but not single standalone helices since |l − l′| ≠ 1 in the reflection case).

3. Some features of single dark helix beams

In this section some features of the single-helix superposition

\sum (x, y, z; C) = C \cdot u_{0, 0} (x, y, z) + u_{0, 1} (x, y, - z)

(5)

of an ordinary Gaussian beam u_0,0 with a counterpropagating Laguerre-Gauss mode u_0,1 with one unit of orbital angular momentum are elucidated.

The single-helix superposition ∑(C) forms a single bright and a single dark helix, the Gaussian beam’s relative weight fixes the dark helix’ radius since the field’s zero in the focal plane occurs at

(x_{0}, y_{0}, 0) = (- C w_{0} / \sqrt{2}, 0, 0)

. The stronger the field of the added Gaussian beam the more the zero of the Laguerre-Gaussian mode gets displaced from the beam axis, compare Figs. 2 and 4. For small values of the coefficient C the dark helices are slim and steep, yet, unlike bright helices they remain distinguishable, see Fig. 4.

Fig. 4 The focal intensity distribution of superposition u_0,2(x, y, z) + u_0,0(x, y, −z) (a) and its logarithm for superposition

u_{0, 2} (x, y, z) + \frac{1}{10} u_{0, 0} (x, y, - z)

(b) demonstrate that narrowly wound bright helices self-overlap and become ill defined whereas dark helices remain distinguishable [coordinate axes scaled in units of beam width w₀].

In general, determination of the precise form of helices along the beam axis requires solving an implicit problem. For beams formed from superpositions of the form (2) (of which ∑(C) of Eq. (5) is a special case) the following mapping allows for a quick determination of the approximate location of the helices.

(x (z) + i y (z)) = (x_{0} + i y_{0}) \sqrt{(1 + z^{2} / z_{R}^{2})} exp (i χ (z))

(6)

\begin{matrix} with the phase & χ (z) = - (2 (1 + p + p^{'}) + | l | + | l^{'} |) ζ (z) + \frac{k r^{2}}{ρ (z)} + 2 k z . \end{matrix}

(7)

This is to be read as a complex-plane representation of a mapping of a helix’ focal plane location (x₀, y₀) to its location (x(z), y(z)) along the beam axis.

Next we determine the field gradients for a dark helix formed from a single-helix beam ∑(C) at the intensity zero in the focal plane

(x_{0}, y_{0}, 0) = (- C w_{0} / \sqrt{2}, 0, 0)

\partial_{x} E = 2 \sqrt{π} exp (- C^{2} / 2) / (z_{R} λ),

(8)

\partial_{y} E = - i \partial_{x} E,

(9)

\begin{matrix} and & \partial_{z} E = C (- 3 λ + C^{2} λ + 4 z_{R} π) / \sqrt{2 π z_{R} λ} \cdot \partial_{y} E; \end{matrix}

(10)

here, the complex phases represent the gradients’ phase differences within the optical cycle. The gradients can be used to derive the exact pitch angle α the helix forms with the focal plane

α = arctan (\frac{- \partial_{y} E}{\partial_{z} E}) = - arctan (\frac{\sqrt{2 π z_{R} λ}}{C (- 3 λ + C^{2} λ + 4 z_{R} π)}) .

(11)

In this derivation the first step arises from the observation that since the helix passes through

(- C w_{0} / \sqrt{2}, 0, 0)

its tangent vector has the form τ = (0, τ_y, τ_z). Since the helix is dark it moreover fulfils the condition τ_y · ∂_yE + τ_z · ∂_zE = 0 which implies Eq. (11) above. For large values of C and z_R/λ this expression conforms with the ‘naive’ expectation |α| ≈ arctan(h/x₀) = arctan(λ/(2^3/2πCw₀)).

With the abbreviation g = ∂_zE/∂_yE, we can write down the normalized focal tangent vector τ = (1+g²)^−1/2(0, −g, 1) and complete the associated Frenet trihedron by forming the third vector η = x̂ × τ = -(1 + g²)^−1/2(0, 1, g).

A dark helix can be used as the core of a blue-detuned [26

S. Chu, “Nobel Lecture: The manipulation of neutral particles,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 685–706 (1998). [CrossRef]

], helical atom waveguide [14

M. Bhattacharya, “Lattice with a twist: Helical waveguides for ultracold matter,” Opt. Commun. 279, 219–222 (2007). [CrossRef]

]. Whereas τ points in the direction of free movement, x̂ = (1, 0, 0) and η form the principal axes of the local transverse trapping potential

\begin{matrix} V (x, η) \propto {| \partial_{x} E |}^{2} x^{2} + {| \partial_{η} E |}^{2} η^{2}, & where & \partial_{η} E = η \cdot \nabla (E) & with \end{matrix}

(12)

\partial_{η} E = - i \partial_{x} E \cdot \sqrt{\frac{2 z_{R} π + 9 C^{2} λ - 6 C^{4} λ - 24 C^{2} π z_{R} + c c^{6} λ + 8 C^{4} π z_{R} + 16 C^{2} π^{2} z_{R}^{2} / λ}{2 z_{R} π}}

(13)

This can be used to determine the transverse potential’s trapping frequencies and their anisotropy ratio A = ω_x/ω_η [14

M. Bhattacharya, “Lattice with a twist: Helical waveguides for ultracold matter,” Opt. Commun. 279, 219–222 (2007). [CrossRef]

], which is plotted in Fig. 3.

Unlike bright features dark features can provide superresolution [27

S. W. Hell, “Far-Field Optical Nanoscopy,” Science 316, 1153–1158 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. This allows us to create structures with spatial extensions below the diffraction limit. To see how the optical resolution limit constrains bright helices much more than dark ones, recall that bright helices are centered on the maximum position r_M of the local electric field. According to Fourier’s theorems monochromatic light fields in free space have to be smooth and differentiable, they cannot have spikes. Therefore, the field’s magnitude, when moving by a small displacement δr away from the core of the helix, can at best drop quadratically with δr, namely, with κ as the maximal local curvature we have

| δ E_{M} (δ r) | = | E (r_{M}) | - E (r_{M} + δ r) \leq \frac{| κ |}{2} \cdot {(δ r)}^{2} + O ({(δ r)}^{3}) .

(14)

Around a zero at location r_m the field instead typically rises linearly (unless one tracks the helix core), this variation is bounded by the largest local gradient γ

| δ E_{m} (δ r) | \approx | E (r_{m} + δ r) | - 0 \leq | γ | \cdot | δ r | + O ({(δ r)}^{2}) .

(15)

This difference in the scaling of the variation of the local field magnitude allows for sharper definition of dark helices compared with bright ones; this is represented graphically in the field magnitude plot of panel (c) of Fig. 1, in the comparison in Fig. 4, and in the ‘spikiness’ of the dark helices’ intensity profiles in Fig. 5(b) and 5(c). Note that the location of the bright helices in these two plots are harder to make out than those of the dark ones. One might be tempted to argue that a logarithmic plot ‘unfairly’ pronounces the presence of dark helices over bright ones, but photoresists, for example, tend to have logarithmic response functions [28

Y. Kim, H. Jung, S. Kim, J. Jang, J. Y. Lee, and J. W. Hahn, “Accurate near-field lithography modeling and quantitative mapping of the near-field distribution of a plasmonic nanoaperture in a metal,” Opt. Express 19, 19296–19309 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] so the use of Figs. 4(b), and 5(b) and 5(c) is quite suitable when trying to gauge outcomes in a photo-lithographic application.

Fig. 5 A set of parallel equal Gaussian beams u_0,0(x − X_G, y − Y_G, z) travelling along the z-axis and with their beam axes centered on a set of grid points {(X_G, Y_G, 0)} of a hexagonal lattice is arranged into three sub-lattices with different polarization orientations (beam centers and respective beam polarizations indicated by arrows in panel (a); nearest neighbour distance 2.3w₀). Despite its tight packing this sub-lattice arrangement avoids destructive interference between beams of equal polarization and yields a roughly uniformly bright background, see panels (b) and (c). The focal intensity distribution of a single dark helix created from the superposition

\sum (x, y, z; \frac{1}{8})

of Eq. (5) is displayed in panel (d) together with an artist’s impression of the location of its dark helix as a black line. Such dark helices can be inserted into the bright background without losing their contrast, (b) and (c), for details see section 5. Massively parallel or sparse implementation of dark helices with good contrast is possible. All position coordinate axes are scaled in units of beam width w₀.

5. Lattices of dark helices

It is possible to embed dark helical beams into a background of roughly uniform illumination. To this end a hexagonal lattice is used because it has high symmetry and can be very tightly packed. Ordinarily, regions of completely destructive interference of such tightly packed beams would be unavoidable. In order to make certain that no dark areas other than the desired dark helices are created, we partition the lattice into three triangular sub-lattices with different polarization directions, see colour-coding of Fig. 5(a). In our examples, the hexagonal lattice is either filled with ordinary Gaussian u_0,0-beams, Fig. 5(b), or with single-helix beams ∑(C), see Fig. 5(c); one of which is displayed in Fig. 5(d).

In case 5(b), the lattice beam u_0,0(x, y, z) at the origin (black arrow) is removed, a very weak +y-polarized beam is superimposed to remove spill-over from the nearest neighbours and a single-helix beam

\sum (x, y, z; \frac{1}{8})

inserted at the origin. This construction demonstrates that a single dark helix can be embedded into a bright uniform background. Alternatively, the entire lattice is formed from helical beams with equal strength, see Fig. 5(c); where, on account of the slightly wider lattice spacing, no spill-over compensation is applied.

The logarithmic intensity plots 5(b) and (c) confirm that the background intensity is quite uniform (varies less than an order of magnitude) and yet allows for embedded dark spirals with excellent intensity contrast: the helix cores are at least four orders of magnitude darker than the background.

6. Applications, conclusions and outlook

The generation of bright and dark intensity helices from paraxial laser beams was studied. Such intensity helices of light may turn out to be applied in nanolithography of bulk media [29

S. Kawata, H.-B. Sun, T. Tanaka, and K. Takada, “Finer features for functional microdevices,” Nature 412, 697–698 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] to create sharply contoured helical imprints in potentially massively parallel fashion.

In section 4 the variation of the electric field magnitude in the immediate vicinity of intensity helices was characterized. This variation scales linearly for dark and quadratically for bright helices.

The very much sharper intensity contrasts this scaling implies for dark helices may turn out to be of considerable practical importance. The logarithmic intensity plots of Fig. 5 (b) and (c) show that we can create sharp spikes of the intensity distribution of dark helices whereas this is impossible for bright helices. This observation is relevant for lithographic applications because photoresists tend to show logarithmic responses to the magnitude of the irradiating field [28

In order to demonstrate the versatility of the approach presented here it was shown that single dark helices can be sparsely embedded in a uniform bright background but also tightly packed into a dense hexagonal grid embedded in a uniform bright background.

The intensity helices’ defined handedness might, for example, help with the production of chiral optical meta-materials [30

A. Sihvola, “Metamaterials in electromagnetics,” Metamaterials 1, 2–11 (2007). [CrossRef]

, 31

I. V. Semchenko, S. A. Khakhomov, and S. A. Tretyakov, “Chiral metamaterial with unit negative refraction index,” Eur. Phys. J. Appl. Phys. 46, 032607 (2009). [CrossRef]

], possibly using longer wavelengths such as from THz-radiation [32

M. Tonouchi, “Cutting-edge terahertz technology,” Nat. Photonics 1, 97–105 (2007). [CrossRef]

Filtering of handed molecules, through a membrane with photo-lithographically etched helical holes or via handedness-sensitive trapping in solution, might become possible.

For the manipulation of ultra-cold gas clouds via the optical dipole force, dark (blue-detuned) and bright (red-detuned [14

M. Bhattacharya, “Lattice with a twist: Helical waveguides for ultracold matter,” Opt. Commun. 279, 219–222 (2007). [CrossRef]

]) helical beams may turn out to be useful [26

S. Chu, “Nobel Lecture: The manipulation of neutral particles,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 685–706 (1998). [CrossRef]

The fact that helices can be made to intertwine, see section 2, opens up the possibility of studying intertwined transport. In the presence of gravity or other uniform force fields a helix that is tilted away from vertical by more than its pitch angle can potentially serve as a microscopic Archimedean-screw transporter [16

S. Kuhr, W. Alt, D. Schrader, M. Müller, V. Gomer, and D. Meschede, “Deterministic Delivery of a Single Atom,” Science 293, 278–281 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] or a helical ratchet-potential. Transport along helices is expected to show localization behaviour [33

Y. B. Gaididei, P. L. Christiansen, P. G. Kevrekidis, H. Büttner, and A. R. Bishop, “Localization of nonlinear excitations in curved waveguides,” New J. Phys. 7, 52–52 (2005). [CrossRef]

, 34

P. Exner and M. Fraas, “A remark on helical waveguides,” Phys. Lett. A 369, 393–399 (2007). [CrossRef]

] and other interesting quantum-transport phenomena [35

X.-L. Qi and S.-C. Zhang, “Field-induced gap and quantized charge pumping in a nanoscale helical wire,” Phys. Rev. B 79, 235442 (2009). [CrossRef]

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Paul Kaye for proof-reading of this manuscript.

References and links

1.	L. Allen, M. W. Beijersbergen, R. J. C. Spreeuw, and J. P. Woerdman, “Orbital angular momentum of light and the transformation of Laguerre-Gaussian laser modes,” Phys. Rev. A 45, 8185–8189 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2.	M. Padgett and L. Allen, “Light with a twist in its tail,” Cont. Phys. 41, 275–285 (2000). [CrossRef]
3.	M. Padgett, J. Courtial, and L. Allen, “Light’s Orbital Angular Momentum,” Phys. Today 57, 35–40 (2004). [CrossRef]
4.	M. Harris, C. A. Hill, and J. M. Vaughan, “Optical helices and spiral interference fringes,” Opt. Commun. 106, 161–166 (1994). [CrossRef]
5.	J. M. Vaughan, “Interferometry, atoms and light scattering: one hundred years of optics,” J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt. 1, 750–768 (1999). [CrossRef]
6.	J. Leach, S. Keen, M. J. Padgett, C. Saunter, and G. D. Love, “Direct measurement of the skew angle of the Poynting vector in a helically phased beam,” Opt. Express 14, 11919–11924 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
7.	O. Steuernagel, “Equivalence between focused paraxial beams and the quantum harmonic oscillator,” Am. J. Phys. 73, 625–629 (2005). [CrossRef]
8.	J. Lekner, “LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Helical light pulses,” J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt. 6, L29–L32 (2004). [CrossRef]
9.	J. Hamazaki, Y. Mineta, K. Oka, and R. Morita, “Direct observation of Gouy phase shift in a propagating optical vortex,” Opt. Express 14, 8382–8392 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
10.	S. M. Baumann, D. M. Kalb, L. H. MacMillan, and E. J. Galvez, “Propagation dynamics of optical vortices due to Gouy phase,” Opt. Express 17, 9818–9827 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
11.	J. Becker, P. Rose, M. Boguslawski, and C. Denz, “Systematic approach to complex periodic vortex and helix lattices,” Opt. Express 19, 9848–9862 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
12.	K. Volke-Sepúlveda and R. Jáuregui, “All-optical 3D atomic loops generated with Bessel light fields,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 42, 085303 (2009). [CrossRef]
13.	K. Staliunas, “Vortex Creation in Bose-Einstein Condensates by Diffraction on a Helical Light Grating,” http://www.arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/9912268 (1999).
14.	M. Bhattacharya, “Lattice with a twist: Helical waveguides for ultracold matter,” Opt. Commun. 279, 219–222 (2007). [CrossRef]
15.	J. F. Nye and M. V. Berry, “Dislocations in Wave Trains,” R. Soc. London Proc. Ser. A 336, 165–190 (1974). [CrossRef]
16.	S. Kuhr, W. Alt, D. Schrader, M. Müller, V. Gomer, and D. Meschede, “Deterministic Delivery of a Single Atom,” Science 293, 278–281 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
17.	D. Meschede and H. Metcalf, “Atomic nanofabrication: atomic deposition and lithography by laser and magnetic forces,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 36, R17–R38 (2003). [CrossRef]
18.	L. Marrucci, C. Manzo, and D. Paparo, “Optical spin-to-orbital angular momentum conversion in inhomogeneous anisotropic media,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 163905 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19.	J. Leach, M. R. Dennis, J. Courtial, and M. J. Padgett, “Laser beams: Knotted threads of darkness,” Nature 432, 165–165 (2004). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20.	M. P. MacDonald, L. Paterson, K. Volke-Sepulveda, J. Arlt, W. Sibbett, and K. Dholakia, “Creation and Manipulation of Three-Dimensional Optically Trapped Structures,” Science 296, 1101–1103 (2002). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
21.	F. Pampaloni and J. Enderlein, “Gaussian, Hermite-Gaussian, and Laguerre-Gaussian beams: A primer,” http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0410021 (2004).
22.	H. A. Haus, Electromagnetic Noise and Quantum Optical Measurements (Springer, Heidelberg, 2000).
23.	L. Paterson, M. P. MacDonald, J. Arlt, W. Sibbett, P. E. Bryant, and K. Dholakia, “Controlled Rotation of Optically Trapped Microscopic Particles,” Science 292, 912–914 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
24.	K. Dholakia, G. C. Spalding, and M. MacDonald, “Optical tweezers: The next generation,” Phys. World 15, 31–35 (2002).
25.	M. P. MacDonald, K. Volke-Sepulveda, L. Paterson, J. Arlt, W. Sibbett, and K. Dholakia, “Revolving interference patterns for the rotation of optically trapped particles,” Opt. Commun. 201, 21–28 (2002). [CrossRef]
26.	S. Chu, “Nobel Lecture: The manipulation of neutral particles,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 685–706 (1998). [CrossRef]
27.	S. W. Hell, “Far-Field Optical Nanoscopy,” Science 316, 1153–1158 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
28.	Y. Kim, H. Jung, S. Kim, J. Jang, J. Y. Lee, and J. W. Hahn, “Accurate near-field lithography modeling and quantitative mapping of the near-field distribution of a plasmonic nanoaperture in a metal,” Opt. Express 19, 19296–19309 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29.	S. Kawata, H.-B. Sun, T. Tanaka, and K. Takada, “Finer features for functional microdevices,” Nature 412, 697–698 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
30.	A. Sihvola, “Metamaterials in electromagnetics,” Metamaterials 1, 2–11 (2007). [CrossRef]
31.	I. V. Semchenko, S. A. Khakhomov, and S. A. Tretyakov, “Chiral metamaterial with unit negative refraction index,” Eur. Phys. J. Appl. Phys. 46, 032607 (2009). [CrossRef]
32.	M. Tonouchi, “Cutting-edge terahertz technology,” Nat. Photonics 1, 97–105 (2007). [CrossRef]
33.	Y. B. Gaididei, P. L. Christiansen, P. G. Kevrekidis, H. Büttner, and A. R. Bishop, “Localization of nonlinear excitations in curved waveguides,” New J. Phys. 7, 52–52 (2005). [CrossRef]
34.	P. Exner and M. Fraas, “A remark on helical waveguides,” Phys. Lett. A 369, 393–399 (2007). [CrossRef]
35.	X.-L. Qi and S.-C. Zhang, “Field-induced gap and quantized charge pumping in a nanoscale helical wire,” Phys. Rev. B 79, 235442 (2009). [CrossRef]

OCIS Codes
(220.3740) Optical design and fabrication : Lithography
(220.4000) Optical design and fabrication : Microstructure fabrication
(260.3160) Physical optics : Interference
(160.1585) Materials : Chiral media
(110.4235) Imaging systems : Nanolithography

ToC Category:
Physical Optics

History
Original Manuscript: February 16, 2012
Revised Manuscript: April 23, 2012
Manuscript Accepted: April 23, 2012
Published: June 12, 2012

Citation
Ole Steuernagel, "Bright and dark helices of light," Opt. Express 20, 14371-14379 (2012)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-20-13-14371

Sort: Author | Year | Journal | Reset

References

L. Allen, M. W. Beijersbergen, R. J. C. Spreeuw, and J. P. Woerdman, “Orbital angular momentum of light and the transformation of Laguerre-Gaussian laser modes,” Phys. Rev. A45, 8185–8189 (1992). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
M. Padgett and L. Allen, “Light with a twist in its tail,” Cont. Phys.41, 275–285 (2000). [CrossRef]
M. Padgett, J. Courtial, and L. Allen, “Light’s Orbital Angular Momentum,” Phys. Today57, 35–40 (2004). [CrossRef]
M. Harris, C. A. Hill, and J. M. Vaughan, “Optical helices and spiral interference fringes,” Opt. Commun.106, 161–166 (1994). [CrossRef]
J. M. Vaughan, “Interferometry, atoms and light scattering: one hundred years of optics,” J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt.1, 750–768 (1999). [CrossRef]
J. Leach, S. Keen, M. J. Padgett, C. Saunter, and G. D. Love, “Direct measurement of the skew angle of the Poynting vector in a helically phased beam,” Opt. Express14, 11919–11924 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
O. Steuernagel, “Equivalence between focused paraxial beams and the quantum harmonic oscillator,” Am. J. Phys.73, 625–629 (2005). [CrossRef]
J. Lekner, “LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Helical light pulses,” J. Opt. A: Pure Appl. Opt.6, L29–L32 (2004). [CrossRef]
J. Hamazaki, Y. Mineta, K. Oka, and R. Morita, “Direct observation of Gouy phase shift in a propagating optical vortex,” Opt. Express14, 8382–8392 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
S. M. Baumann, D. M. Kalb, L. H. MacMillan, and E. J. Galvez, “Propagation dynamics of optical vortices due to Gouy phase,” Opt. Express17, 9818–9827 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
J. Becker, P. Rose, M. Boguslawski, and C. Denz, “Systematic approach to complex periodic vortex and helix lattices,” Opt. Express19, 9848–9862 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
K. Volke-Sepúlveda and R. Jáuregui, “All-optical 3D atomic loops generated with Bessel light fields,” J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys.42, 085303 (2009). [CrossRef]
K. Staliunas, “Vortex Creation in Bose-Einstein Condensates by Diffraction on a Helical Light Grating,” http://www.arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/9912268 (1999).
M. Bhattacharya, “Lattice with a twist: Helical waveguides for ultracold matter,” Opt. Commun.279, 219–222 (2007). [CrossRef]
J. F. Nye and M. V. Berry, “Dislocations in Wave Trains,” R. Soc. London Proc. Ser. A336, 165–190 (1974). [CrossRef]

Cited By

Alert me when this paper is cited

OSA is able to provide readers links to articles that cite this paper by participating in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. CrossRef includes content from more than 3000 publishers and societies. In addition to listing OSA journal articles that cite this paper, citing articles from other participating publishers will also be listed.

Click here to see a list of articles that cite this paper