OSA's Digital Library

Optics Express

Optics Express

  • Editor: Andrew M. Weiner
  • Vol. 21, Iss. 1 — Jan. 14, 2013
  • pp: 1287–1300
« Show journal navigation

Phase anomalies in Talbot light carpets of self-images

Myun-Sik Kim, Toralf Scharf, Christoph Menzel, Carsten Rockstuhl, and Hans Peter Herzig  »View Author Affiliations


Optics Express, Vol. 21, Issue 1, pp. 1287-1300 (2013)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.21.001287


View Full Text Article

Acrobat PDF (5201 KB)





Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Browse by Journal and Year


   


Lookup Conference Papers

Close Browse Journals / Lookup Meetings

Article Tools

Share
Citations

Abstract

An interesting feature of light fields is a phase anomaly, which occurs on the optical axis when light is converging as in a focal spot. Since in Talbot images the light is periodically confined in both transverse and axial directions, it remains an open question whether at all and to which extent the phase in the Talbot images sustains an analogous phase anomaly. Here, we investigate experimentally and theoretically the anomalous phase behavior of Talbot images that emerge from a 1D amplitude grating with a period only slightly larger than the illumination wavelength. Talbot light carpets are observed close to the grating. We concisely show that the phase in each of the Talbot images possesses an anomalous axial shift. We show that this phase shift is analogous to a Gouy phase of a converging wave and occurs due to the periodic light confinement caused by the interference of various diffraction orders. Longitudinal-differential interferometry is used to directly demonstrate the axial phase shifts by comparing Talbot images phase maps to a plane wave. Supporting simulations based on rigorous diffraction theory are used to explore the effect numerically. Numerical and experimental results are in excellent agreement. We discover that the phase anomaly, i.e., the difference of the phase of the field behind the grating to the phase of a referential plane wave, is an increasing function with respect to the propagation distance. We also observe within one Talbot length an irregular wavefront spacing that causes a deviation from the linear slope of the phase anomaly. We complement our work by providing an analytical model that explains these features of the axial phase shift.

© 2013 OSA

1. Introduction

Diffraction and interference phenomena are manifestations of the wave nature of light. A prime example for such effect constitutes a grating that diffracts monochromatic incident light into discrete directions. Especially in the Fresnel diffraction regime, i.e., the region close to the surface of the grating, each diffraction order propagates at a certain angle and superposes with others in space. Such a superposition leads to interference and self-images of the grating can be observed. This self-imaging phenomenon was first discovered by Talbot in 1836 [1

1. F. Talbot, “Facts relating to optical science. No. IV,” Philos. Mag. 9, 401–407 (1836).

] and afterward called the Talbot effect. It connotes that the light field emerging from the grating possesses a periodicity in propagation direction, in addition to the periodicity in lateral directions imposed by the periodicity of the object. Such particular field distributions repeat at regular distances away from the grating surface. An analytic description for this distance was derived by Lord Rayleigh in 1881 and he called it the Talbot length [2

2. L. Rayleigh, “On copying diffraction gratings and some phenomena connected therewith,” Philos. Mag. 11(67), 196–205 (1881). [CrossRef]

].

These self-imaging effects play an important role in numerous applications. Examples are for the measurements of the refractive index [3

3. J. C. Bhattacharya, “Measurement of the refractive index using the Talbot effect and a moire technique,” Appl. Opt. 28(13), 2600–2604 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], for sensing a distance or a displacement [4

4. G. Spagnolo, D. Ambrosini, and D. Paoletti, “Displacement measurement using the Talbot effect with a Ronchi grating,” J. Opt. Soc. A 4(6), S376–S380 (2002). [CrossRef]

], for laser resonators [5

5. J. R. Leger, M. L. Scott, and W. B. Veldkamp, “Coherent addition of AlGaAs lasers using microlenses and diffractive coupling,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 52(21), 1771–1773 (1988). [CrossRef]

, 6

6. J. R. Leger, “Lateral mode control of an AlGaAs laser array in a Talbot cavity,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 55(4), 334–336 (1989). [CrossRef]

], lithography [7

7. L. Stuerzebecher, T. Harzendorf, U. Vogler, U. D. Zeitner, and R. Voelkel, “Advanced mask aligner lithography: fabrication of periodic patterns using pinhole array mask and Talbot effect,” Opt. Express 18(19), 19485–19494 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], array illumination [8

8. P. Maddaloni, M. Paturzo, P. Ferraro, P. Malara, P. De Natale, M. Gioffrè, G. Coppola, and M. Iodice, “Mid-infrared tunable two-dimensional Talbot array illuminator,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 94(12), 121105 (2009). [CrossRef]

], sub-wavelength focusing [9

9. F. M. Huang, N. Zheludev, Y. Chen, and F. Javier Garcia de Abajo, “Focusing of light by a nanohole array,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 90(9), 091119 (2007). [CrossRef]

], imaging [10

10. O. Bryngdahl, “Image formation using self-imaging techniques,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 63(4), 416–419 (1973). [CrossRef]

], lensless image synthesis [11

11. E. Bonet, J. Ojeda-Castañeda, and A. Pons, “Imagesynthesis using the Laueffect,” Opt. Commun. 81(5), 285–290 (1991). [CrossRef]

] and 2D optical correlator [12

12. J. C. Barreiro, P. Andrés, J. Ojeda-Castañeda, and J. Lancis, “Multiple incoherent 2D optical correlator,” Opt. Commun. 84(5-6), 237–241 (1991). [CrossRef]

]. Such appealing applications draw attention and led to intensive investigations; both experimentally and theoretically. The theoretical studies often focused on a discussion of the origin of the Talbot effect and associated phenomena while relying on different approximations. Work has been done in the framework of Fresnel diffraction [13

13. R. F. Edgar, “The Fresnel diffraction images of periodic structures,” J. Mod. Opt. 16, 281–287 (1969).

], Fresnel images [14

14. J. T. Winthrop and C. R. Worthington, “Theory of Fresnel images. I. Plane periodic objects in monochromatic light,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 55(4), 373–381 (1965). [CrossRef]

], Fourier images [15

15. A. Kołodziejczyk, “Realization of Fourier images without using a lens by sampling the optical object,” J. Mod. Opt. 32, 741–746 (1985).

], and the theory of image formation [16

16. Y.-S. Cheng and R.-C. Chang, “Theory of image formation using the Talbot effect,” Appl. Opt. 33(10), 1863–1874 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Associated effects such as the quasi-Talbot effect [17

17. S. Teng, Y. Tan, and C. Cheng, “Quasi-Talbot effect of the high-density grating in near field,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 25(12), 2945–2951 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] or the fractional and fractal Talbot effects [18

18. M. Berry and S. Klein, “Integer, fractional and fractal Talbot effects,” J. Mod. Opt. 43(10), 2139–2164 (1996). [CrossRef]

] were equally investigated. Also, rigorous studies were done using, e.g., electromagnetic theory [19

19. E. Noponen and J. Turunen, “Electromagnetic theory of Talbot imaging,” Opt. Commun. 98(1-3), 132–140 (1993). [CrossRef]

], the finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) method [20

20. Y. Lu, C. Zhou, and H. Luo, “Talbot effect of a grating with different kinds of flaws,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 22(12), 2662–2667 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] and the Rayleigh-Sommerfeld formula to understand the impact of aberrations on the self-imaging process [21

21. F. J. Torcal-Milla, L. M. Sanchez-Brea, and J. Vargas, “Effect of aberrations on the self-imaging phenomenon,” J. Lightwave Technol. 29(7), 1051–1057 (2011). [CrossRef]

]. In physical optics, researchers discussed such effects down to the quantum mechanical level, i.e., the quantum Talbot effect [22

22. M. Berry, I. Marzoli, and W. Schleich, “Quantum carpets, carpets of light,” Physics World June, 39–46 (2001).

, 23

23. X.-B. Song, H.-B. Wang, J. Xiong, K. Wang, X. Zhang, K.-H. Luo, and L.-A. Wu, “Experimental observation of quantum Talbot effects,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107(3), 033902 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Such self-imaging phenomena are also not limited to optical waves. For instance, the Talbot effect exits for atomic matter waves [24

24. M. S. Chapman, C. R. Ekstrom, T. D. Hammond, J. Schmiedmayer, B. E. Tannian, S. Wehinger, and D. E. Pritchard, “Near-field imaging of atom diffraction gratings: The atomic Talbot effect,” Phys. Rev. A 51(1), R14–R17 (1995). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 25

25. S. Nowak, Ch. Kurtsiefer, T. Pfau, and C. David, “High-order Talbot fringes for atomic matter waves,” Opt. Lett. 22(18), 1430–1432 (1997). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], x-ray [26

26. P. Cloetens, J. P. Guigay, C. De Martino, J. Baruchel, and M. Schlenker, “Fractional Talbot imaging of phase gratings with hard x rays,” Opt. Lett. 22(14), 1059–1061 (1997). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], electron beams [27

27. B. J. McMorran and A. D. Cronin, “An electron Talbot interferometer,” New J. Phys. 11(3), 033021 (2009). [CrossRef]

], and surface plasmons [28

28. M. R. Dennis, N. I. Zheludev, and F. J. García de Abajo, “The plasmon Talbot effect,” Opt. Express 15(15), 9692–9700 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 29

29. S. Cherukulappurath, D. Heinis, J. Cesario, N. F. van Hulst, S. Enoch, and R. Quidant, “Local observation of plasmon focusingin Talbot carpets,” Opt. Express 17(26), 23772–23784 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

].

Compared to the theoretical works, there are only few experimental investigations reported. In most of these experiments, the Talbot effect has been studied using gratings with periods much larger when compared to the wavelength, for example, in Refs. [20

20. Y. Lu, C. Zhou, and H. Luo, “Talbot effect of a grating with different kinds of flaws,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 22(12), 2662–2667 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], [21]

21. F. J. Torcal-Milla, L. M. Sanchez-Brea, and J. Vargas, “Effect of aberrations on the self-imaging phenomenon,” J. Lightwave Technol. 29(7), 1051–1057 (2011). [CrossRef]

and [23]

23. X.-B. Song, H.-B. Wang, J. Xiong, K. Wang, X. Zhang, K.-H. Luo, and L.-A. Wu, “Experimental observation of quantum Talbot effects,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107(3), 033902 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

. This suggests a certain simplicity for the experiments since it is not difficult to accommodate the associated macroscopic scales. Moreover, and even surprisingly, the phase features are often not taken into account in these studies. Recently, a detailed experimental and theoretical study of the Talbot effect has been using a 1D amplitude grating with a period only slightly larger than the wavelength. There, detailed information of both amplitude and phase fields were provided [30

30. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, C. Menzel, C. Rockstuhl, and H. P. Herzig, “Talbot images of wavelength-scale amplitude gratings,” Opt. Express 20(5), 4903–4920 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The contributions of each diffraction order to the Talbot effect and the formation of self-images has been discussed. However, it can be expected that such fields may be characterized by much more interesting features. A prime example phase fields might feature, in general, is the anomalous axial phase shift [31

31. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, C. Etrich, C. Rockstuhl, and H. H. Peter, “Longitudinal-differential interferometry: Direct imaging of axial superluminal phase propagation,” Opt. Lett. 37(3), 305–307 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. In this work, we focus on the phase of light fields emerging from the grating surface that form Talbot images. Especially, the axial phase behavior of the light is of interest.

2. Experiment and simulation

For the measurements of amplitude and phase in the entire 3D space, a high-resolution interference microscope (HRIM) is considered. Details of the experimental setup are reported elsewhere [71

71. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, S. Mühlig, C. Rockstuhl, and H. P. Herzig, “Engineering photonic nanojets,” Opt. Express 19(11), 10206–10220 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 72

72. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, and H. P. Herzig, “Small-size microlens characterization by Multiwavelength High-Resolution Interference Microscopy,” Opt. Express 18(14), 14319–14329 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. A particular measurement mode of the HRIM allows longitudinal-differential (LD) interferometry [31

31. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, C. Etrich, C. Rockstuhl, and H. H. Peter, “Longitudinal-differential interferometry: Direct imaging of axial superluminal phase propagation,” Opt. Lett. 37(3), 305–307 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

] that directly measures the axial phase shift by comparing the phase of the object field with that of a reference plane wave in situ. In this study, all experimental and theoretical investigations were performed at a single wavelength of 642 nm (CrystaLaser: DL640-050-3). In passing we note that the laser source provides perfect coherent light and the light delivering system is based on a collimation using a spatial filtering technique that also assures perfect spatial coherence. The Talbot effect occurs in the amplitude of the wave field only if it is perfectly coherent, as it holds for the present setup. However, even for incoherent light a longitudinal periodicity can be observed that was first described by Lau [73

73. E. Lau, “Beugungserscheinungen an Doppelrastern,” Ann. Phys. 437(7-8), 417–423 (1948). [CrossRef]

] and it also holds for partially coherent beams [74

74. A. W. Lohmann and A. S. Marathay, “About periodicities in 3-D wavefields,” Appl. Opt. 28(20), 4419–4423 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 75

75. A. W. Lohmann and J. Ojeda-Castaneda, “Spatial periodicities in partially coherent fields,” Opt. Acta: Int. J. Opt. 30(4), 475–479 (1983). [CrossRef]

].

Eventually, what we want to probe in our experiments is the phase anomaly in a wave field that consists of three interfering plane waves, in our case, three propagating diffraction orders, that could have been also generated in the field upon interference of a finite number of plane waves. However, such scheme does not allow for the measurement of LD phase map in an unambiguous manner since an isolated plane wave that provides the referential phase advance cannot be incorporated into such measurement scheme. The beauty of the proposed sample structure shown in Fig. 1 is the integration of all the necessary structures into a single sample that can be equally measured at once. This is a clear advantage of devices that are discussed in the field of micro- and nano-optics, respectively. The integration of multiple functionalities into one sample is often very beneficial [76

76. M. Thiel, M. Hermatschweiler, M. Wegener, and G. von Freymann, “Thin-film polarizer based on a one-dimensional–three-dimensional–one-dimensional photonic crystal heterostructure,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 91(12), 123515 (2007). [CrossRef]

]. With this particularly designed sample, we can additionally demonstrate and study the presence of the boundary diffraction wave at the edge of the opaque region and, moreover, the propagation of an isolated diffraction order that is not superposed to other diffraction orders. These features can be observed at the edges of the opaque region. To be precise, at the left edge of the 30-μm opaque region in Fig. 1, a boundary diffraction wave emerges toward both the shadow (to the right) and opening (to the left) regions. At the right boundary of the opaque region, an isolated diffraction order emerges to the left into the shadow region and does not superpose with other orders of the grating. The diffraction orders emerging from the middle of the grating region superpose each other and eventually produce the Talbot images.

3. Intensity distributions: Talbot images and Talbot length

The simplest demonstration of the self-imaging effect is an intensity measurement that prominently shows the periodic intensity distributions corresponding to the grating period and an axial periodicity at repeated distances away from the grating surface. Figure 2
Fig. 2 The x-z intensity distribution emerging from the grating structure shown in Fig. 1. A plane wave is used for the illumination. (a) Measured and (b) simulated intensity distribution. The region of interest is the central 60-μm part of Fig. 1. Intensities are normalized.
shows the measured and simulated x-z intensity distributions when the 1D grating structure from Fig. 1 is illuminated by a plane wave of 642 nm wavelength.

The region of interest (ROI) is the central 60-μm part, which covers a part of the opening and the grating and the full 30-μm opaque region. On the left hand side, the in situ reference plane wave with minimal perturbations passes through the opening. No light passes through the opaque region, x = 5 - 35 μm in Fig. 2. Only diffracted light emerges at certain angles from both edges of the opaque region. On the right hand side, x = 35 - 60 μm, the self-images of the grating appear, i.e., the Talbot images. Here, one can see a consequence of the finite grating. The diffraction angle of the ± 1st orders defines a geometrical region with an inclined edge where the three diffraction orders superpose and interfere to form the Talbot image. The inclination angle perfectly corresponds to the diffraction angle of the 1st order. For a period of Λ = 1 μm and a wavelength of λ = 642 nm, the 1st order diffraction order propagates at an angle of 39.9°. The region x = 50 - 60 μm shows Talbot images extending up to z = 20 μm. It corresponds to the upper limit of the region of interest. The simulation in Fig. 2(b) shows an excellent agreement with the measurement from Fig. 2(a).

While the boundary diffraction wave at the left edge of the opaque region is not prominently visible in both figures due to very low field strength, the single diffraction order emerging from the boundary between the opaque region and the grating is well resolved. This single diffraction order emerging toward the left from the grating, which is defined as the −1st order in our convention, demonstrates a tilting angle that corresponds to the diffraction angle of 39.9°. This is the vertical reflection of the inclination angle of the Talbot image zone in Fig. 2 that is defined by the + 1st order. Since in the present configuration only three diffraction orders propagate, i.e., the 0th and ± 1st, only self-Talbot images are found. This implies that there are neither quasi-Talbot images nor fractional Talbot images [17

17. S. Teng, Y. Tan, and C. Cheng, “Quasi-Talbot effect of the high-density grating in near field,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 25(12), 2945–2951 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 18

18. M. Berry and S. Klein, “Integer, fractional and fractal Talbot effects,” J. Mod. Opt. 43(10), 2139–2164 (1996). [CrossRef]

] that are associated with higher diffraction orders. Each self-image plane has a lateral shift of half grating period. The distance between adjacent self-image planes is equal to half the Talbot length. In some literatures [e.g., Ref. [22

22. M. Berry, I. Marzoli, and W. Schleich, “Quantum carpets, carpets of light,” Physics World June, 39–46 (2001).

]] this half-length is used as the Talbot length ZT, but we adopt the original definition proposed by Lord Rayleigh [2

2. L. Rayleigh, “On copying diffraction gratings and some phenomena connected therewith,” Philos. Mag. 11(67), 196–205 (1881). [CrossRef]

], which is derived as
ZT=λ11(λΛ)2.
(1)
He also suggested an approximation to Eq. (1) when the wavelengths λ is considered to be small compared to the period Λ of the structure. In this paraxial approximation the Talbot length can be expressed as
ZT=2Λ2λ.
(2)
Our study is a prime example to demonstrate the invalidity of Eq. (2) when the period Λ tends to be in the order of the wavelength λ. Figure 3
Fig. 3 Comparison of the exact and approximate Talbot lengths ZT with respect to the grating period Λ. The difference becomes noticeable when the period Λ is below 5λ. The case of Λ = 1.56λ ( = 1 μm) produces approximately 12% difference between two results. When Λ = λ, this relative error reaches up to 100%. The experimental result is in excellent agreement with the exact Talbot length.
shows the calculated Talbot length with respect to the grating period by using both Eqs. (1) and (2). The difference between results of two equations becomes prominent when Λ equals 5λ, where 1% difference occurs. Here, the difference in percentage is derived by comparing the difference with the actual Talbot length from Eq. (1). Analytically, the difference can reach 100% when the Talbot lengths equals the observation wavelength, hence Λ = λ. Already for the case of Λ = 1.56λ (i.e., Λ = 1 μm at λ = 642 nm), the difference is significantly increased up to almost 12%. Therefore, for our case, we can assert that Eq. (2) is not valid anymore and should not be used. Equation (1) is the exact analytical solution to verify the experimental and numerical results. Figures 2(a) and 2(b) both demonstrate the Talbot length ZT = 2.8 μm that perfectly matches with the result of Eq. (1) while Eq. (2) would lead to ZT = 3.1 μm.

4. Phase distributions: longitudinal-differential and propagation phase maps

In experiments, the longitudinal-differential interferometer naturally records the LD phase map as shown in Fig. 4(a)
Fig. 4 The measured x-z phase distributions: (a) the longitudinal-differential phase map and (b) the propagation phase map. The reference plane wave passing the opening is shown in x = 1 - 8 μm of both maps in the referential plane at x = 0 µm. The propagation phase is obtained by adding the phase advance of a plane wave in free space to each distance that can be calculated analytically according to kz and unwrapping it with a modulo of 2π.
. The experimental errors due to vibration and the laser source instability can now be corrected by using the in situ reference plane wave that is present in the region of x = 1 - 8 μm and which appears as a constant phase. By wrapping this constant phase of the reference plane wave with a modulo of 2π, a propagation phase map, which is the counterpart of the simulated absolute phase map, is obtained as shown in Fig. 4(b). The corresponding simulations are shown in Fig. 5
Fig. 5 The simulated x-z phase distributions: (a) the longitudinal-differential phase map and (b) the propagation phase map. The reference plane wave passing the opening is shown in x = 1 - 5 μm of both maps. The LD phase distribution is obtained by subtracting the phase of the plane wave from the propagation phase map in the referential plane at x = 0 µm.
. Note that the coordinates of the region of interest are shifted to match with intensity distributions. Therefore, the in situ reference appears now at x = 1 - 5 μm. The simulations are again in excellent agreement with experiments. In simulations, the absolute phase is the natural result that represents the propagation phase map as shown in Fig. 5(b). Subtracting the phase of the plane wave from the propagation map leads to the LD phase map in Fig. 5(a).

Especially in the low intensity region, e.g., in the geometrical shadow behind the 30-μm opaque region, the phase maps show much more information than the intensity maps. Now, the presence of the boundary diffraction wave is clearly observed on the left edge of the opaque region. The phase of the single diffraction order that does not superpose with other diffraction orders shows as a tilted planar wavefront on the right edge of the opaque region. In the region where the three diffraction orders superpose (x = 38 - 60 μm for experiment and x = 35 - 60 μm for simulation), phase Talbot images emerge from the grating surface. In this region, the super-resolution features like phase singularities are found in each self-image plane. Such phase dislocations occur where the destructive interference causes points in space with zero amplitude. Since only the self-images demonstrate such features [30

30. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, C. Menzel, C. Rockstuhl, and H. P. Herzig, “Talbot images of wavelength-scale amplitude gratings,” Opt. Express 20(5), 4903–4920 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

], the position of the singularity can serve as an indication for the self-image planes. Therefore, a super-resolution distance measurement can be put in place when the phase field is considered for the applications exploiting the Talbot effect.

5. Phase anomaly of the Talbot image

By definition, the classical Gouy phase of a focused, monochromatic field at an axial point is defined as the difference between the argument (or “phase”) of the object field and that of a plane wave of the same frequency [77

77. X. Pang, D. G. Fischer, and T. D. Visser, “Generalized Gouy phase for focused partially coherent light and its implications for interferometry,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 29(6), 989–993 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. Here, we adopt this notion to discuss the phase anomaly of Talbot images. Therefore, the LD phase maps, which display the axial phase difference from the phase of the in situ reference plane wave, shown in Fig. 4(a) and 5(a) directly reveals the axial phase shift from the plane wave. Since Talbot images are periodic along the lateral direction, on-axis observation points are defined here as the points connecting the center of each Talbot image. Therefore, the axial profiles of the LD phase maps from the experiment [see Fig. 4(a)] and the simulation [see Fig. 5(a)] are extracted along the center of one Talbot image, i.e., close to x = 55 μm. After unwrapping they are plotted together in Fig. 6
Fig. 6 The axial phase shifts along the center of Talbot images from the experiment (filled square) and simulation (red solid line). The analytical result using Eq. (3) is plotted in dark dashed line. For the single diffraction order, the simulation result is plotted in blue dot-dashed line denoted as FMM single order.
.

We observe a continuously growing phase shift along the z-axis. To better understand this phenomenon, an analytical equation is derived by using the tilted wave model [78

78. Q. Zhan, “Second-order tilted wave interpretation of the Gouy phase shift under high numerical aperture uniform illumination,” Opt. Commun. 242(4-6), 351–360 (2004). [CrossRef]

]. In this model, the ± 1st orders are considered as propagating toward each other at a diffraction angle of 39.9° with respect to the surface normal. The superposition results in an interference that leads to Moiré-like fringes aligned along the axial direction. This Moiré interference fringe is superposed with the 0th diffraction order that is a plane wave propagating on-axis. Finally, the resulting interference between the Moiré-like fringe and the plane wave causes the axial periodicity, that is, the axial periodicity of the self-Talbot images. This suggests that the phase of the Talbot images can be written as the phase difference between the titled higher diffraction orders and the 0th order and is given as
Δϕ =z(cosθ1)k,
(3)
with θ being the diffraction (or tilt) angle and k being the wavenumber ( = 2π/λ). In this case, the amount of the axial phase shift or phase anomaly Δϕ does not has a finite and bound value, as in the case of a converging wave, but it is a growing function with respect to the propagation distance z. The phase anomaly calculated by Eq. (3) is also plotted in Fig. 6 and is compared to the experimental and numerical results. Overall, the analytical results show a very good agreement to the experiment and simulation. The axial phase of the single diffraction order, which is the −1st, has been plotted as well (see FMM single order). This will be discussed later with results of Fig. 7
Fig. 7 Phase profiles within one Talbot length along the center of the Talbot image close to x = 55 μm: (a) the absolute phase from Fig. 5(b) and (b) the unwrapped LD phase from Fig. 5(a). The absolute phase shows the irregular wavefront spacing within one Talbot length. This irregularity leads to the phase anomaly slope deviating from the linear slope of the analytical solution Eq. (3). This repeatedly appears in Fig. 6 as a demonstration for the axial periodicity that represents the Talbot length.
.

Apart from the main effect, which is the linearly growing phase anomaly defined by the analytical solution [see Eq. (3)], both the experimental and numerical results demonstrate periodic deviations from this linear slope. This clearly originates from the wavefront deformation and the irregular spacing within adjacent wavefronts. Talbot images are produced by three-waves-interference (the 0th and ± 1st orders) that causes the wavefront deformation appearing over one Talbot length [see Figs. 4(b) and 5(b) at x = 40 – 60 μm]. This results in an irregular wavefront spacing within one Talbot length, as shown in the extracted axial phase profile from Fig. 5(b) given in Fig. 7(a). Such irregular wavefront spacing is typically found in focused beams [63

63. H. Chen, Q. Zhan, Y. Zhang, and Y.-P. Li, “The Gouy phase shift of the highly focused radially polarized beam,” Phys. Lett. A 371(3), 259–261 (2007). [CrossRef]

, 79

79. J. T. Foley and E. Wolf, “Wave-front spacing in the focal region of high-numerical-aperture systems,” Opt. Lett. 30(11), 1312–1314 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

, 80

80. T. D. Visser and J. T. Foley, “On the wavefront spacing of focused, radially polarized beams,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 22(11), 2527–2531 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

]. The irregularity causes a deviation of the phase from the linear slope as shown in Fig. 7(b), which is the phase anomaly occurring within one Talbot length (e.g., z = 0 - 2.8 μm). Therefore, the periodicity of this deviation in the Talbot image phase map is again equal to the Talbot length.

The merit of our sample is the access to an isolated diffraction order that emerges from the left edge of the grating toward the opaque region. This single diffraction order, i.e., the −1st order, corresponds to a plane wave propagating obliquely at an angle of 39.9° with respect to the surface normal. In this case, the phase along the axial direction is defined by the longitudinal component of the wave number, kz = 2π/λ·cosθ, which represents exactly a tilted wave. Therefore, the axial phase difference of this isolated diffraction order from the plane wave propagating along the axial direction equals the result of Eq. (3). Now, the axial profile from the simulation from Fig. 5(a) is extracted at x = 34 μm for the −1st order. Since there is no wavefront deformation and irregular spacing, a periodic deviation from the linear slope is not found. The phase extracted from the simulation along this line is equally shown in Fig. 6 (see FMM single order) and shows clearly a linear slope at no specific periodic deviation. In this way, we can verify that the phase anomaly of the Talbot image is associated with the unified action of all the diffraction orders, for our case, the 0th and ± 1st orders, not the 0th order alone. The tilt angle θ (i.e., the diffraction angle of the higher orders) plays a key role to define the growing slope. But the fine details are clearly dominated by the interference of multiple diffraction orders. For the Talbot images, the wavefront deformation and the irregular wavefront spacing causes periodic deviations from the linear slope that appear along the propagation distance. This periodicity verifies the Talbot length in another way. When the phase difference between higher ( ± 1st) orders and the lowest (0th) order equals 2π, constructive or destructive interference occurs. This suggests that the axial period of the Talbot images, which are the result of the constructive interference, equals the distance z where Δϕ = 2π. Therefore, by letting Eq. (3) = 2π another formulation of the Talbot length can be derived:
ZT=λ1cosθ,
(4)
When applying the grating equation sinθ = λ/Λ, Eq. (1) leads to an identical formula as Eq. (4) that covers up to the non-paraxial case of the diffraction and interference problems.

6. Conclusions

We experimentally and theoretically investigated the phase anomaly in Talbot images close to 1D amplitude grating with a period only slightly larger than the illumination wavelength. Upon normal incidence, three propagating diffraction orders emerge, the 0th and ± 1st orders that have a diffraction angle of 39.9° in our specific geometry. With three interfering beams the minimal condition to generate Talbot images is fulfilled and self-images were found. The deflection angle of approximately 40° is well beyond the paraxial regime; consequently, the approximated equation for the Talbot length fails to agree with the experimental observations and rigorous simulations. The exact analytical equation derived by Lord Rayleigh is confirmed to be valid for such small period gratings and shows a perfect agreement with experimental and numerical results.

In order to provide the in situ reference plane wave as required for longitudinal-differential interferometry, particular grating structures were designed that sustain a wide opening far away from the edge of the grating. This opening permits the incidence plane wave to propagate with marginal perturbation so that the wavefront compares very well to that of the initial plane wave. The longitudinal-differential phase distributions, which are the natural outcomes of the experiments, directly demonstrate how much amount of axial phase shifts occur along the Talbot images. By wrapping this LD phase map with 2π modulo referencing the in situ plane wave, the propagation phase map could be obtained as well. Measurements were compared to simulations and showed an excellent agreement. Particular phase features like phase singularities were found in each self-image plane. There, destructive interference among the three propagating orders occurs at both sides of the bright Talbot images. It can be safely anticipated that these features can find application for super-resolution distance measurements, for instance.

The unwrapped axial phase profiles, which are extracted from the LD phase maps along the Talbot image center, allow the direct measurement of the phase anomaly in Talbot images. The main body of such self-images is the moiré-like interference fringe of two tilted waves, i.e., the ± 1st diffraction orders. This moiré fringe again interferes with the 0th order that corresponds to a plane wave propagating along the longitudinal direction with no deflection. Consequently, the phase difference between the tilted waves (i.e., the higher orders) and the normal plane wave (i.e., the 0th order) directly indicates the amount of the phase anomaly. By applying this concept, the analytical solution for the phase anomaly of the Talbot images has been derived and it matches well with experiments and simulations. Moreover, from this analytical solution of the phase anomaly, another formula for the Talbot length can be derived with respect to the tilt angle. The origin of the phase anomaly in the Talbot images is therefore the result of the phase difference between the higher diffraction orders and the 0th order caused by the tilt angle of the higher orders. Beyond increasing our understanding for the basic principles in such complicated beams, we may only speculate at the moment that such research will find its way into applications such as a lensless image synthesis, into illumination systems and it may find use in various types of microscopes where structured illumination is at the heart to achieve images with super-resolving features.

Acknowledgment

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Space Agency (ESA). C. Menzel and C. Rockstuhl would like to acknowledge funding from the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (PhoNa) and the Thuringian State Government (MeMa). The authors are grateful to James R. Leger for careful reading and comments.

References and links

1.

F. Talbot, “Facts relating to optical science. No. IV,” Philos. Mag. 9, 401–407 (1836).

2.

L. Rayleigh, “On copying diffraction gratings and some phenomena connected therewith,” Philos. Mag. 11(67), 196–205 (1881). [CrossRef]

3.

J. C. Bhattacharya, “Measurement of the refractive index using the Talbot effect and a moire technique,” Appl. Opt. 28(13), 2600–2604 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4.

G. Spagnolo, D. Ambrosini, and D. Paoletti, “Displacement measurement using the Talbot effect with a Ronchi grating,” J. Opt. Soc. A 4(6), S376–S380 (2002). [CrossRef]

5.

J. R. Leger, M. L. Scott, and W. B. Veldkamp, “Coherent addition of AlGaAs lasers using microlenses and diffractive coupling,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 52(21), 1771–1773 (1988). [CrossRef]

6.

J. R. Leger, “Lateral mode control of an AlGaAs laser array in a Talbot cavity,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 55(4), 334–336 (1989). [CrossRef]

7.

L. Stuerzebecher, T. Harzendorf, U. Vogler, U. D. Zeitner, and R. Voelkel, “Advanced mask aligner lithography: fabrication of periodic patterns using pinhole array mask and Talbot effect,” Opt. Express 18(19), 19485–19494 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

8.

P. Maddaloni, M. Paturzo, P. Ferraro, P. Malara, P. De Natale, M. Gioffrè, G. Coppola, and M. Iodice, “Mid-infrared tunable two-dimensional Talbot array illuminator,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 94(12), 121105 (2009). [CrossRef]

9.

F. M. Huang, N. Zheludev, Y. Chen, and F. Javier Garcia de Abajo, “Focusing of light by a nanohole array,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 90(9), 091119 (2007). [CrossRef]

10.

O. Bryngdahl, “Image formation using self-imaging techniques,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 63(4), 416–419 (1973). [CrossRef]

11.

E. Bonet, J. Ojeda-Castañeda, and A. Pons, “Imagesynthesis using the Laueffect,” Opt. Commun. 81(5), 285–290 (1991). [CrossRef]

12.

J. C. Barreiro, P. Andrés, J. Ojeda-Castañeda, and J. Lancis, “Multiple incoherent 2D optical correlator,” Opt. Commun. 84(5-6), 237–241 (1991). [CrossRef]

13.

R. F. Edgar, “The Fresnel diffraction images of periodic structures,” J. Mod. Opt. 16, 281–287 (1969).

14.

J. T. Winthrop and C. R. Worthington, “Theory of Fresnel images. I. Plane periodic objects in monochromatic light,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 55(4), 373–381 (1965). [CrossRef]

15.

A. Kołodziejczyk, “Realization of Fourier images without using a lens by sampling the optical object,” J. Mod. Opt. 32, 741–746 (1985).

16.

Y.-S. Cheng and R.-C. Chang, “Theory of image formation using the Talbot effect,” Appl. Opt. 33(10), 1863–1874 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

17.

S. Teng, Y. Tan, and C. Cheng, “Quasi-Talbot effect of the high-density grating in near field,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 25(12), 2945–2951 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

18.

M. Berry and S. Klein, “Integer, fractional and fractal Talbot effects,” J. Mod. Opt. 43(10), 2139–2164 (1996). [CrossRef]

19.

E. Noponen and J. Turunen, “Electromagnetic theory of Talbot imaging,” Opt. Commun. 98(1-3), 132–140 (1993). [CrossRef]

20.

Y. Lu, C. Zhou, and H. Luo, “Talbot effect of a grating with different kinds of flaws,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 22(12), 2662–2667 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

21.

F. J. Torcal-Milla, L. M. Sanchez-Brea, and J. Vargas, “Effect of aberrations on the self-imaging phenomenon,” J. Lightwave Technol. 29(7), 1051–1057 (2011). [CrossRef]

22.

M. Berry, I. Marzoli, and W. Schleich, “Quantum carpets, carpets of light,” Physics World June, 39–46 (2001).

23.

X.-B. Song, H.-B. Wang, J. Xiong, K. Wang, X. Zhang, K.-H. Luo, and L.-A. Wu, “Experimental observation of quantum Talbot effects,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107(3), 033902 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

24.

M. S. Chapman, C. R. Ekstrom, T. D. Hammond, J. Schmiedmayer, B. E. Tannian, S. Wehinger, and D. E. Pritchard, “Near-field imaging of atom diffraction gratings: The atomic Talbot effect,” Phys. Rev. A 51(1), R14–R17 (1995). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

25.

S. Nowak, Ch. Kurtsiefer, T. Pfau, and C. David, “High-order Talbot fringes for atomic matter waves,” Opt. Lett. 22(18), 1430–1432 (1997). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

26.

P. Cloetens, J. P. Guigay, C. De Martino, J. Baruchel, and M. Schlenker, “Fractional Talbot imaging of phase gratings with hard x rays,” Opt. Lett. 22(14), 1059–1061 (1997). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

27.

B. J. McMorran and A. D. Cronin, “An electron Talbot interferometer,” New J. Phys. 11(3), 033021 (2009). [CrossRef]

28.

M. R. Dennis, N. I. Zheludev, and F. J. García de Abajo, “The plasmon Talbot effect,” Opt. Express 15(15), 9692–9700 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

29.

S. Cherukulappurath, D. Heinis, J. Cesario, N. F. van Hulst, S. Enoch, and R. Quidant, “Local observation of plasmon focusingin Talbot carpets,” Opt. Express 17(26), 23772–23784 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

30.

M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, C. Menzel, C. Rockstuhl, and H. P. Herzig, “Talbot images of wavelength-scale amplitude gratings,” Opt. Express 20(5), 4903–4920 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

31.

M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, C. Etrich, C. Rockstuhl, and H. H. Peter, “Longitudinal-differential interferometry: Direct imaging of axial superluminal phase propagation,” Opt. Lett. 37(3), 305–307 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

32.

M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, S. Mühlig, C. Rockstuhl, and H. P. Herzig, “Gouy phase anomaly in photonic nanojets,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 98(19), 191114 (2011). [CrossRef]

33.

L. G. Gouy, “Sur une propriété nouvelle des ondes lumineuses,” C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 110, 1251–1253 (1890).

34.

R. W. Boyd, “Intuitive explanation of the phase anomaly of focused light beams,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 70(7), 877–880 (1980). [CrossRef]

35.

D. Subbarao, “Topological phase in Gaussian beam optics,” Opt. Lett. 20(21), 2162–2164 (1995). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

36.

R. Simon and N. Mukunda, “Bargmann invariant and the geometry of the Güoy effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 70(7), 880–883 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

37.

S. J. M. Habraken and G. Nienhuis, “Geometric phases in astigmatic optical modes of arbitrary order,” J. Math. Phys. 51(8), 082702 (2010). [CrossRef]

38.

G. F. Brand, “A new millimeter wave geometric phase demonstration,” Int. J. Infrared Millim. Waves 21(4), 505–518 (2000). [CrossRef]

39.

P. Hariharan and P. A. Robinson, “The Gouy phase shift as a geometrical quantum effect,” J. Mod. Opt. 43, 219–221 (1996).

40.

S. Feng and H. G. Winful, “Physical origin of the Gouy phase shift,” Opt. Lett. 26(8), 485–487 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

41.

I. G. Da Pazl, P. L. Saldanha, M. C. Nemes, and J. G. Peixoto de Faria, “Experimental proposal for measuring the Gouy phase of matter waves,” New J. Phys. 13, 125005 (2011).

42.

T. D. Visser and E. Wolf, “The origin of the Gouy phase anomaly and its generalization to astigmatic wavefields,” Opt. Commun. 283(18), 3371–3375 (2010). [CrossRef]

43.

J. P. Rolland, K. P. Thompson, K.-S. Lee, J. Tamkin Jr, T. Schmid, and E. Wolf, “Observation of the Gouy phase anomaly in astigmatic beams,” Appl. Opt. 51(15), 2902–2908 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

44.

A. E. Siegman, Lasers (University Science Books, Stanford, 1986).

45.

M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics, 7th ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999).

46.

F. Gittes and C. F. Schmidt, “Interference model for back-focal-plane displacement detection in optical tweezers,” Opt. Lett. 23(1), 7–9 (1998). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

47.

B. Roy, S. B. Pal, A. Haldar, R. K. Gupta, N. Ghosh, and A. Banerjee, “Probing the dynamics of an optically trapped particle by phase sensitive back focal plane interferometry,” Opt. Express 20(8), 8317–8328 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

48.

L. Friedrich and A. Rohrbach, “Tuning the detection sensitivity: a model for axial backfocal plane interferometric tracking,” Opt. Lett. 37(11), 2109–2111 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

49.

R. W. Boyd, Nonlinear Optics 2nd ed. (Academic Press, San Diego, 1992).

50.

S. Carrasco, B. E. A. Saleh, M. C. Teich, and J. T. Fourkas, “Second- and third-harmonic generation with vector Gaussian beams,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 23(10), 2134–2141 (2006). [CrossRef]

51.

C. Zhang, Y.-Q. Qin, and Y.-Y. Zhu, “Perfect quasi-phase matching for the third-harmonic generation using focused Gaussian beams,” Opt. Lett. 33(7), 720–722 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

52.

N. C. R. Holme, B. C. Daly, M. T. Myaing, and T. B. Norris, “Gouy phase shift of single-cycle picosecond acoustic pulses,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 83(2), 392–394 (2003). [CrossRef]

53.

C. R. Carpenter, “Gouy phase advance with microwaves,” Am. J. Phys. 27, 98–100 (1959).

54.

J. F. Federici, R. L. Wample, D. Rodriguez, and S. Mukherjee, “Application of terahertz Gouy phase shift from curved surfaces for estimation of crop yield,” Appl. Opt. 48(7), 1382–1388 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

55.

A. B. Ruffin, J. V. Rudd, J. F. Whitaker, S. Feng, and H. G. Winful, “Direct observation of the Gouy phase shift with single-cycle terahertz pulse,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 83(17), 3410–3413 (1999). [CrossRef]

56.

H. He and X.-C. Zhang, “Analysis of Gouy phase shift for optimizing terahertz air-biased-coherent-detection,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 100(6), 061105 (2012). [CrossRef]

57.

B. E. A. Saleh and M. C. Teich, Fundamentals of Photonics (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1991).

58.

H. Kogelnik and T. Li, “Laser Beams and Resonators,” Appl. Opt. 5(10), 1550–1567 (1966). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

59.

T. Ackemann, W. Grosse-Nobis, and G. L. Lippi, “The Gouy phase shift, the average phase lag of Fourier components of Hermite-Gaussian modes and their application to resonance conditions in optical cavities,” Opt. Commun. 189(1-3), 5–14 (2001). [CrossRef]

60.

J. Courtial, “Self-imaging beams and the Guoy effect,” Opt. Commun. 151(1-3), 1–4 (1998). [CrossRef]

61.

J. Hamazaki, Y. Mineta, K. Oka, and R. Morita, “Direct observation of Gouy phase shift in a propagating optical vortex,” Opt. Express 14(18), 8382–8392 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

62.

H. X. Cui, X. L. Wang, B. Gu, Y. N. Li, J. Chen, and H. T. Wang, “Angular diffraction of an optical vortex induced by the Gouy phase,” J. Opt. 14(5), 055707 (2012). [CrossRef]

63.

H. Chen, Q. Zhan, Y. Zhang, and Y.-P. Li, “The Gouy phase shift of the highly focused radially polarized beam,” Phys. Lett. A 371(3), 259–261 (2007). [CrossRef]

64.

X. Pang, G. Gbur, and T. D. Visser, “The Gouy phase of Airy beams,” Opt. Lett. 36(13), 2492–2494 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

65.

R. Gadonas, V. Jarutis, R. Paškauskas, V. Smilgevičius, A. Stabinis, and V. Vaičaitis, “Self-action of Bessel beam in nonlinear medium,” Opt. Commun. 196(1-6), 309–316 (2001). [CrossRef]

66.

P. Martelli, M. Tacca, A. Gatto, G. Moneta, and M. Martinelli, “Gouy phase shift in nondiffracting Bessel beams,” Opt. Express 18(7), 7108–7120 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

67.

W. Zhu, A. Agrawal, and A. Nahata, “Direct measurement of the Gouy phase shift for surface plasmon-polaritons,” Opt. Express 15(16), 9995–10001 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

68.

D. Chauvat, O. Emile, M. Brunel, and A. Le Floch, “Direct measurement of the central fringe velocity in Young-type experiments,” Phys. Lett. A 295(2-3), 78–80 (2002). [CrossRef]

69.

M. Vasnetsov, V. Pas’ko, A. Khoroshun, V. Slyusar, and M. Soskin, “Observation of superluminal wave-front propagation at the shadow area behind an opaque disk,” Opt. Lett. 32(13), 1830–1832 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

70.

L. Li, “New formulation of the Fourier modal method for crossed surface-relief gratings,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 14(10), 2758–2767 (1997). [CrossRef]

71.

M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, S. Mühlig, C. Rockstuhl, and H. P. Herzig, “Engineering photonic nanojets,” Opt. Express 19(11), 10206–10220 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

72.

M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, and H. P. Herzig, “Small-size microlens characterization by Multiwavelength High-Resolution Interference Microscopy,” Opt. Express 18(14), 14319–14329 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

73.

E. Lau, “Beugungserscheinungen an Doppelrastern,” Ann. Phys. 437(7-8), 417–423 (1948). [CrossRef]

74.

A. W. Lohmann and A. S. Marathay, “About periodicities in 3-D wavefields,” Appl. Opt. 28(20), 4419–4423 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

75.

A. W. Lohmann and J. Ojeda-Castaneda, “Spatial periodicities in partially coherent fields,” Opt. Acta: Int. J. Opt. 30(4), 475–479 (1983). [CrossRef]

76.

M. Thiel, M. Hermatschweiler, M. Wegener, and G. von Freymann, “Thin-film polarizer based on a one-dimensional–three-dimensional–one-dimensional photonic crystal heterostructure,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 91(12), 123515 (2007). [CrossRef]

77.

X. Pang, D. G. Fischer, and T. D. Visser, “Generalized Gouy phase for focused partially coherent light and its implications for interferometry,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 29(6), 989–993 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

78.

Q. Zhan, “Second-order tilted wave interpretation of the Gouy phase shift under high numerical aperture uniform illumination,” Opt. Commun. 242(4-6), 351–360 (2004). [CrossRef]

79.

J. T. Foley and E. Wolf, “Wave-front spacing in the focal region of high-numerical-aperture systems,” Opt. Lett. 30(11), 1312–1314 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

80.

T. D. Visser and J. T. Foley, “On the wavefront spacing of focused, radially polarized beams,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 22(11), 2527–2531 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

OCIS Codes
(050.1950) Diffraction and gratings : Diffraction gratings
(050.5080) Diffraction and gratings : Phase shift
(070.6760) Fourier optics and signal processing : Talbot and self-imaging effects
(180.3170) Microscopy : Interference microscopy
(260.1960) Physical optics : Diffraction theory

ToC Category:
Diffraction and Gratings

History
Original Manuscript: November 5, 2012
Revised Manuscript: December 21, 2012
Manuscript Accepted: December 26, 2012
Published: January 11, 2013

Citation
Myun-Sik Kim, Toralf Scharf, Christoph Menzel, Carsten Rockstuhl, and Hans Peter Herzig, "Phase anomalies in Talbot light carpets of self-images," Opt. Express 21, 1287-1300 (2013)
http://www.opticsinfobase.org/oe/abstract.cfm?URI=oe-21-1-1287


Sort:  Author  |  Year  |  Journal  |  Reset  

References

  1. F. Talbot, “Facts relating to optical science. No. IV,” Philos. Mag.9, 401–407 (1836).
  2. L. Rayleigh, “On copying diffraction gratings and some phenomena connected therewith,” Philos. Mag.11(67), 196–205 (1881). [CrossRef]
  3. J. C. Bhattacharya, “Measurement of the refractive index using the Talbot effect and a moire technique,” Appl. Opt.28(13), 2600–2604 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. G. Spagnolo, D. Ambrosini, and D. Paoletti, “Displacement measurement using the Talbot effect with a Ronchi grating,” J. Opt. Soc. A4(6), S376–S380 (2002). [CrossRef]
  5. J. R. Leger, M. L. Scott, and W. B. Veldkamp, “Coherent addition of AlGaAs lasers using microlenses and diffractive coupling,” Appl. Phys. Lett.52(21), 1771–1773 (1988). [CrossRef]
  6. J. R. Leger, “Lateral mode control of an AlGaAs laser array in a Talbot cavity,” Appl. Phys. Lett.55(4), 334–336 (1989). [CrossRef]
  7. L. Stuerzebecher, T. Harzendorf, U. Vogler, U. D. Zeitner, and R. Voelkel, “Advanced mask aligner lithography: fabrication of periodic patterns using pinhole array mask and Talbot effect,” Opt. Express18(19), 19485–19494 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. P. Maddaloni, M. Paturzo, P. Ferraro, P. Malara, P. De Natale, M. Gioffrè, G. Coppola, and M. Iodice, “Mid-infrared tunable two-dimensional Talbot array illuminator,” Appl. Phys. Lett.94(12), 121105 (2009). [CrossRef]
  9. F. M. Huang, N. Zheludev, Y. Chen, and F. Javier Garcia de Abajo, “Focusing of light by a nanohole array,” Appl. Phys. Lett.90(9), 091119 (2007). [CrossRef]
  10. O. Bryngdahl, “Image formation using self-imaging techniques,” J. Opt. Soc. Am.63(4), 416–419 (1973). [CrossRef]
  11. E. Bonet, J. Ojeda-Castañeda, and A. Pons, “Imagesynthesis using the Laueffect,” Opt. Commun.81(5), 285–290 (1991). [CrossRef]
  12. J. C. Barreiro, P. Andrés, J. Ojeda-Castañeda, and J. Lancis, “Multiple incoherent 2D optical correlator,” Opt. Commun.84(5-6), 237–241 (1991). [CrossRef]
  13. R. F. Edgar, “The Fresnel diffraction images of periodic structures,” J. Mod. Opt.16, 281–287 (1969).
  14. J. T. Winthrop and C. R. Worthington, “Theory of Fresnel images. I. Plane periodic objects in monochromatic light,” J. Opt. Soc. Am.55(4), 373–381 (1965). [CrossRef]
  15. A. Kołodziejczyk, “Realization of Fourier images without using a lens by sampling the optical object,” J. Mod. Opt.32, 741–746 (1985).
  16. Y.-S. Cheng and R.-C. Chang, “Theory of image formation using the Talbot effect,” Appl. Opt.33(10), 1863–1874 (1994). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. S. Teng, Y. Tan, and C. Cheng, “Quasi-Talbot effect of the high-density grating in near field,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A25(12), 2945–2951 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. M. Berry and S. Klein, “Integer, fractional and fractal Talbot effects,” J. Mod. Opt.43(10), 2139–2164 (1996). [CrossRef]
  19. E. Noponen and J. Turunen, “Electromagnetic theory of Talbot imaging,” Opt. Commun.98(1-3), 132–140 (1993). [CrossRef]
  20. Y. Lu, C. Zhou, and H. Luo, “Talbot effect of a grating with different kinds of flaws,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A22(12), 2662–2667 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. F. J. Torcal-Milla, L. M. Sanchez-Brea, and J. Vargas, “Effect of aberrations on the self-imaging phenomenon,” J. Lightwave Technol.29(7), 1051–1057 (2011). [CrossRef]
  22. M. Berry, I. Marzoli, and W. Schleich, “Quantum carpets, carpets of light,” Physics World June, 39–46 (2001).
  23. X.-B. Song, H.-B. Wang, J. Xiong, K. Wang, X. Zhang, K.-H. Luo, and L.-A. Wu, “Experimental observation of quantum Talbot effects,” Phys. Rev. Lett.107(3), 033902 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. M. S. Chapman, C. R. Ekstrom, T. D. Hammond, J. Schmiedmayer, B. E. Tannian, S. Wehinger, and D. E. Pritchard, “Near-field imaging of atom diffraction gratings: The atomic Talbot effect,” Phys. Rev. A51(1), R14–R17 (1995). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. S. Nowak, Ch. Kurtsiefer, T. Pfau, and C. David, “High-order Talbot fringes for atomic matter waves,” Opt. Lett.22(18), 1430–1432 (1997). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. P. Cloetens, J. P. Guigay, C. De Martino, J. Baruchel, and M. Schlenker, “Fractional Talbot imaging of phase gratings with hard x rays,” Opt. Lett.22(14), 1059–1061 (1997). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. B. J. McMorran and A. D. Cronin, “An electron Talbot interferometer,” New J. Phys.11(3), 033021 (2009). [CrossRef]
  28. M. R. Dennis, N. I. Zheludev, and F. J. García de Abajo, “The plasmon Talbot effect,” Opt. Express15(15), 9692–9700 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. S. Cherukulappurath, D. Heinis, J. Cesario, N. F. van Hulst, S. Enoch, and R. Quidant, “Local observation of plasmon focusingin Talbot carpets,” Opt. Express17(26), 23772–23784 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, C. Menzel, C. Rockstuhl, and H. P. Herzig, “Talbot images of wavelength-scale amplitude gratings,” Opt. Express20(5), 4903–4920 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, C. Etrich, C. Rockstuhl, and H. H. Peter, “Longitudinal-differential interferometry: Direct imaging of axial superluminal phase propagation,” Opt. Lett.37(3), 305–307 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, S. Mühlig, C. Rockstuhl, and H. P. Herzig, “Gouy phase anomaly in photonic nanojets,” Appl. Phys. Lett.98(19), 191114 (2011). [CrossRef]
  33. L. G. Gouy, “Sur une propriété nouvelle des ondes lumineuses,” C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris110, 1251–1253 (1890).
  34. R. W. Boyd, “Intuitive explanation of the phase anomaly of focused light beams,” J. Opt. Soc. Am.70(7), 877–880 (1980). [CrossRef]
  35. D. Subbarao, “Topological phase in Gaussian beam optics,” Opt. Lett.20(21), 2162–2164 (1995). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. R. Simon and N. Mukunda, “Bargmann invariant and the geometry of the Güoy effect,” Phys. Rev. Lett.70(7), 880–883 (1993). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. S. J. M. Habraken and G. Nienhuis, “Geometric phases in astigmatic optical modes of arbitrary order,” J. Math. Phys.51(8), 082702 (2010). [CrossRef]
  38. G. F. Brand, “A new millimeter wave geometric phase demonstration,” Int. J. Infrared Millim. Waves21(4), 505–518 (2000). [CrossRef]
  39. P. Hariharan and P. A. Robinson, “The Gouy phase shift as a geometrical quantum effect,” J. Mod. Opt.43, 219–221 (1996).
  40. S. Feng and H. G. Winful, “Physical origin of the Gouy phase shift,” Opt. Lett.26(8), 485–487 (2001). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. I. G. Da Pazl, P. L. Saldanha, M. C. Nemes, and J. G. Peixoto de Faria, “Experimental proposal for measuring the Gouy phase of matter waves,” New J. Phys.13, 125005 (2011).
  42. T. D. Visser and E. Wolf, “The origin of the Gouy phase anomaly and its generalization to astigmatic wavefields,” Opt. Commun.283(18), 3371–3375 (2010). [CrossRef]
  43. J. P. Rolland, K. P. Thompson, K.-S. Lee, J. Tamkin, T. Schmid, and E. Wolf, “Observation of the Gouy phase anomaly in astigmatic beams,” Appl. Opt.51(15), 2902–2908 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. A. E. Siegman, Lasers (University Science Books, Stanford, 1986).
  45. M. Born and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics, 7th ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1999).
  46. F. Gittes and C. F. Schmidt, “Interference model for back-focal-plane displacement detection in optical tweezers,” Opt. Lett.23(1), 7–9 (1998). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. B. Roy, S. B. Pal, A. Haldar, R. K. Gupta, N. Ghosh, and A. Banerjee, “Probing the dynamics of an optically trapped particle by phase sensitive back focal plane interferometry,” Opt. Express20(8), 8317–8328 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. L. Friedrich and A. Rohrbach, “Tuning the detection sensitivity: a model for axial backfocal plane interferometric tracking,” Opt. Lett.37(11), 2109–2111 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. R. W. Boyd, Nonlinear Optics 2nd ed. (Academic Press, San Diego, 1992).
  50. S. Carrasco, B. E. A. Saleh, M. C. Teich, and J. T. Fourkas, “Second- and third-harmonic generation with vector Gaussian beams,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B23(10), 2134–2141 (2006). [CrossRef]
  51. C. Zhang, Y.-Q. Qin, and Y.-Y. Zhu, “Perfect quasi-phase matching for the third-harmonic generation using focused Gaussian beams,” Opt. Lett.33(7), 720–722 (2008). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. N. C. R. Holme, B. C. Daly, M. T. Myaing, and T. B. Norris, “Gouy phase shift of single-cycle picosecond acoustic pulses,” Appl. Phys. Lett.83(2), 392–394 (2003). [CrossRef]
  53. C. R. Carpenter, “Gouy phase advance with microwaves,” Am. J. Phys.27, 98–100 (1959).
  54. J. F. Federici, R. L. Wample, D. Rodriguez, and S. Mukherjee, “Application of terahertz Gouy phase shift from curved surfaces for estimation of crop yield,” Appl. Opt.48(7), 1382–1388 (2009). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. A. B. Ruffin, J. V. Rudd, J. F. Whitaker, S. Feng, and H. G. Winful, “Direct observation of the Gouy phase shift with single-cycle terahertz pulse,” Phys. Rev. Lett.83(17), 3410–3413 (1999). [CrossRef]
  56. H. He and X.-C. Zhang, “Analysis of Gouy phase shift for optimizing terahertz air-biased-coherent-detection,” Appl. Phys. Lett.100(6), 061105 (2012). [CrossRef]
  57. B. E. A. Saleh and M. C. Teich, Fundamentals of Photonics (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1991).
  58. H. Kogelnik and T. Li, “Laser Beams and Resonators,” Appl. Opt.5(10), 1550–1567 (1966). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. T. Ackemann, W. Grosse-Nobis, and G. L. Lippi, “The Gouy phase shift, the average phase lag of Fourier components of Hermite-Gaussian modes and their application to resonance conditions in optical cavities,” Opt. Commun.189(1-3), 5–14 (2001). [CrossRef]
  60. J. Courtial, “Self-imaging beams and the Guoy effect,” Opt. Commun.151(1-3), 1–4 (1998). [CrossRef]
  61. J. Hamazaki, Y. Mineta, K. Oka, and R. Morita, “Direct observation of Gouy phase shift in a propagating optical vortex,” Opt. Express14(18), 8382–8392 (2006). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. H. X. Cui, X. L. Wang, B. Gu, Y. N. Li, J. Chen, and H. T. Wang, “Angular diffraction of an optical vortex induced by the Gouy phase,” J. Opt.14(5), 055707 (2012). [CrossRef]
  63. H. Chen, Q. Zhan, Y. Zhang, and Y.-P. Li, “The Gouy phase shift of the highly focused radially polarized beam,” Phys. Lett. A371(3), 259–261 (2007). [CrossRef]
  64. X. Pang, G. Gbur, and T. D. Visser, “The Gouy phase of Airy beams,” Opt. Lett.36(13), 2492–2494 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. R. Gadonas, V. Jarutis, R. Paškauskas, V. Smilgevičius, A. Stabinis, and V. Vaičaitis, “Self-action of Bessel beam in nonlinear medium,” Opt. Commun.196(1-6), 309–316 (2001). [CrossRef]
  66. P. Martelli, M. Tacca, A. Gatto, G. Moneta, and M. Martinelli, “Gouy phase shift in nondiffracting Bessel beams,” Opt. Express18(7), 7108–7120 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. W. Zhu, A. Agrawal, and A. Nahata, “Direct measurement of the Gouy phase shift for surface plasmon-polaritons,” Opt. Express15(16), 9995–10001 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. D. Chauvat, O. Emile, M. Brunel, and A. Le Floch, “Direct measurement of the central fringe velocity in Young-type experiments,” Phys. Lett. A295(2-3), 78–80 (2002). [CrossRef]
  69. M. Vasnetsov, V. Pas’ko, A. Khoroshun, V. Slyusar, and M. Soskin, “Observation of superluminal wave-front propagation at the shadow area behind an opaque disk,” Opt. Lett.32(13), 1830–1832 (2007). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. L. Li, “New formulation of the Fourier modal method for crossed surface-relief gratings,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A14(10), 2758–2767 (1997). [CrossRef]
  71. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, S. Mühlig, C. Rockstuhl, and H. P. Herzig, “Engineering photonic nanojets,” Opt. Express19(11), 10206–10220 (2011). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. M.-S. Kim, T. Scharf, and H. P. Herzig, “Small-size microlens characterization by Multiwavelength High-Resolution Interference Microscopy,” Opt. Express18(14), 14319–14329 (2010). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. E. Lau, “Beugungserscheinungen an Doppelrastern,” Ann. Phys.437(7-8), 417–423 (1948). [CrossRef]
  74. A. W. Lohmann and A. S. Marathay, “About periodicities in 3-D wavefields,” Appl. Opt.28(20), 4419–4423 (1989). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. A. W. Lohmann and J. Ojeda-Castaneda, “Spatial periodicities in partially coherent fields,” Opt. Acta: Int. J. Opt.30(4), 475–479 (1983). [CrossRef]
  76. M. Thiel, M. Hermatschweiler, M. Wegener, and G. von Freymann, “Thin-film polarizer based on a one-dimensional–three-dimensional–one-dimensional photonic crystal heterostructure,” Appl. Phys. Lett.91(12), 123515 (2007). [CrossRef]
  77. X. Pang, D. G. Fischer, and T. D. Visser, “Generalized Gouy phase for focused partially coherent light and its implications for interferometry,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A29(6), 989–993 (2012). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Q. Zhan, “Second-order tilted wave interpretation of the Gouy phase shift under high numerical aperture uniform illumination,” Opt. Commun.242(4-6), 351–360 (2004). [CrossRef]
  79. J. T. Foley and E. Wolf, “Wave-front spacing in the focal region of high-numerical-aperture systems,” Opt. Lett.30(11), 1312–1314 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  80. T. D. Visser and J. T. Foley, “On the wavefront spacing of focused, radially polarized beams,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. A22(11), 2527–2531 (2005). [CrossRef] [PubMed]

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.


« Previous Article  |  Next Article »

OSA is a member of CrossRef.

CrossCheck Deposited