Interferometer Interference

[@TheEvertw]

You are on a roll! These simulations are awesome, and you make great cases for displaying interesting phenomenon.

[@pritamshtty]

This is the same reason why there are less losses in lenses and optics with antireflective coatings

[@PewrityLab]

Exactly, it's just interference. Summing up all the waves, the reflected wave goes to zero and the transmitted to 100%

[@AaronALAI]

Awesome video! And cool usage of the simulation code. I spent my weekend doing simulations too, really fascinating stuff!!

[@googlefuuplayad9055]

😊👍👍🐈🐾🐾

[@HuygensOptics]

Indeed that code is really awesome.

[@cylosgarage]

Where is this code???

[@HuygensOptics]

@@cylosgarage It can be found at the @DiffractionLimited channel as a link in the description of the last couple of videos.

[@cylosgarage]

@@HuygensOptics sweet thank you!!

[@BonesMcoy]

Love these wave visualizations

[@duncanfreeman5436]

This is the best visual explanation of the E&M going on here I've ever seen. Well done

[@valterkaugust8511]

Thank you! This really cleared things up for me!

[@devendrabisht9713]

So energy is always conserved!

[@pinocleen]

Yes, unlimited shelf life!

[@mrmotl1]

Does this imply that the idea of deconstructive interference is somewhat a misnomer? Since it seems to deconstruct the signal wave in its forward progress, but it does seem to constructively interfere through back propagation intensity? Would that be correct or am I missing something?

[@HuygensOptics]

Yes indeed. Destructive interference is actually the result of the intensity routed elsewhere, due to the phase relationships present in the field.

[@mrmotl1]

​@@HuygensOpticsis this also the same mechanism that allows a laser to create a feedback loop with itself?

[@TheEvertw]

If there is destructive interference somewhere, there will also be constructive interference somewhere nearby.

[@HuygensOptics]

@@mrmotl1 no, that process is called stimulated emission, basically it is the emission of an amount of energy in phase with the existing field.

[@mrmotl1]

@@HuygensOptics Thanks, now I've learned something today already.

[@metaturso]

The only kind of Shorts I'll allow in my subscription feed.

[@solaokusanya955]

Where did it go?

[@chinmaygupta4856]

Exactly, he didn't even say it 😭

[@breadnoodle]

back towards the source

[@jan_the_man]

Een van mijn favoriete Nederlandse KZbinrs 😁 ps: ik hoop dat je ooit eens een lezing of iets komt geven op de TU Delft

[@malta7406]

Fascinating

[@DrBlokmeister]

Nice! Of course this is true, but it is something else to see this explained by these clear simulations. It really adds another layer of depth!

[@Noconstitutionfordemocrats1]

Does anything truly cancel to zero in the universe?

[@zlm001]

Thanks

[@quintenbroadfield7980]

Cool, can you do one where you show how holography works?

[@Tim-Kaa]

In ham radio we have a measurement gage for reflected power

[@SlinkyD]

Great explanation & visuals. Unrelated high shower thought: How deep is a sea of light?

[@-vermin-]

What about the case where two coherent and 180° phase locked sources are fired directly at each other (rather than using a beam splitter)?

[@JCAtkeson3]

Fired in the same direction or shooting at each other?

[@-vermin-]

@@JCAtkeson3 I was thinking "at each other" but coincident at a focal point on a surface is also a valid query.

[@PewrityLab]

Btw the reason why this happens is because one wave is phase shifted by 180° with respect to the other

[@tjmozdzen]

Just think of the intensity as a probability likelihood. Energy doesn't go away, it just doesn't go where the probability is near zero.

[@paaao]

The ability to do work can quickly become the ability to do nothing.

[@revimfadli4666]

Burnouts be like:

[@danriches7328]

I like to think of it as the ability to do one type of work becomes the ability to do a different type of work. Just like shg lasers, the different wavelengths react with different elements but the energy is still there albeit after losses.

[@rodm1949]

Waves are co-mingled, the emitance is light shadow and refraction.

[@Trahloc]

So this is how beam forming is done? By destructively choosing where the energy gets focused?

[@ajoshdoingthings541]

Back to sender😂

[@frogz]

optics, like antennas are black magic

[@Ivan.Wright]

Why did the change in mirror position by a quarter wavelength turn the wave intensity 90° clockwise? Would a half wavelength move it 180°? Would a 1/8th wavelength turn it 45°? Or does the intensity just raise and lower between the two rotational positions as it phases back and forth? I'd love to see an animation where you take samples of the mirrors position at intervals over a whole wavelength so I could see how the intensity evolves.

[@HuygensOptics]

In reflection, the wave covers a change in distance twice, resulting in a net phase shift of 1/2 lambda (or 180 degrees), which is the difference between being in phase or in "anti phase".

[@Drawliphant]

Give your source a gaussian distribution so it looks nicer

[@petevenuti7355]

So it gets reflected? makes sense.

[@marca9955]

It went back to the source? In the case of an interference not in an interferometer, where does it go? For example in the case of an RF beam steering antenna array?

[@antonylawrence7266]

How’s that work with the double slit experiment, are you saying the energy is the same both sides of the slits ?

[@Kevin-ht1ox]

I am not sure this really demonstrates where the energy goes. Two photons can cancel each other out but for some reason, when this happens, the energy really just ends up in a different direction?

[@QuantumLab-bt7yq]

You state the beam is split into 2 equal parts. What beam splitter did you use? I have yet to find a beam splitter that produces only 2 beams. Beam splitters produce what are called ghost images. The simulation looks nice but not accurate.

[@HuygensOptics]

I used a simulated beam spitter. You cannot find them in regular shops. ;-)

[@QuantumLab-bt7yq]

@@HuygensOptics The animation is inaccurate because it states the beam splitter splits the beam into 2 equal parts. I have been unable to find a beam splitter that produces only 2 beams. For the animation to be accurate it would have to include the additional beams. You are misleading the viewer.

[@QuantumLab-bt7yq]

@@HuygensOptics Perhaps a warning to the viewers would be appropriate. The statement 2 equal beams is not accurate. Not everyone is aware of the "ghost beams". see kzbin.info/www/bejne/aqqblYKnj5VgY7s it may help explain my point. The simulation you present can not be accurate because it does not show where all the photons are going.

[@HuygensOptics]

@@QuantumLab-bt7yq As you can see, the beam splitter featured in the simulation is a plate beam splitter, not a cube beam splitter. A good plate beam splitter is thin and has a semi reflective coating on one side and an anti-reflection coating on the other. They generally do not exhibit ghost reflections of significant intensity.

[@QuantumLab-bt7yq]

@@HuygensOptics i have a plate splitter. It produces 1 transmitted beam and 2 reflected beams. The second reflected beam is referred to as a ghost beam. Your video is great. Just to be accurate. A beam splitter does not split a beam into 2 equal beams.

[@Andratos95]

I tried to follow along with the simulation on Python, but when I run it, I get much less distinction between the peaks of the intensity profile... I tried cchanging the parameter "source_fequency_scale" to a number smaller than 1, but it still really doesn't look as nicely contrasty as yours... The image you provided in the description is the destructive interference case, right? Anyway, how do you save the video from Python? And how do you add the optical elements overlay? Thank you

[@ioanacsinte7971]

I think if the same principle of light splitting was IF spectroscopy made by nasa to scan the moon and moving part was moving by one driver (like a piezoelectric spiker ) to change angle of light. I like to see some video about sun spectrum drive type because I don’t understand how work if have protection filters in top ( is not possible to see full spectrum)

[@DonaldRichards-mr3lz]

where does the energy go during then after cancellation ?

[@TheVigyanPodcast]

Which sofware do you use to create these animations, sir.❤

[@HuygensOptics]

See video description

[@ramithewest]

What if u have identical beam from left , can the splitter cause perfect cancellation interfernce ?

[@JuliusUnique]

how? they reflect off of each other?

[@Lord_Omni]

And if there is no beam splitter? And mirrors? And where photons go? o)

[@AshwaniMaurya-ph3vs]

Energy is redistributed😊

[@mwm48]

It’s just like noise canceling headphones, just bc you don’t hear the noise doesn’t mean it isn’t still there.

[@angelorf]

Ok so the energy is still going somewhere, so it's not really destructive interference? I feel like I need more explanation on this phenomenon.

[@suncrafterspielt9479]

Does this mean if light interferences destructively, somewhere else the light interferes constructively?

[@HuygensOptics]

Yes always, it is essentially how waves work.

[@TheAussieLeo]

Quanta cannot be destroyed, it's always somewhere :)

[@iliya-malecki]

It is not obvious where it went, could you elaborate on that?

[@HuygensOptics]

See video description for more info.

[@michalchik]

It goes backwards in the direction of the incident beam?

[@angrytedtalks]

Wait, this is light cancelling out light? I though photons reached their destination instantly? If they cancel each other out they remove energy from the universe...

[@crackwitz]

would it be fair to say that the parts between mirror and beam splitter are standing waves?

[@HuygensOptics]

Yes, I guess so, If you look at the amplitude of the beams after they have reflected of the mirrors you see exactly that: a standing wave pattern.

[@toseltreps1101]

true spiritual successor to Leeuwenhoek!

[@markc7955]

Does it turn to heat?

[@testsubject318no6]

So it just went up

[@efisgpr]

Dutch accents are cool. 👍

[@Pidrittel]

Is that open source code? If so, where can I find it?

[@HuygensOptics]

see video description

[@Pidrittel]

Ah, did not know that shorts even have a description. Nice of DiffractionLimited to publish the code! Thank you for the answer!@@HuygensOptics

[@Pidrittel]

Could you elaborate which python pagkage versions (numpy, cupy) you used@@HuygensOptics ? On my machine the code throws errors.

[@HuygensOptics]

just use miniforge/mamba to install as was suggested in the README.md file and it will automatically install the correct versions. You should use separate installation commands for numpy, opencv, matplotlib and cupy. Each command looking somenting like this: mamba install numpy. Hope this helps.

[@myoniwy]

LIGO detector

[@justsayjay]

Ah yes, i know some of those words.

[@Coastfog]

Algorithm, are you tracking this? More of this, you can cut the "💯 Respect!" memes, I'll be fine.

[@Leland-y1d]

What form is that energy? Kinetic? How is it measured?

[@westernfloracaravanpark59]

and yet youll still bang on about fauxtons

[@carlbrenninkmeijer8925]

clear, the wave reads the sign " wrong way go back!"

[@Drakenvlieg]

Nederlands accent gedetecteerd

[@mltonsorangestapler]

back to the SOURCE

[@TheBigFatVladimir]

no

[@mltonsorangestapler]

@@TheBigFatVladimir yes

[@TheBigFatVladimir]

@@mltonsorangestapler interference means out of phase, the energy is still there, it doesn’t just go back to the source it is simply redistributed, same with EM waves

[@marcin4xm]

You don't understand the question .When two single wave interfere to nothing - there is no energy in this point - and then waves go from this null point to again get full energy .

[@benheideveld4617]

Ik zie het niet. Gaarne aangeven waar de energie heen gaat.

[@HuygensOptics]

Zie de video description voor meer info.