Patterns

[Din]

In re-reading this explanation of diffraction efficiency, I overlooked the obvious, .... Details here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs ... .tb01198.x

Just more obfuscation to distract from your misunderstanding of the topic of this thread, the nature of Fresnel reflections, and the dependency of diffraction efficiency on polarization of the reconstruction light in thick volume materials like covestro's photopolymer.

So, let's see, Kogelnik's expression for DE of a reflection hologram with dephasing parameter ξ²(eqn 57):

η = 1/{1 + (1 + ξ²/ν²)/sh²√(ν² - ξ²)}

If the hologram is reconstructed on-Bragg, the dephasing parameter vanished and ξ = 0. Now the Kogelnik expression for the diffraction efficiency is:

η = 1/{1 + 1/sh²√(ν²)}

Now, I have never been able to determine the factor representing polarisation, which would, of course be a vector. There are no vector variables in this equation. Let's say that η is polarisation dependant, I assume you mean linear polarisation (For Bob's sake, let me define 'linear' as meaning a straight line. You know Bob, where there is no deviation from the straight and narrow - sorry Bob, 'deviation' is a three syllable word; never mind). So, one assumes that there is a η(polarisation). But, there are an infinite number of linear polarisations, pick any angle from 0 to 2π - there are an infinite number of them!. So, any given hologram has an infinite number of efficiencies? You know, you should really write this up and publish in "Optics" or "Nature". The world awaits!

Oh! forgot, in the Bob Hess universe ALL physics is '/goobledygook', ALL mathematics is 'goobledygook'. The ultimate in science denial.

But wait! Lawrence Livermore Labs uses holography ( https://www.llnl.gov/article/48521/holo ... wer-lasers ), and, I've talked to some of their physicists, and they do model their holograms on Kogelnik. But, in the Bob Hess Universe, it's all 'goobledygook" and Kogelnik is all wrong. In the Bob Hess Universe, Bob Hess has Supreme Knowledge and everyone else employing Kogelnik is simply obfuscation ( a 4 syllable word! I'm impressed!).

NASA uses holography (and I've worked on some of them) https://techport.nasa.gov/projects/5664. I know they use the Kogelnik equations because we at POC sent them a report where I did the theoretical work on the holograms using Kogelnik.But, in the Bob Hess Universe, it's all 'goobledygook" and Kogelnik is all wrong. In the Bob Hess Universe, Bob Hess has Supreme Knowledge and everyone else employing Kogelnik is simply obfuscation ( a 4 syllable word! I'm impressed!).

The Department Of Defense uses holography, at POC they were one of our clients. I know they use the Kogelnik equations because we at POC sent them a report where I did the theoretical work on the holograms using Kogelnik.But, in the Bob Hess Universe, it's all 'goobledygook" and Kogelnik is all wrong. In the Bob Hess Universe, Bob Hess has Supreme Knowledge and everyone else employing Kogelnik is simply obfuscation.

Oh We could go on. National labs the world over, military applications the world over, medical applications etc etc. But, in the Bob Hess Universe, it's all 'goobledygook" and Kogelnik is all wrong. In the Bob Hess Universe, Bob Hess has Supreme Knowledge and everyone else employing Kogelnik is simply obfuscation

So, do you have a reference for the polarisation dependance of DE in any peer-reviewed technical journal or text book? Where are these 'many books'?

I forgot Bob Hess is the Font of All Knowledge and cannot be questioned. Despite having NO valid references and NO mathematical or physical argument.

Oh, just mentioning, the earth is round,and we did go to the moon. The Covid vaccine does not autism. Almost forgot, the earth actually travels around the sun. The earth is not the center of the universe. It's been shown mathematically. But, in the Bob Hess universe All mathematics is 'goobledygook' and the earth is actually the centre of the universe (because Bob Hess lives there, of course!)

EDIT: Merry Christmas to the Font of All Wisdom and the Center of All Knowledge.

[BobH]

So, let's see, ... the Center of All Knowledge.

Just more insignificant word salad from the resident troll.

The benefit I get from these illogical and childish responses to my comments here is that sometimes they incite me to look up fundamental things and that can lead to improvements in the holograms I'm currently making, or solutions to problems I currently face.

[Din]

So, let's see, ... the Center of All Knowledge.

Just more insignificant word salad from the resident troll.

The benefit I get from these illogical and childish responses to my comments here is that sometimes they incite me to look up fundamental things and that can lead to improvements in the holograms I'm currently making, or solutions to problems I currently face.

So, you have a reference that a scalar equation can have a vector-based value? Any reference at all? I'd say it's pretty fundamental to deny all the world's greatest optical physicists and engineers who all say:

1. Holography is based on wavefront reconstruction. You, apparently, think that holography has nothing to do with wavefront reconstruction!
https://pubs.aip.org/physicstoday/artic ... m=fulltext "New interest has arisen in the wavefront reconstruction process of Gabor." NO! NO! According to the Font of All Knowledge, wavefront reconstruction is not holography. Gabor didn't invent holography - Bob Hess did!!!
2. The diffraction efficiency of a thick hologram is based on index modulation, material thickness and recording wavelength and slant factors, not polarisation. This is the basis of all calculations by the top optical engineers and physicists on the planet.

To repeat, the DE of a hologram (Kogelnik eq 57) is

η = 1/{1 + 1/sh²√(ν²)}

where ν = iπ(δn)d/{(λ√c(r)c(s)}
I repeat, which variable represents polarisation? The world awaits your stunning discovery!

Oh, by the way, can you quote a reference to your odd hypothesis that DE is proportional to polarisation? From peer-reviewed journal? Not your friend that thinks the world is flat.