Photonics
Derek Abbott
photonics, electrooptics, optoelectronics, quantum electronics,
quamtum optics, lightwave technology (are there any others?) etc.
Please also draw a "family tree" so that I can see which terms
encompass the others.
eg: fruit
|
------------
| |
citrus Banana
|
--------
| |
Lemon Orange
Thanx in advance.
PS.The definitions in Saleh & Teich are very wishy-washy and leave me
even more confused. If you can do better than Saleh & Teich, I'd like to hear
from you.
Steve Eckhardt
>
>Can somebody explain the relative definitions of the words:
>
>photonics, electrooptics, optoelectronics, quantum electronics,
>quamtum optics, lightwave technology (are there any others?) etc.
They're all technobabble, invented to sell magazines. You can ignore
the nuances and use them interchangeably, other than the first and
last, which I wouldn't use at all.
>Please also draw a "family tree" so that I can see which terms
>encompass the others.
Rather than a tree, you might try the family algae.
>PS.The definitions in Saleh & Teich are very wishy-washy and leave me
>even more confused. If you can do better than Saleh & Teich, I'd like to hear
>from you.
>
Steve Eckhardt (skeck...@mmm.com)
Opinions? Those are *facts* son. (been in Texas too long)
Aephraim M. Steinberg
Derek Abbott <dab...@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au> wrote:
>Can somebody explain the relative definitions of the words:
>photonics, electrooptics, optoelectronics, quantum electronics,
>quamtum optics, lightwave technology (are there any others?) etc.
>Please also draw a "family tree" so that I can see which terms
>encompass the others.
>PS.The definitions in Saleh & Teich are very wishy-washy and leave me
>even more confused. If you can do better than Saleh & Teich, I'd like to hear
>from you.
They're wishy-washy for a reason: no one agrees as to what all these
terms mean. Furthermore, I don't think they arrange themselves in a
family tree by anyone's definitions. A Venn diagram is perhaps the
best you could hope for, and even that might be too much. There are
areas which are "sort of" quantum electronics and "sort of" photonics,
et cetera-- some sort of fuzzy Venn diagram might be able to indicate
the range of opinions about these terms, but wouldn't lend itself to ASCII.
I'll give it a shot anyway, and see if I can get flamed. First, let me
mention that Milonni's new book _The quantum vacuum_ (which I highly
recommend) had a nice definition of q.o. near the beginning, but I don't
remember it precisely. I just got a preprint from someone in quantum
optics, who writes:
> Although there is no clearly agreed upon definition, semiclassical theories,
> which study the interaction of atoms with classical fields, are often said to
> comprise {\em optical physics}, while {\em quantum optics} treats the
> interaction of atoms or molecules with quantized electromagnetic fields. A
> significant part of optical physics and quantum optics studies near-resonant
> atom-field interactions, and concentrates on non-perturbative dynamics where
> the effects of the optical fields have to be kept to all orders.
If I remember correctly, Milonni stresses more the coherence properties
of the atom-field interaction, and tacks on the possibility of the
optical field being quantized as an "especially in cases where..." But
you should check the book to be sure.
Personally, I think it's clear that "quantum optics" _should_ describe
cases where the opt itself and not just the atoms need to be treated
quantum-mechanically. Laser theory is frequently considered a large
part of quantum optics (though the term quantum electronics is more
common in that context), but even though lasers need qm to work, most
of the theory is semiclassical (which I take to be the antonym of
quantum optics). To me, then, things like squeezed light and Bell's
inequalities are quantum optics. So are micromasers, though in general
I shy away from considering microwave fields "optics."
Many people use quantum optics to describe a whole broad range of
atomic physics where there are interesting "nonclassical" effects,
even though the light field itself can be described classically.
Things like superradiance, self-induced transparency, coherent transients,
nonlinear optics, all sorts of things. But I do think that the more
these subjects have to do with the atoms rather than the fields, the
more likely people are to say "quantum electronics" rather than
"quantum optics"-- still, to many people, the terms are essentially
interchangeable.
Since laser-cooling and -trapping rely on the photon's momentum kick,
these areas are frequently described as being part of quantum optics.
Other than that, however, the fields don't really need to be treated
quantum-mechanically. I suppose the fact that you're dealing with
resonant interactions such that light shifts become important, and
dressed states frequently become a useful picture, makes people want
to describe it as q.o.
Quantum electronics generally makes me think of semiconductors, quantum
wells, optical studies of superconductors, microlasers, that sort of thing.
Usually optical interactions are at work, but the quantum is more likely
to describe the state of the matter than of the radiation. It is much more
common to hear this stuff described as "quantum optics" than to hear
a Bell's Inequality experiment described as "quantum electronics," but
there is no guarrantee that in a given context (sessions at a certain
conference or sections in a journal) both options will be present, so
the borders get fuzzy.
I think "photonics" is a bit easier. Vaguely speaking, it's the
performance of historically "electronics" applications using photons
rather than electrons. Not being an engineer, I don't know how it's
really used, but that's my understanding of the original intent of
the term. This can overlap with q.o. in cases like holographic memory
storage, where the hologram is written in a nonlinear crystal, which
many people would consider quantum optical.
I imagine that "lightwave technology" just means whatever you can market
using optics. I don't consider it a field in its own right.
Electrooptics means the control or detection of light via electronics,
and includes things like electro-optic modulators and avalanche photodiodes,
which could in turn rely on quantum electronics in their design.
I'm running out of steam here. I would say that optoelectronics is like
photonics, but is more of a compromise. Attempts to perform _part_ of
an electronic function optically. Obviously, many of the important components
will be electrooptics. I would distinguish them by saying that electrooptics
tries to use electricity to do optics while optoelectronics tries to use
light to do electronics-- obviously, the equipment will be much the same
in the two cases. And people probably like to use the word "photonics"
for all of this, just because it sounds cool. But I don't consider
fiber-optic transmission "photonics," just lightwave technology, and I
don't consider an EOM "photonics," just electrooptics which can be
useful for optoelectronics. I don't consider any of this quantum optics
or quantum electronics, though if someone really wanted to call the EOM
quantum electronics, I wouldn't get my dander up about it.
My "Photonics Dictionary" defines quantum optics as "The science concerned
with the applications of the quantum theory of optics; i.e., optics
defined in terms of the quanta of radiant energy, or photons."
It doesn't have an entry for quantum electronics.
Photonics="The technology of generating and harnessing light and other
[photons]. The science includes light emission, transmission, deflection,
amplification and detection by optical components and instruments, lasers
and other light sources, fiber optics, electro-optical instrumentation,
related hardware and electronics, and sophisticated systems....."
They don't have "electro-optics," but use it as an adjective for detector,
spectroscopy, shutter, transistor, deflection, effect, material,
modulator, and radar.
optoelectronic="Pertaining to a device that responds to optical power,
emits or modifies optical radiation, or utilizes optical radiation for
its internal operation. Any device that functions as an electrical-to-
optical or optical-to-electrical transducer. Electro-optical is often
erroneously used as a synonym."
...well, so much for my definitions of electro-optics and optoelectronics,
if you want to trust the publishers of Photonics Spectra!
--
Aephraim M. Steinberg | "We are all one! (Though, inexplicably,
UCB Physics | American Express bills us separately.)"
aeph...@physics.berkeley.edu |
| -- Leon Lederman
Aephraim M. Steinberg
% In article <2nqth6$5...@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au>, Derek Abbott wrote:
% >Can somebody explain the relative definitions of the words:
% >photonics, electrooptics, optoelectronics, quantum electronics,
% >quamtum optics, lightwave technology (are there any others?) etc.
% .....
% I think "photonics" is a bit easier. Vaguely speaking, it's the
% performance of historically "electronics" applications using photons
% rather than electrons. ...
% ...
% Electrooptics means the control or detection of light via electronics,
% and includes things like electro-optic modulators and avalanche photodiodes,
% which could in turn rely on quantum electronics in their design.
% ... [but]
% My "Photonics Dictionary" defines ...
% Photonics="The technology of generating and harnessing light and other
% [photons]. The science includes light emission, transmission, deflection,..."
% optoelectronic="Pertaining to a device that responds to optical power,
% emits or modifies optical radiation, or utilizes optical radiation for
% its internal operation..."
And wouldn't you know it, I just received a copy of "Lasers and
Optronics" magazine. This immediately introduces a word I forgot to
define, so given the fact that my definition of photonics seems nonstandard,
let me change my answer and say that I was actually defining optronics.
Meanwhile, the editorial in this issue is quite on-topic:
``The participants in "Photonics 2000" spent a fair amount of energy just
defining the term "photonics." Their definition is "the generation,
manipulation, transport, and use of light information and/or light
energy; where light refers to electromagnetic radiation from the far
infrared to the x-ray region." That's a small, but extremely significant,
change from the 1970-era definition of "electro-optics" as the "generation,
modulation, transmission, and detection of electromagnetic radiation
having wavelengths of less than one millimeter."''