Flat Lenses

Cory Waltz

Well-known member
Messages
174
Reaction score
0
Location
Huntsville, AL, US
I'm sure this will fall in the 5 to 10 years from now catagory of products, but I figured some of you would find it interesting...

************************************************************

University Of Toronto Study Charts New Realm Of Physics: Flat Lens Could Significantly Enhance Object Resolution

By constructing artificial materials that break long-standing rules of nature, a University of Toronto researcher has developed a flat lens that could significantly enhance the resolution of imaged objects. This, in turn, could lead to smaller and more effective antennas and devices for cell phones, increased space for data storage on CD-ROMs and more complex electronic circuits.

"This is new physics," says George Eleftheriades, a U of T professor specializing in electromagnetic technology at the Edward S. Rogers Sr. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and senior author of an article in the March 24 issue of Applied Physics Letters. "These findings provide an opportunity to resolve details in an object smaller than a wavelength."

The team works in the rapidly emerging field of metamaterials - artificially created substances with properties not found in nature. Under normal electromagnetic conditions, light passing through a flat lens will diverge; light passing through a lens made of metamaterials, however, will bend the "wrong" way and become focused.

Their study reveals that when evanescent waves - weak but important waves that lose strength quickly after leaving their source - are directed through their flat metamaterial lens, these waves are amplified. At the same time, the lens corrects the phase of the waves by focusing the diverging waves into a beam. Metamaterial lenses, when constructed at optical frequencies, could be used to engineer the next generation of electronic devices at the nanometre scale, says Eleftheriades.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/03/030325072809.htm

************************************************************
 
The optical effects described sound more applicable to data storage than camera optics, but this article at ScienceDaily looks promising:

"Researchers have developed a new type of biofuel cell — a battery that runs off of alcohol and enzymes — that could replace the rechargeable batteries in everything from laptops to Palm Pilots. Instead of plugging into a fixed power outlet and waiting, these new batteries can be charged instantly with a few milliliters of alcohol. The new findings were presented today at the 225th national meeting of the American Chemical Society, the world's largest scientific society, in New Orleans..."

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/03/030325072337.htm
--
BJN
 
The physics you report is bull. Light passing through a flat glass plate does not focus or defocus, it refracts. All the light rays that strike, assuming they are parallel (object at infinity) leave the glass still parallel but headed in another direction.

Evinecent light? Optical physics uses wave equations that have an imaginary component. That's been known for 100 years. Not really imaginary, its just what the mathematitions call part of the variables that have an i as part of the number.

You can make flat plate lenses two ways. The first has been used in light houses for 200 years. Its called a Frisnell lens. The other would be to make a flat plate of glass but the glass was produced with varying index of refraction. Its possible.

Resolution is still dependent on the lens size, not the material or engineering. Diffraction limiting will not be overcome with any new physics, at least for cameras that don't use synthetic aperture technology.

Oh one more. The oldest lens in the world is flat. THe camera obscura from the 1500s used a pin whole "lens"
I'm sure this will fall in the 5 to 10 years from now catagory of
products, but I figured some of you would find it interesting...

************************************************************

University Of Toronto Study Charts New Realm Of Physics: Flat Lens
Could Significantly Enhance Object Resolution

By constructing artificial materials that break long-standing rules
of nature, a University of Toronto researcher has developed a flat
lens that could significantly enhance the resolution of imaged
objects. This, in turn, could lead to smaller and more effective
antennas and devices for cell phones, increased space for data
storage on CD-ROMs and more complex electronic circuits.

"This is new physics," says George Eleftheriades, a U of T
professor specializing in electromagnetic technology at the Edward
S. Rogers Sr. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and
senior author of an article in the March 24 issue of Applied
Physics Letters. "These findings provide an opportunity to resolve
details in an object smaller than a wavelength."

The team works in the rapidly emerging field of metamaterials -
artificially created substances with properties not found in
nature. Under normal electromagnetic conditions, light passing
through a flat lens will diverge; light passing through a lens made
of metamaterials, however, will bend the "wrong" way and become
focused.

Their study reveals that when evanescent waves - weak but important
waves that lose strength quickly after leaving their source - are
directed through their flat metamaterial lens, these waves are
amplified. At the same time, the lens corrects the phase of the
waves by focusing the diverging waves into a beam. Metamaterial
lenses, when constructed at optical frequencies, could be used to
engineer the next generation of electronic devices at the nanometre
scale, says Eleftheriades.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/03/030325072809.htm

************************************************************
--
Ken Eis
 
The physics you report is bull.
thank you for your insightful and carefully considered opinion!

I'm sure I'm not the only person to ponder on human behaviour in which a great many scientific discoveries have been advanced by researchers who found themselves in tiny minorities being shouted down by the established scientific community

Mike
 
Thank you so much for setting me straight. I just assumed that a University of Toronto professor would know his stuff. Perhaps the Canadian educational system is to blame for is article being full of physics bull. No matter. I'm sure you can find his contact info at the university and send him an email that sets him straight.

Also thank you for the informative mathematical discussion on imaginary numbers... I can't believe I got my mathematics minor without so much as a word on these from my professors.
Evinecent light? Optical physics uses wave equations that have an
imaginary component. That's been known for 100 years. Not really
imaginary, its just what the mathematitions call part of the
variables that have an i as part of the number.

You can make flat plate lenses two ways. The first has been used in
light houses for 200 years. Its called a Frisnell lens. The other
would be to make a flat plate of glass but the glass was produced
with varying index of refraction. Its possible.

Resolution is still dependent on the lens size, not the material or
engineering. Diffraction limiting will not be overcome with any new
physics, at least for cameras that don't use synthetic aperture
technology.

Oh one more. The oldest lens in the world is flat. THe camera
obscura from the 1500s used a pin whole "lens"
I'm sure this will fall in the 5 to 10 years from now catagory of
products, but I figured some of you would find it interesting...

************************************************************

University Of Toronto Study Charts New Realm Of Physics: Flat Lens
Could Significantly Enhance Object Resolution

By constructing artificial materials that break long-standing rules
of nature, a University of Toronto researcher has developed a flat
lens that could significantly enhance the resolution of imaged
objects. This, in turn, could lead to smaller and more effective
antennas and devices for cell phones, increased space for data
storage on CD-ROMs and more complex electronic circuits.

"This is new physics," says George Eleftheriades, a U of T
professor specializing in electromagnetic technology at the Edward
S. Rogers Sr. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and
senior author of an article in the March 24 issue of Applied
Physics Letters. "These findings provide an opportunity to resolve
details in an object smaller than a wavelength."

The team works in the rapidly emerging field of metamaterials -
artificially created substances with properties not found in
nature. Under normal electromagnetic conditions, light passing
through a flat lens will diverge; light passing through a lens made
of metamaterials, however, will bend the "wrong" way and become
focused.

Their study reveals that when evanescent waves - weak but important
waves that lose strength quickly after leaving their source - are
directed through their flat metamaterial lens, these waves are
amplified. At the same time, the lens corrects the phase of the
waves by focusing the diverging waves into a beam. Metamaterial
lenses, when constructed at optical frequencies, could be used to
engineer the next generation of electronic devices at the nanometre
scale, says Eleftheriades.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/03/030325072809.htm

************************************************************
--
Ken Eis
 
So ...we meet again!
(another thread on new physics)
The physics you report is bull. Light passing through a flat glass
plate does not focus or defocus, it refracts. All the light rays
that strike, assuming they are parallel (object at infinity) leave
the glass still parallel but headed in another direction.
Ken, this is microengineered materials, nothing is said about them being homogenous in different properties. I have here on my table a flat lens that focuses nicely. An example of this is in common fibreoptics that has an engineered refractive index that varies with the radius providing the "focusing properties " in a flat section. This is however not enough to explain "bending the light in the wrong direction". To do this you really have to bend backwards engineering-wise using strange phenomena such as evanescent waves etc in a nano forest of carefully placed rods.
Evinecent light? Optical physics uses wave equations that have an
imaginary component. That's been known for 100 years. Not really
imaginary, its just what the mathematitions call part of the
variables that have an i as part of the number.
Not evanescent light, evanescent wave and it is just as real as any other type of electromagnetic waves. It can esily be disturbed and tapped of energy by bringing another piece of glass (or whatever material you are using) very close to but not touching the original lightguide.

Get this: incoming light being totally reflected at a surface between glass and air. When you bring another piece of glass close (but not touching) a part of the light energy will stop totally reflecting and jump the void into the new piece of glass. (If you don't think this is strange you don't understand ;-) So...the evanescent wave is very real, even though represented in the calculations by the imaginary (i) part.
You can make flat plate lenses two ways. The first has been used in
light houses for 200 years. Its called a Frisnell lens. The other
would be to make a flat plate of glass but the glass was produced
with varying index of refraction. Its possible.
There is actually a third way and that is called a Fraunhofer lens or Zone Plate. This one is made up of alternating transparent and opaque (black) circular rings on a flat, thin glass plate or any other transparent medium.
Resolution is still dependent on the lens size, not the material or
engineering. Diffraction limiting will not be overcome with any new
physics, at least for cameras that don't use synthetic aperture
technology.
Absolutely! But this is not what limits the resolution in even the best of lenses today.
Oh one more. The oldest lens in the world is flat. THe camera
obscura from the 1500s used a pin whole "lens"
Can be regarded as a variety of the Fraunhofer lens mentioned above, that is also why it has such a terrible chromatic aberration

So... no bull, just a long way left to practical use and i totally agree on that This is not in the 2004 Canon Deluxe so why discuss it here? Because things like this will INEVITABELY change the future way we see upon optics.

This is maybe stuff that is hard to integrate with what most people (think they) know about optics but no reason to withold the information for those who can take us further!

Cognac
 
The physics you report is bull. Light passing through a flat glass
plate does not focus or defocus, it refracts. All the light rays
that strike, assuming they are parallel (object at infinity) leave
the glass still parallel but headed in another direction.

Evinecent light? Optical physics uses wave equations that have an
imaginary component. That's been known for 100 years. Not really
imaginary, its just what the mathematitions call part of the
variables that have an i as part of the number.

You can make flat plate lenses two ways. The first has been used in
light houses for 200 years. Its called a Frisnell lens. The other
would be to make a flat plate of glass but the glass was produced
with varying index of refraction. Its possible.

Resolution is still dependent on the lens size, not the material or
engineering. Diffraction limiting will not be overcome with any new
physics, at least for cameras that don't use synthetic aperture
technology.

Oh one more. The oldest lens in the world is flat. THe camera
obscura from the 1500s used a pin whole "lens"
It's science and physics, they do not necessarily comply with all the BS you wrote above. Your words seem to indicate to me that you have very little knowledge of exactly how physics works.

Go away, Gollum.
 
You can make flat plate lenses two ways.
2+2 = 2? At least four ways that are commonly in production come quickly to mind.

Add to your list: diffractive optics (Canon is actually selling such lenses) and holographic optics (sony uses them in their focusing systems).
The first has been used in
light houses for 200 years. Its called a Frisnell lens.
Actually, it's Fresnel. I don't normally comment on spelling, but if you're going to call someone's work "bull", you should be standing on the most solid possible foundation.
The other
would be to make a flat plate of glass but the glass was produced
with varying index of refraction. Its possible.
Yes, I have a very nice borescope in the lab that uses GRIN lenses.
Resolution is still dependent on the lens size, not the material or
engineering. Diffraction limiting will not be overcome with any new
physics, at least for cameras that don't use synthetic aperture
technology.
True, but it's extremely rare for lenses to be diffraction limited. Other abberations are typically orders of magnitude greater than diffraction.

Ciao!

Joe
 
If you got a mathematics education without being introduced to complex number in the for of a+ib then you didn't progress past simple calculus.

I'm not throwing stones at the Univ of Toronto. Sometimes very ignorant reporters write down what the professor said and report what they believe he said. Scientists are miss quoted far more often then polititions.

For those of you insinuating that I'm a close minded jerk well let me try and make my case. First the laws of physics don't change very often. THere is a Portuguese scientist who is making a case for the speed of light not being constant. Its been a constant since Michelson and Morley's demonstration in the 1890s so maybe every 100 years you get some changes to the basic physical understanding of nature. Diffraction limiting is a basic tenent of science for which no case is being made that this tenent has been suspended. I would bet any of you a beer that the Univ Toronto is not making that case either. The only statement I objected to was the phrase ...resolution down to a fraction of a wavelength of light. I object because that's not even the way a scientist would describe resolution. What that statement describes is the spectral resolution, not the resolution we talk about in photography. Resolution is in line pair per mm or arc secs separation of to light sources.
Also thank you for the informative mathematical discussion on
imaginary numbers... I can't believe I got my mathematics minor
without so much as a word on these from my professors.
Evinecent light? Optical physics uses wave equations that have an
imaginary component. That's been known for 100 years. Not really
imaginary, its just what the mathematitions call part of the
variables that have an i as part of the number.

You can make flat plate lenses two ways. The first has been used in
light houses for 200 years. Its called a Frisnell lens. The other
would be to make a flat plate of glass but the glass was produced
with varying index of refraction. Its possible.

Resolution is still dependent on the lens size, not the material or
engineering. Diffraction limiting will not be overcome with any new
physics, at least for cameras that don't use synthetic aperture
technology.

Oh one more. The oldest lens in the world is flat. THe camera
obscura from the 1500s used a pin whole "lens"
I'm sure this will fall in the 5 to 10 years from now catagory of
products, but I figured some of you would find it interesting...

************************************************************

University Of Toronto Study Charts New Realm Of Physics: Flat Lens
Could Significantly Enhance Object Resolution

By constructing artificial materials that break long-standing rules
of nature, a University of Toronto researcher has developed a flat
lens that could significantly enhance the resolution of imaged
objects. This, in turn, could lead to smaller and more effective
antennas and devices for cell phones, increased space for data
storage on CD-ROMs and more complex electronic circuits.

"This is new physics," says George Eleftheriades, a U of T
professor specializing in electromagnetic technology at the Edward
S. Rogers Sr. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering and
senior author of an article in the March 24 issue of Applied
Physics Letters. "These findings provide an opportunity to resolve
details in an object smaller than a wavelength."

The team works in the rapidly emerging field of metamaterials -
artificially created substances with properties not found in
nature. Under normal electromagnetic conditions, light passing
through a flat lens will diverge; light passing through a lens made
of metamaterials, however, will bend the "wrong" way and become
focused.

Their study reveals that when evanescent waves - weak but important
waves that lose strength quickly after leaving their source - are
directed through their flat metamaterial lens, these waves are
amplified. At the same time, the lens corrects the phase of the
waves by focusing the diverging waves into a beam. Metamaterial
lenses, when constructed at optical frequencies, could be used to
engineer the next generation of electronic devices at the nanometre
scale, says Eleftheriades.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/03/030325072809.htm

************************************************************
--
Ken Eis
--
Ken Eis
 
OK I can accept everything you poss. I appreciate the informaton. I one last shot is to just say that what you are describing is really cool optical engineering. The rules of physics are in no way suspended, advanced, or changed. All is right in the Universe.
The physics you report is bull. Light passing through a flat glass
plate does not focus or defocus, it refracts. All the light rays
that strike, assuming they are parallel (object at infinity) leave
the glass still parallel but headed in another direction.
Ken, this is microengineered materials, nothing is said about them
being homogenous in different properties. I have here on my table a
flat lens that focuses nicely. An example of this is in common
fibreoptics that has an engineered refractive index that varies
with the radius providing the "focusing properties " in a flat
section. This is however not enough to explain "bending the light
in the wrong direction". To do this you really have to bend
backwards engineering-wise using strange phenomena such as
evanescent waves etc in a nano forest of carefully placed rods.
Evinecent light? Optical physics uses wave equations that have an
imaginary component. That's been known for 100 years. Not really
imaginary, its just what the mathematitions call part of the
variables that have an i as part of the number.
Not evanescent light, evanescent wave and it is just as real as any
other type of electromagnetic waves. It can esily be disturbed and
tapped of energy by bringing another piece of glass (or whatever
material you are using) very close to but not touching the
original lightguide.

Get this: incoming light being totally reflected at a surface
between glass and air. When you bring another piece of glass close
(but not touching) a part of the light energy will stop totally
reflecting and jump the void into the new piece of glass. (If you
don't think this is strange you don't understand ;-) So...the
evanescent wave is very real, even though represented in the
calculations by the imaginary (i) part.
You can make flat plate lenses two ways. The first has been used in
light houses for 200 years. Its called a Frisnell lens. The other
would be to make a flat plate of glass but the glass was produced
with varying index of refraction. Its possible.
There is actually a third way and that is called a Fraunhofer lens
or Zone Plate. This one is made up of alternating transparent and
opaque (black) circular rings on a flat, thin glass plate or any
other transparent medium.
Resolution is still dependent on the lens size, not the material or
engineering. Diffraction limiting will not be overcome with any new
physics, at least for cameras that don't use synthetic aperture
technology.
Absolutely! But this is not what limits the resolution in even the
best of lenses today.
Oh one more. The oldest lens in the world is flat. THe camera
obscura from the 1500s used a pin whole "lens"
Can be regarded as a variety of the Fraunhofer lens mentioned
above, that is also why it has such a terrible chromatic aberration

So... no bull, just a long way left to practical use and i totally
agree on that This is not in the 2004 Canon Deluxe so why discuss
it here? Because things like this will INEVITABELY change the
future way we see upon optics.

This is maybe stuff that is hard to integrate with what most people
(think they) know about optics but no reason to withold the
information for those who can take us further!

Cognac
--
Ken Eis
 
Ken,

Good answer! Everything is all right in the universe...sleep tight...Thanks, i will. (I laghed aloud!)

Thanks also for a good discussion. Please ignore the two following posters, they might know some physics but very little on how to discuss with real live people.

Cognac
 
Ken,

Good answer! Everything is all right in the universe...sleep
tight...Thanks, i will. (I laghed aloud!)

Thanks also for a good discussion. Please ignore the two following
posters, they might know some physics but very little on how to
discuss with real live people.
Do you seriously believe that the above statement is an example of how to "discuss with real live people"?

Then again, you were responding to KenEis, who set the tone of the thread by beginning his response "The physics you report is bull".

So, enjoy your little world, where you imagine your people skills to be equal to your knowledge of physics. But don't forget to peek out at reality from time to time. It's a nice show, the colors are very pretty.

Ciao!

Joe
 
Hi Joe,

I do appreciate a discussion where people (including myself) listen to different opinions, add their own ideas, maybe learn something and draw new conclusions.

I think Ken did that, and deserve kudos for having the guts to admit that there was more to be said and learnt on the subject. I think that he also put it in a nice way.

Sorry if i offended you and thanks for your comments on my personal qualities.

Returning to the subject, do you think that there will be any major breakthrough in optics that will affect the design within the next ten years?

Best regards

Cognac
Ken,

Good answer! Everything is all right in the universe...sleep
tight...Thanks, i will. (I laghed aloud!)

Thanks also for a good discussion. Please ignore the two following
posters, they might know some physics but very little on how to
discuss with real live people.
Do you seriously believe that the above statement is an example of
how to "discuss with real live people"?

Then again, you were responding to KenEis, who set the tone of the
thread by beginning his response "The physics you report is bull".

So, enjoy your little world, where you imagine your people skills
to be equal to your knowledge of physics. But don't forget to peek
out at reality from time to time. It's a nice show, the colors are
very pretty.

Ciao!

Joe
 
The optical effects described sound more applicable to data storage
than camera optics, but this article at ScienceDaily looks
promising:

"Researchers have developed a new type of biofuel cell — a battery
that runs off of alcohol and enzymes — that could replace the
rechargeable batteries in everything from laptops to Palm Pilots.
Instead of plugging into a fixed power outlet and waiting, these
new batteries can be charged instantly with a few milliliters of
alcohol. The new findings were presented today at the 225th
national meeting of the American Chemical Society, the world's
largest scientific society, in New Orleans..."
How about beer powered photographers?
 
Hi Joe,

I do appreciate a discussion where people (including myself) listen
to different opinions, add their own ideas, maybe learn something
and draw new conclusions.
Same here.
I think Ken did that, and deserve kudos for having the guts to
admit that there was more to be said and learnt on the subject. I
think that he also put it in a nice way.
We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.
Sorry if i offended you and thanks for your comments on my personal
qualities.
I'll take that as sincere, since I need people to remind me to behave periodically.
Returning to the subject, do you think that there will be any major
breakthrough in optics that will affect the design within the next
ten years?
To be perfectly honest, no. I see a lot of evolution, but no revolution in optics design.

There may be breakthroughs, but I don't think they will be commercialized fast enough to affect lens design in existing products.

I see a continuation of the "three year effect". There was a lovely article last year (trying to remember where) that pointed out that, because of the increases in availiable computing power (and the corresponding increases in the sophistication of optical design software) that more lens computations had been performed in the last three years than in the entire 4000 year history of optics preceeding that. And the same will be true 3 years from now, and 3 years after that. 10 years will bring an 8 fold increase in the total amount of lens design that has been performed in the world.

10 years will also bring about incremental increases in the quality of glass (higher index of refraction, lower dispersion), better coatings, lens element grinding and molding techniques. I see more low cost aspherical elements.

And more sophisticated mechanisms. More gropus of elements moving independently when zooming or focusing.

Just my opinions.

Ciao!

Joe
 
Well said! I agree, no major breakthroughs but incrementally better engineering in the next 10 yrs. I think that (apart from what you mention) adaptation to digital sensors (angle of incidence v.s. virtual chromatic aberration, aliasing effects, smaller sensors v.s. lens size, dof control etc). Within 10 yrs, imho, we will also have active electrically controlled coatings

Cognac
To be perfectly honest, no. I see a lot of evolution, but no
revolution in optics design.

There may be breakthroughs, but I don't think they will be
commercialized fast enough to affect lens design in existing
products.

I see a continuation of the "three year effect". There was a lovely
article last year (trying to remember where) that pointed out that,
because of the increases in availiable computing power (and the
corresponding increases in the sophistication of optical design
software) that more lens computations had been performed in the
last three years than in the entire 4000 year history of optics
preceeding that. And the same will be true 3 years from now, and 3
years after that. 10 years will bring an 8 fold increase in the
total amount of lens design that has been performed in the world.

10 years will also bring about incremental increases in the quality
of glass (higher index of refraction, lower dispersion), better
coatings, lens element grinding and molding techniques. I see more
low cost aspherical elements.

And more sophisticated mechanisms. More gropus of elements moving
independently when zooming or focusing.

Just my opinions.

Ciao!

Joe
 
... The only statement I objected to was the phrase ...resolution down
to a fraction of a wavelength of light. I object because that's not even
the way a scientist would describe resolution...
Hmm... when I purchase (or make) telescope mirrors they are described in fractions of wavelenth as in "the 1/8 wave mirror costs $X, and the 1/20 wave mirror costs $XXX..." While it's true that they are referring to the quality and accuracy of the mirror, it is assumed that higher quality yields higher resolution, resulting in a telescope where the optics are not the limiting feature when it comes to resolution (hence the term "diffraction limited optics").

I guess scientists aren't involved in astronomy :^P
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top