From: pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net
On 8/11/2014 8:28 AM, ggherold@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, August 10, 2014 8:32:42 PM UTC-4, Phil Hobbs wrote:
>> On 8/10/2014 7:04 PM, ggherold@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>
>>>> Fabry-Perots are quite a bit harder to make than that. What are you
>>>> trying to do, exactly?
>>>
>>> Well, if you have a tunable laser, then some mirrors and lens tubes is
enough.
>> At sufficiently low finesse, sure. The problem is that the finesse is
>> limited to about 1/(2*epsilon), where epsilon is the surface error in
>> waves. Your average lambda/10 surfaces will get you a maximum finesse
>> of about 5.
>>
> Hi Phil, I 'mostly harmless' when it comes to optics. The link I posted
was for a confocal cavity. (I don't know if that makes difference.) We get a
finesse a bit more than 100, mostly that seems to be dependent on how well you
set the mirror
spacing... getting all those longitudinal modes to have the same wavelength.
>
> George H.
>>
Hi, George,
Spherical-mirror FPs are _not_ my favourite things to align, but once
tweaked up, they're beautiful. I always tell people to get the
fibre-coupled ones, because the mode matching is "one and done".
I'm assuming that the OP (if he's still around) wants to make a
low-finesse plane-mirror cavity.
When you say "confocal", do you mean that the two mirrors are really
confocal, i.e. their centres of curvature coincide, or just that they're
curved? The mode alignment gets twitchier and twitchier the closer you
get to being really confocal.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510
hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
