banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Depolarization effect in optical absorption measurements of one- and two-dimensional nanostructures
Rent this article for
View: Figures


Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Measurement scheme and calculated depolarization effect at the focal plane. (a) Linearly polarized light (785 nm) is introduced into an oil-immersion objective lens with an adjustable numerical aperture (upper blue disk), with the polarization direction shown as a blue arrow. The light transmitted through the substrate which has various nanostructures resting on the surface is collected by an oil-immersion lens (lower blue disk) with a fixed numerical aperture (NA = 1.4). The initial polarization before the lens is along the x-direction, and the z-direction is defined as being normal to the sample. Two representative semiaperture angles are shown here. Focusing the light with the larger semiaperture angle tilts the polarization, introducing a measurable z-component. (b) Calculated intensities of the x and z components of the electric field incident upon the sample focal plane are shown fordifferent SAs. All intensities at different SAs are normalized to the x-component.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

The experimentally measured absorption in graphene depends on semiaperture illumination angle. (a) Absorption of light at the same area of the sample for two different semiaperture angles. The absorbance of the substrate was set to zero following uniform background correction. Scale bar, 5 m. (b) Experimentally measured (black squares) and theoretical curve (red line) of absorption of graphene as a function of semiaperture angle. The theoretical curve takes into account the depolarization effect at the focal plane obtaining the fitted tangential absorption of light to be for graphene. Inset: Laser beam diameter is smaller than the area of the graphene sheet, which is assumed in the calculation.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Dependence of measured absorption versus illumination semiaperture angle in Ge nanowires. (a) Upper: AFM image of a representative Genanowire (d 65 nm). Scale bar, 1 m. Lower: Measured absorption of light of the same nanowire for two different semiaperture angles. Scale bar, 0.5 m. (b) Experimentally measured (black squares) and calculated (blue and red curves) absorption for various semiaperture angles of illumination. The blue curve considers only the Abbe diffraction effect in the absence of depolarization. The red curve, however, includes the depolarization effects. Both calculations for this nanowire use in the portion of the nanowire being illuminated. The latter uses . Inset: Schematic illustrating that the nanowire diameter is smaller than the beam diameter. Smaller semiaperture angles lead to larger laser spot diameters (left) and vice versa (right), with the z component (shaded area) only being significant in the latter.


Article metrics loading...


Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Depolarization effect in optical absorption measurements of one- and two-dimensional nanostructures