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.
Degenerate four‐wave mixing of 10.6‐μm radiation in Hg1−x Cd x Te
1.R. K. Jain and M. B. Klein, Appl. Phys. Lett. 35, 454 (1979).
2.R. K. Jain, M. B. Klein, and R. C. Lind, Opt. Lett. 4, 10 (1979).
3.V. Kremenitskii, S. Odoulov, and M. Soskin, Phys. Status Solidi (to be published).
4.R. C. Lind and R. K. Jain (unpublished).
5.Preliminary results on D4WM of 10.6‐μm radiation were first reported at the 1979 Conference on Laser Engineering and Applications, Washington, D.C., by R. K. Jain, M. B. Klein, and R. C. Lind, Paper 11‐8 (unpublished).
6.During the preparation of the final version of this manuscript, we have noted the announcement of D4WM of 10.6‐μm radiation in by M. A. Khan, J. F. Ready, and P. W. Kruse at the 1980 Conference on Laser and Electro‐Optical Systems, San Diego, Paper THEE4 (unpublished). These authors report values of the order of esu for the third‐order susceptibility, consistent with that due to conduction‐band nonpar‐abolicity (see Refs. 13–16 below), which is apparently favored by their experimental conditions.
7.For a recent review article, see A. Yariv, IEEE J. Quantum Electron. QE‐14, 650 (1978).
8.E. E. Bergmann, I. J. Bigio, B. J. Feldman, and R. A. Fisher, Opt. Lett. 3, 82 (1978).
9.R. C. Lind, D. G. Steel, M. B. Klein, R. L. Abrams, C. R. Giuliano, and R. K. Jain, Appl. Phys. Lett. 34, 457 (1979).
10.D. G. Steel, R. C. Lind, J. F. Lam, and C. R. Giuliano, Appl. Phys. Lett. 35, 376 (1979).
11.This calculation includes the effect of attenuation on each of the mixing waves. For instance, see Ref. 1.
12.S. A. Jamison and A. V. Nurmikko, Appl. Phys. Lett. 33, 182 (1978);
12.A. V. Nurmikko and S. A. Jamison, in Physics of Semiconductors, 1978 (Institute of Physics, London, 1979), pp. 315–318.
13.C. K. N. Patel, R. E. Slusher, and P. A. Fleury, Phys. Rev. Lett. 17, 1011 (1966);
13.P. A. Wolff and G. A. Pearson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 17, 1015 )1966)., Phys. Rev. Lett.
14.K. C. Rustagi, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 30, 2547 (1969);
14.J. J. Wynne, Phys. Rev. 178, 1295 (1969).
15.P. W. Kruse, J. F. Ready, and M. A. Khan, Infrared Phys. 19, 497 (1979).
16.Among these, the largest contribution (that due to the highly nonparabolic conduction band) is approximately two orders of magnitude smaller than the electron‐hole plasma contribution, for the chosen sample and experimental conditions.
17.See, for instance, R. Dornhaus and G. Nimtz, The Properties and Applications of the Systems, Springer‐Verlag Ser. Solid State Phys. (Springer, New York, 1976).
18.M. A. Kinch, M. J. Brau, and A. Simmons, J. Appl. Phys. 44, 1649 (1973).
19.F. Bartoli, R. Allen, L. Esterowitz, and M. Kruer, J. Appl. Phys. 45, 2150 (1974).
20.I. M. Nesmelova, N. J. Baryshev, F. P. Volkova, and A. P. Cherkasov, Sov. Phys. Semicond. 6, 822 (1972).
21.J. D. Wiley and R. N. Dexter, Phys. Rev. 181, 1181 (1969).
22.T. W. Nee, C. D. Cantrell, J. F. Scott, and M. O. Scully, Phys. Rev. B 17, 3936 (1978);
22.S. A. Jamison, and A. V. Nurmikko, Phys. Rev. B 19, 5185 (1979)., Phys. Rev. B
23.Similar effects have just recently been reported by D. A. B. Miller, S. D. Smith, and A. Johnston, Appl. Phys. Lett. 35, 658 (1979). In contrast to their low‐temperature results, we have observed nonlinear Fabry Perot effects at room temperature.
24.H. M. Gibbs, S. L. McCall, T. N. C. Venkatesan, A. C. Gossard, A. Passner, and W. Wiegmann, Appl. Phys. Lett. 35, 451 (1979).
Article metrics loading...
Full text loading...
Most read this month
Most cited this month