RP Photonics

Encyclopedia … combined with a great Buyer's Guide!

VLib
Virtual
Library

The Photonics Spotlight

Conflicting Definitions of s and p Polarization

Posted on 2012-03-03 as a part of the Photonics Spotlight (available as e-mail newsletter!)

Permanent link: https://www.rp-photonics.com/spotlight_2012_03_03.html

Author: Dr. Rüdiger Paschotta, RP Photonics Consulting GmbH

Abstract: There are conflicting definitions of s and p polarization in the scientific literature. What some people call p polarization, is s polarization for others. Obviously, that can cause confusion.

Dr. Rüdiger Paschotta

It is quite common to talk about s-polarized and p-polarized laser beams, incident on optical surfaces or diffraction gratings. Therefore, it is quite disturbing that there are conflicting definitions in the scientific literature:

So there is another trap to fall into! When reading some paper, we have to find out which definition has been used.

By the way, some people call a laser beam s-polarized, when its polarization is vertical, i.e., perpendicular to the lab's floor. It is better, though, to restrict the terms s polarization and p polarization to cases where the polarization direction with respect to a plane of incidence is relevant. For example, if you have a Brewster-angled prism in the common orientation where the reflected beam stays horizontal in direction, s polarization according to the first definition above is vertical. However, if you turn the prism such that the reflected beam goes upwards, that will change, of course.

This article is a posting of the Photonics Spotlight, authored by Dr. Rüdiger Paschotta. You may link to this page and cite it, because its location is permanent. See also the Encyclopedia of Laser Physics and Technology.

Note that you can also receive the articles in the form of a newsletter or with an RSS feed.

How do you rate this article?

Click here to send us your feedback!

Your general impression: don't know poor satisfactory good excellent
Technical quality: don't know poor satisfactory good excellent
Usefulness: don't know poor satisfactory good excellent
Readability: don't know poor satisfactory good excellent
Comments:

Found any errors? Suggestions for improvements? Do you know a better web page on this topic?

Spam protection: (enter the value of 5 + 8 in this field!)

If you want a response, you may leave your e-mail address in the comments field, or directly send an e-mail.

If you enter any personal data, this implies that you agree with storing it; we will use it only for the purpose of improving our website and possibly giving you a response; see also our declaration of data privacy.

If you like our website, you may also want to get our newsletters!

If you like this article, share it with your friends and colleagues, e.g. via social media:

arrow