Experiments with Polarized Light at Slit and Double-Slit
Experiments at slit with varied polarized light show only at very narrow slit-widths and high diffraction-orders a noticeable influence. This is explained by Newton's demonstration of localization of bent light near the edge. The experiment by Fresnel is repeated where a double-slit with right and left circular polarized light in the single slits yields no interferences. This result was confirmed but with a polarizing-filter in front of the catch-up plane appeared the interference-figure of double-slit, whereat its fringes move by turning the filter. Therefore without polarizing-filter only a blurred figure is originated.
Figure 1. Examples for influence of polarization of light in diffraction at slit. The light of a Ne-He-laser HNA 50 passed a rotator and was focused on the illumination-slit 0.05 mm slit-width. The with an objective f' = 35 cm parallel directed light strikes the diffraction-slit.
a: 1 mm slit-width in 1 m distance,
b: 0.03 mm slit-width in 0.065 m distance.
_______ E-Vector parallel to slit,
.............. 45° to slit,
- - - - - - perpendicular to slit.
Figure 2. Relative intensity in dependence of direction of polarization of incident light from a He-Ne-laser through a slit of variable slit-width light. Abszissa: slit-width a: 0.0.. .mm and b: 0.00.. mm; Ordinate: Relative Intensity a: x 1 and b: x 0.1.
⁄ ⁄ parallel to slit,
⊥ E-Vector perpendicular to slit.
Figure 3. Experimental arrangement for examination of opposite circular polarized light with the double-slit. L - light-source, a mercury high-pressure lamp HBO 100; C - Condenser; F - green-filter; M -mikroscope-objektive; ID - illumentation circular-opening Ø 0.1 mm; Le 1 - lens f' = 1 m; PF 1 - polarization-filter Zeiss-Bernotar in 45°-position; DS - double-slit with 1.5 mm stick and ever one λ /4-plate of glimmer, where the direction of extinction in or 90° to the slits were cut; Le 2 - lens f' = 2 m; PF 2 - polarization-filter, rotating before the camera; P - camera-body of a single-lens reflex-miniature camera.
Figure 4. Diffraction-figures of the double-slit in dependence of the distance to slit. Breadth of middle-stick 1.5 mm, width of single-slits 0.375 mm. Illuminated with parallel mercury light with green-filter. Negatives are tree-fold enlarged. Distance: a: 25 mm, b: 125 mm, c = 275 mm, d = 720 mm..
Newton  book III observation 5 had shown that bent light comes only out of a small surrounding of the edge. Nieke ,  and  showed particulars to this fact, light comes out of a surrounding smaller than 0.1 mm of every edge, independent of slit-width. With it is explicable the constant difference independent of slit-width in figure 2: only on bent light exists an influence of direction of polarization, in the middle of the slit passing light is not influenced. Figure 1 show that bent light is not stricken equal but ever the order of bent light the stronger the influence of polarization. Newton  III, query 1 supposed that stronger bent light passed near the edge. The stronger influence of polarization can also be connected with it. The change of preference-direction by Bois a. Rubens  indicated in optical radiation for an influence of structure of photons and first in Hertz's radiation for a matter-interaction.
According to these results opposite circular polarized light shows only therefore not the diffraction-figure of double-slit because the single components of inter-direction of diffraction-fringes lay side by side and so no diffraction-figure is visible.
Moreover already Fresnel was known that about a plate of glass brought in a light-path of one slit shifts the diffraction-figure of the double-slit.
 I. Newton, Opticks, or a Treatise of the Reflexions, Refractions, Inflexions and Colors of Light. London 1704; Opera quae exstant omnis, Tom IV. London 1782; Optics, Reprint, Bruxells 1966; Optik II + III, Übers. W. Abendroth, Ostwald's Klassiker Nr. 97, Engelmann Leipzig 1898; Neuauflage Bd. 96/97 Vieweg, Braunschweig 1983; Optique, Trac. J. P. Marat, 1787, Bourgois Paris 1989.
 J. B. Biot, Traité de physique expérementale at mathématique. Paris 1816, Tome IV.
 A. Fresnel, Ann. chim. phys.(2) 28 (1822); Ann. Physik (II) 21 (1831) 276; Oeuvre complétes I. Paris 1866, S. 731.
 V. v. Lang, Sitzungsber. Wien. Akad. 60 (2) (1869) 767; Ann. Physik (II) 140 (1870) 460.
 Cornu, Comp. rend. 92 (1881) 1365.
 J. J. Thomson, Phil. Mag. (5) 11 (1881) 229; 28 (1889) 1.
 W. Wien, Ann. Physik (III) 46 (1886) 117.
 H. Hertz, Ann. Physik (III) 36 (1892) 775.
 H. du Bois, Ann. Physik (III) 46 (1892) 542.
 H. du Bois u. H. Rubens, Ann. Physik (IV) 35 (1911) 243.
 G. Wolfsohn, Handbuch der Physik, Bd. XX, S. 305, Springer, Berlin 1928.
 H. Nieke, Newtons Beugungsexperimente und ihre Weiterführung. Halle 1997, Comp. Print 1,Arbeit 1. Newton's Diffraction Experiments and their Continuation. Halle 1997,comp. print 3, paper 1.
 As , paper 2.
 As , paper 3.
© 2006 by tediamedia email@example.com