Skip to main content
Sandbox Physics

Optics 097 · Waveguides, structured light, and modern optics

Surface Plasmon Resonance Lab

An independently initialized three-dimensional apparatus connects Kretschmann angle scan, Surface-field resonance, Analyte-index sensing. Two dimensional physical controls, direct probe dragging, a detector trace, and three quantitative checks are recalculated from the stated equation.

Interactive modelSurface Plasmon Resonance Lab
Primary prediction P1\mathcal P_10.500.50
Physical scale P2\mathcal P_250%50\%
Limit check V\mathcal V0.00π0.00\pi
Model regimevalid model regime\text{valid model regime}

Physics tutorial

How to investigate Surface Plasmon Resonance Lab

BackgroundSurface Plasmon Resonance Lab is one independently initialized apparatus with three linked investigations: Kretschmann angle scan, Surface-field resonance, Analyte-index sensing. Its two controls—Analyte index and Incident angle—feed the governing relation ksp=k0εmεdεm+εdk_{\mathrm{sp}}=k_0\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon_m\varepsilon_d}{\varepsilon_m+\varepsilon_d}}. The displayed result is an analytic trend model; quantitative near-field prediction requires a Maxwell full-wave solver with measured material data.

Why it mattersHow does phase matching transfer prism light into a lossy surface wave that senses refractive index?

Start with the essentials

Focus question
How does phase matching transfer prism light into a lossy surface wave that senses refractive index?
One-sentence intuition
The detector curve and all three numerical readouts are recomputed from ksp=k0εmεdεm+εdk_{\mathrm{sp}}=k_0\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon_m\varepsilon_d}{\varepsilon_m+\varepsilon_d}}. Geometry and glow are presentation encodings; the equation, units, conservation or limit check, and validity indicator are the quantitative evidence.

Core mathematical model

Governing relation

ksp=k0εmεdεm+εdk_{\mathrm{sp}}=k_0\sqrt{\frac{\varepsilon_m\varepsilon_d}{\varepsilon_m+\varepsilon_d}}

The implementation evaluates this relation with dimensional inputs and an executable analytic or numerical benchmark. The displayed result is an analytic trend model; quantitative near-field prediction requires a Maxwell full-wave solver with measured material data.

Common difficulties

Mistaking glow for measured power

Typical misconceptionA brighter cinematic trail must represent proportionally more optical power.

Better mental modelUse the detector and normalized readouts for comparison. Glow is deliberately nonlinear so weak structure stays visible.

Run the experiment

  1. 01

    Scene 1: Kretschmann angle scan

    Select Kretschmann angle scan. Sweep Analyte index, hold Incident angle fixed, and then reverse the roles. Drag the stage probe to repeat the first sweep directly.

    What to observe: Read the primary prediction, physical scale, limit check, and validity indicator together. Record where the approximation boundary changes.
  2. 02

    Scene 2: Surface-field resonance

    Select Surface-field resonance. Sweep Analyte index, hold Incident angle fixed, and then reverse the roles. Drag the stage probe to repeat the first sweep directly.

    What to observe: Read the primary prediction, physical scale, limit check, and validity indicator together. Record where the approximation boundary changes.
  3. 03

    Scene 3: Analyte-index sensing

    Select Analyte-index sensing. Sweep Analyte index, hold Incident angle fixed, and then reverse the roles. Drag the stage probe to repeat the first sweep directly.

    What to observe: Read the primary prediction, physical scale, limit check, and validity indicator together. Record where the approximation boundary changes.