Switching polarizer and analyzer: the order matters -- why?

  • I
  • Thread starter PathEnthusiast
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Polarizer
In summary: This is why you see a destruction of image when you try to watch a movie with a circular polariser in front of a mirror - because the circular polariser is transferring half the power of the original light to the mirror, cancelling out the image.In summary, the polarizer and analyzer on a microscope block light depending on how they are oriented. If the "top" of the analyzer is facing the polarizer, then light from the polarizer is blocked. If the "top" of the analyzer is facing the fluorescent light, then light from the fluorescent is blocked. If the "top" of the analyzer is facing the mirror, then light from the mirror is blocked. If the
  • #1
PathEnthusiast
8
1
TL;DR Summary
I was playing around with the polarizer and analyzer on my microscope and discovered that the analyzer could block light from the polarizer--but not vice versa. I'm perplexed.
Hey all! I'm a pathologist and just got a polarizer/analyzer pair for my microscope. I decided to play around with them a little before I put them into the microscope to demonstrate the way they block light, and initially I found that no light was blocked no matter how I rotated them relative to each other. This was quite perplexing, and eventually, as I fiddled with them, I changed the order light was passing through and lo and behold light was blocked as expected when they were perpendicularly oriented. After some further experimentation, I have observed the following:

1) Light from an overhead fluorescent in my office is blocked when it passes through the polarizer and then the analyzer (when they're oriented perpendicularly).
2) Light from the overhead fluorescent is NOT blocked when light passes through the analyzer and then the polarizer (regardless of how they're oriented).
3) Light from my computer monitor is blocked by the polarizer alone (when appropriately rotated).
4) Light from my computer monitor is blocked by the analyzer alone (when appropriately rotated).

Based on these observations, I've concluded that the analyzer and polarizer are doing *something* different to light, but I'm perplexed as to what exactly.

My suspicion is that, when exposed to randomly polarized light, the polarizer blocks all directions of polarization but one, thus producing linearly polarized light. The polarizer will thus block all light polarized perpendicular to this direction.

On the other hand, I suspect that the analyzer is birefringent and is somehow producing circularly or elliptically polarized light. Such light would not be blocked by a linear polarizer. However, I'm at a loss to explain how a birefringent material is able to entirely block all light polarized in a particular direction. This seems like I've forgotten a really basic aspect of how circular polarizers work, but quick attempts at refreshing my memory reveal only that circular polarizers can cause destructive interference with light reflected off a surface that has the opposite direction of circular polarization. And I don't see how that helps explain the phenomena I'm observing.

It's been over 12 years since my last physics class, so I'm quite rusty and this is as far as I've been able to get on my own. Please help!
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Probably a birefringent film on one side of the polarizer. Play around with the combinations of order in the stack and flipping each polarizer. Any combination that has two crossed polarizers with nothing in between will block light. But if the polarization is changed in between them, they won't.
This is how circular polarizers are made.
 
  • Like
Likes vanhees71
  • #3
DaveE said:
Probably a birefringent film on one side of the polarizer. Play around with the combinations of order in the stack and flipping each polarizer. Any combination that has two crossed polarizers with nothing in between will block light. But if the polarization is changed in between them, they won't.
This is how circular polarizers are made.

YES!!!

It hadn't occurred to me that they would coat just one side with birefringent material. I now have some additional observations:

1) Light from the computer monitor is not blocked by the analyzer when the "top" of the analyzer faces the computer screen.
2) Light from the overhead fluorescent is not blocked when light passes through the polarizer and then the analyzer, if the "top" of the analyzer faces the polarizer.
3) Light from the overhead fluorescent IS blocked when light passes through the analyzer when the "top" faces the fluorescent light and then passes through the polarizer.

So my explanation of the phenomenon would be:

The birefringent film on the analyzer converts linearly polarized light into "rotating" polarized light that cannot be entirely blocked by a linear polarizer. However, if linearly polarized light passes through the polarizing material of the analyzer *before* reaching the birefringent film, essentially all light has been eliminated so rotating the polarization doesn't make a difference. Similarly, if light passes through the film first, then the polarizing material of the analyzer, the polarizing material converts it to linearly polarized light which can then be blocked by the second polarizer.
 
  • #4
Sometimes you can peel the film off if you want.
 
  • #5
PathEnthusiast said:
TL;DR Summary: I was playing around with the polarizer and analyzer on my microscope and discovered that the analyzer could block light from the polarizer--but not vice versa. I'm perplexed.

My suspicion is that, when exposed to randomly polarized light, the polarizer blocks all directions of polarization but one, thus producing linearly polarized light.
This is not an accurate description of the process. what your description implies is that you would only get a tiny fraction of the incoming light through. In fact the polariser takes the component of all of the randomly polarised parts of the light, resulting in half the energy getting through.

When linearly polarised light hits a circular polariser, the light becomes circularly polarised (obvs) and half its power gets through a linear analyser with any orientation. When circularly polarised light passes through a linear polariser, only one particular component of the resulting linearly polarised light is selected for one orientation of the analyser. It's blocked when the polarisations are crossed. There's a logic to it.
PathEnthusiast said:
It hadn't occurred to me that they would coat just one side with birefringent material.
A circular polariser has, by design , a thickness such that the path difference through the birefringent material is one quarter wave different for the two linear polarisations. That means it is a thin layer and has to be mounted on one side of the supporting linear polariser. The direction of rotation depends on the orientation of the linear polariser. There's a diagram in this link of what I mean.
 

FAQ: Switching polarizer and analyzer: the order matters -- why?

What is the difference between a polarizer and an analyzer?

A polarizer is an optical filter that allows light waves of a specific polarization to pass through and blocks light waves of other polarizations. An analyzer is essentially another polarizer that is used to detect the light's polarization state after it has passed through the initial polarizer or other optical elements.

Why does the order of the polarizer and analyzer matter?

The order matters because the initial polarizer sets the polarization state of the light, and the analyzer then measures the light's intensity based on its own orientation relative to that polarization state. If the analyzer is placed first, it will not correctly measure the polarization state set by the polarizer, leading to different results.

How does the relative angle between the polarizer and analyzer affect the transmitted light intensity?

The transmitted light intensity depends on the relative angle between the polarizer and analyzer according to Malus's Law. The intensity I of the transmitted light is given by I = I0 * cos²(θ), where I0 is the initial intensity and θ is the angle between the polarizer and analyzer. If they are aligned (θ = 0°), the intensity is maximized, and if they are perpendicular (θ = 90°), the intensity is minimized.

What happens if the polarizer and analyzer are crossed at 90 degrees?

If the polarizer and analyzer are crossed at 90 degrees, no light should pass through the analyzer because the polarization direction set by the polarizer is perpendicular to the transmission axis of the analyzer. This results in complete extinction of the light.

Can the order of polarizer and analyzer be reversed in any optical setup?

In some optical setups, especially those involving only linear polarizers and analyzers, the order can sometimes be reversed without affecting the final measurement. However, in systems involving additional optical elements like wave plates or birefringent materials, the order can significantly impact the results because these elements can alter the polarization state of light between the polarizer and analyzer.

Back
Top