The following content is provided under a Creative Commons license.

Your support will help MIT

OpenCourseWare continue to offer high-quality educational resources for free. To make a donation or
to view additional materials from hundreds of MIT courses, visit MIT OpenCourseWare at ocw.mit.edu.
GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: The key point of the previous lecture was to simplify the equations for
refraction from a spherical surface, such that we can write them in a simple form. OK, what I just said
was redundancy. But we want to simplify them. I should have said we want to simplify them so that we
can write them in a linearlized form. And the linearlized form is actually very useful because with this
form, as I'm about to show, we're going to use a very familiar form of math, namely linear algebra
matrices. And we can retrace through almost arbitrarily complex optical systems. Of course, there's a
downside that if write trace this way, we do not really get very accurate results. Our results, as we
discussed last time, are only accurate within the paraxial approximation. On the other hand, if we do this
analysis even approximately, we can get an idea of how the optical system behaves. And then if we get
this approximate design, this approximate idea, then we can plug the system into a more sophisticated
numerical tool, for example, Zemax or CODE V. There's a number of different optical design and
software suites available. And then we can actually get a more accurate analysis of how the optical
systems would behave. So the other reason we write these matrices is that they give us actually quite a
bit of information about the basic properties of optical systems. So it is really worthwhile to do this first,
every time we face an optics problem, before we jump into the numerical analysis. And for those of you
who really have a real-life problems to solve and you really need to go to software, we will tell you later
during the class where we'll give you some information about what types of software are available and
what you can do with those. But generally, this idea of using paraxial optics is very powerful in order to
understand optical system. So the summary then of what paraxial optics standard is summarized. These
are shown on this slide over here. The most important is the results on the right that allows you to write
the angle of departure of a ray to the right-hand side of the card interface and the elevation of the ray,
with respect to the right-hand side interface. It allows you to write them as functions of the
corresponding quantities on the left-hand side of the interface. And as you can see there, it actually
looks like it two by two set of vectors, which are related by a two by two matrix. And the matrix are not
very interesting. As you can see, the most relevant, the most interesting element is the element on the
first row, second column, which equals the index of refraction to the right of the interface, minus the
index of refraction to the left, divided by the radius of curvature of the spherical interface. And, of
course, the radius of curvature is simply the radius of the sphere. We're talking about the sphere. And
then the other result that we put here and looks like a propagation through free space, it looks kind of
too much trouble, really, for what it's worth. But you will see in a second that this is actually a very
useful tool to have in mind. One of the thing that says is that the ray, as it propagates from the left over
a distance d, if it propagates through free space, then what happens is the elevation of the ray changes,
but the angle of propagation does not change. So this verifies what we know from Fermat's principle
that a ray propagating in uniform space, it minimizes its path. Therefore, it must propagate in a straight
line because the straight line is the minimum path between two points. Now, you might be wondering.
We talked last time about ellipsoidal surfaces, hyperboloid surfaces, and spherical surfaces. You might
wonder, why did we do this analysis in the context of the sphere? Well, that says it doesn't matter very
much because all of these three possibilities, ellipsoids, hyperboloids, and spheres, near the axis, they
actually all look kind of the same. If you compare a sphere-- so I should specify now what I mean by axis.
So in the case of a sphere, as Professor Sheppard pointed out last time, in the case of a sphere, really,
any lines going through the center of the sphere acts as the optical axis. But for the hyperboloid and the
ellipsoid, that's not true. There's a very well-defined major axis and minor axis for the surfaces. And it
turns out you can match the curvature of these surfaces with the curvature of a sphere so that
[INAUDIBLE] a common axis, they all look the same, as I've done in this diagram. It's a little bit of an
algebraic mess to actually work out how to do this. So I didn't do it in this slide. The idea is basically to
do a Taylor series expansion on the explanations that describe all those surfaces. And then when you do
that, each one of those is described by a different set of coefficients. So what you can do then is you can
match the coefficients in order to match the curvature. So I will let the graduate version of the class,
those of you who are taking 2710, as a homework, I will let you work out one of these, a simple case for
matching-- I forget. I think it is matching an ellipsoid to a sphere. So let you do that. What I really want
you to live with out of this lecture, for now, is that the paraxial analysis remains valid for all three
surfaces. OK? As long as we match the curvature of the sphere, ellipse, and hyperboloid, and we
constrain ourselves to the paraxial regime, then our results remain approximately correct. So this is kind
of another useful property of the paraxial approximation that it is not only valid for a sphere, but it is
also valid for other surfaces of revolution, provided the curvature near the center of the surfaces
matches the curvature of the corresponding sphere. OK. Yeah? Push the button, please. Yeah, so that's a
good question. AUDIENCE: Could you repeat the question? We didn't hear the question. GEORGE
BARBASTATHIS: The question was if there's an angle that we'll consider as a cutoff for the breakdown of
the paraxial approximation. So the accurate answer is zero. Any angle other than zero violates the
paraxial approximation. In actuality, you can calculate, with the help from this Taylor series, actually,
that we saw in the previous slide, you can calculate the accuracy of the approximation. So treat it as a
first order of a Taylor series expansion. And then you can calculate what is the next order accuracy. So
this is actually algebraically quite complex. And typically, we resort to software to do it for us, numerical
software. As a rule of thumb, anything in the range below 30 degrees, you can kind of trust the paraxial
approximation. But that's a rule of thumb. In some cases, it's not true. In some cases, you need more
accuracy. So the guideline is something like that. But, for example, for sure, if you have a ray
propagating at 80 degrees, you know for sure that approximation breaks. If it goes to 1 to 3 degrees,
then most likely, you're OK. And then there's a gray area that you have to be a little bit more careful. If
the accuracy demanded by the application is much higher, than you have to be more careful. There's
also surfaces that are not very well-described by this at all, for example, a cubic. If you make a refractive
interface that looks like a cubic surface, would look kind of like this. And then this totally breaks down,
right? So you have to go to then to non-paraxial [? methods. ?] Another thing to discuss is in one the
previous equations, I wrote down ray elevations and ray angles. But I was not very careful about
defining the signs of these angles, namely, whether they go up, or down, or left, or right, and so on. I
was deliberately left this little bit vague. Again, this may appear like too much trouble for nothing. But
you will see, as we go later on with the lecture today, you will see that this is a very useful and highly
nontrivial aspect of geometrical optics, namely, the conventions of the signs, for when the quantities
that we're dealing with are positive or negative. So bear with me for a second, and I will show examples
of how this works later. So I want to read this because I don't know of a better way to do it. I will read it.
And then as I read, please look down at the slide. And you will see on the left-hand side I have examples
of all these qualities being positive. And on the right-hand side, we have example of all of these
quantities being negative. OK, so the convention number one is that the light always travels from left to
right. So you know immediately when someone draws an optical system or attempts to draw an optical
system, you know immediately if this person knows their optics or not by the way they pick the light
propagation. If they show light rays going from right to left, it means they don't know optics. So if they
learned optics, they learned it very deficiently. AUDIENCE: [CHUCKLES] GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: So
always light goes from left to right in this diagram. There's one exception, of course. Can anybody guess?
One exception that I'm not dealing with here. Mirror. Push the button. AUDIENCE: Mirror. GEORGE
BARBASTATHIS: Mirrors, yes. So in this diagram over here, I do not consider mirrors yet. We will deal
with mirrors later, in about a week. And then we'll see a revised set of sign convention. But as long as
there's no mirrors in your optical system, if you have what is called a purely dioptric optical system, then
the light is always going from left to right. Taking this as a given, then we'll define the positive and
negative radii of curvature as solved over here. So if the surface is convex towards the left, then we'll call
it positive, OK? Then this sounds a little bit weird. It says that longitudinal distances are positive if
pointing to the right. I'll show you an example a little bit later where distance can become negative by
pointing to the left. But for now, take this definition for granted. The same is for lateral distances that
this measures perpendicular to the optical axis. If they point up, then they're called positive. If they
point down, they're called negative. And finally, angles are positive if they are acute in the
counterclockwise sense, with respect to the optical axis. So clockwise, we have to be very careful when
we define it, so we don't get any mirror effects. So hope that the cameras that we're using here do not
make any mirrors. But counter-clockwise is basically like this, OK? If in this direction you get an acute
angle, then the angle is positive. If you have to go all the way around to get your angle, or another way
to put it is if you can make it acute by going clockwise, then you call the angle negative. OK. So this set of
conventions is self-contained and consistent. To add to the confusion, set and optical text books, they
use the opposite sign of conventions. It is also possible, by the way. The set of conventions I use here is
consistent with a Hecht text book and the majority of text books. There's a minority of textbooks that
use the exact opposite conventions. But we will not deal with those. OK, using these set of conventions,
we can define the power of an optical system based on whether rays that propagate outwards-- by
outwards, I mean a ray bundle that expands-- whether a surface, a spherical surface, causes the
expansion to become slower or faster. If the surface causes the expansion to become slower, as in the
top diagram over here, then the surface is said to have positive power. If the surface causes the
expansion to become faster-- that is, it takes the expanding bundle and spreads it further outwards--
then the surface is said to have negative power. So now, let me proceed to define a specific optical
system. And then we'll see more examples of this thing happening. So the system I would like to
consider is a lens. And this is actually the first example of a lens that we see in the class. And I will take a
very special case with a lens that we refer to as thin. What's a lens? A lens is simply a piece of glass that
has been shaped to have spherical surfaces on one or both sides. Typically both, but we'll see examples
of lenses that are actually flat on one surface and curved on the other surface. So when we call the lens
thin, well, we call it thin. Consider an expanding spherical wave that propagates through the lens. And
consider the maximum angle that can be subtended through the lens. In other words, angles larger than
this one would actually miss the lens. So therefore, this alpha maximum is sort of the biggest angle that
we have to worry about. Well, what does the paraxial approximation say? It says that this angle has to
be relatively small. So assume that this is true, then. The lens also has a thickness. So this thickness, I
denoted as T in this diagram over here. So provided this thickness, if we do a little bit of an analysis here,
we can calculate this thickness relative to the radius of curvature of the sphere. And the angle phi that is
defined as shown, from the center of the sphere relative to the edge of the ray, that subtends the
maximum angle alpha maximum. OK? So we can see the definition phi for this angle and the radius r. So
if, given this angle of arrival is alpha maximum, if it is true that the angle phi is also very small, then we
can consider the lens to be thin. So we can basically pretend that the space between these two points
on the lens, the space between the entrance to the optical axis and the exit of the optical axis through
the lens, we can neglect the space. This is what the thin lens approximation says. That's very convenient
because we can now analyze the lens. As you can see, if I neglect this space, then the ray elevation
before and after the lens remains the same. And also can neglect a refraction that might happen within
the lens. So basically, we have the system where the ray arrives then is bent in one step and then
propagates outwards at a slightly different angle. So in order to analyze the system, now, what I will do
is I will break it into two components. One of them is the curved surface on the left-hand side. And the
second is the curved surface on the right-hand side. OK. And now, for each one of those, I can define an
angle on the right and then angle on the left, as I have done in the simple [INAUDIBLE] of the refractive
surface. Now, each one of those is a simple refractive surface interface that we know how to deal with
from the previous lecture. And I can add equations. Remember the equation for the refraction from the
spherical surface. I will add it here on my pad, just to remember. So it goes like this. Hopefully, someone
will notice and they will project it. So n to the right, alpha to the right, x to the right equals-- can
anybody see? OK, we're having technical difficulties here. Oh, there we go. AUDIENCE: Can you lower
the piece of paper a little? Yeah, got it. Yeah. GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: So this equals 1, 0, 1. This is easy.
And then we have apply our mnemonic, minus n to the right, minus n to the left, over the radius of
curvature, times the same property for the left. And left alpha left, x left. OK. Now, what we're have to
do is we have to apply this rule successively for the two interfaces. So here's the question that we get
for the second interface. So this case, n to the right is 1 because to the right of this interface, I have air.
And n to the left is n because to the left of this interface, I have glass. OK. Now, what I will do is I will
apply the same rule. But I will now apply it on the first interface. And if I do to the first interface, I get
this equation. Now, notice that in the numerator of the element in the first row, second column, the
quantities are reversed because now n to the right is the index of refraction of glass, whereas n to the
left is the index of refraction in air, that is 1. So therefore, I get this matrix. Now, what it can do, I can
cascade the two matrices because I can substitute the vector n over 1 x1 that is on the top equation. I
can substitute it from the second equation. And if I do that, of course, I will get a cascade of the two
matrices. And notice that in the cascade, it is very important to remember that in the cascade, the
matrix of the last element to the right appears left. And that is very important to remember and not
confuse because as you know, matrix multiplication is not commutative. If you mess up the order of
these matrices, you will get the wrong result. So you have to remember that you start from the right.
That is, you start from the end of the optical system where the rays depart, and you start cascading the
matrices going backwards towards the beginning of the optical system. So this is what I've done here.
I've put the matrix corresponding to the second interface. This matrix appears first. And the matrix
corresponding to the first interface appears second. And then I cascade them. I do the matrix
multiplication, which is a relatively straightforward task to do. And I get the second, the last equation
that appears on the slide. OK. Now, let's go ahead and interpret this equation. It looks very nice. But let's
see what it really means. Also, before I move on, let me notice one more thing. Notice that in the
vectors of the ray, angles of the ray elevations, the index of refraction has disappeared. It has not really
disappeared. It is simply because the angles alpha right and alpha left are in air. And therefore, the index
of refraction is 1. That's why there's no index of refraction in that location. OK. Let's look at this equation
again. The top quantity that appears relatively complicated, it has a name. It is called 1 over the focal
length. Now, you might wonder, why did they call this the focal length? I will justify that in a second. But
if you believe me that the focal length follows from this equation, then this equation is known as the
lens maker's equation. And it is very useful because it gives you the focal length of the thin lens as a
function of the three quantities that define the thin lens, that radii of curvature to the left and to the
right and the index of refraction of the lens. And what I want to emphasize, again, is that this equation is
valid if the lens is surrounded by air. If the lens is surrounded by another material, for example, water,
or oil or something with index of refraction different than 1, then this equation does not hold anymore.
And as a bonus, in the next homework, which has already been posted, you will actually derive the
corrected equation if the lens is immersed in a material that is different than air. But for now, this
equation is correct because we put our lens in air. So therefore, everything is fine. And this is a lens
maker formula. So then let me justify that this quantity that appeared over there and has units 1 over
distance, why on over distance? Because this quantity has 1 over the radius of curvature in the
denominator. So therefore, it is 1 over distance. So let me justify why this quantity is actually the focal
length of the lens. So to do that, let me consider a ray that is arriving from infinity horizontally at an
elevation x1 with respect to the optical axis. So this ray, I can retrace through the system. Basically to
retrace through the system means that I have to propagate this ray by a distance z. And then I have to
find out what is the ray angle alpha 2 with respect to the optical axis and the ray elevation x2, also with
respect to the optical axis, as function of this propagation distance z. So now you can see why it was
convenient to define the matrix for propagation through free space. Because now, in order to figure out
where this ray lands, what is its elevation and propagation angle, all I have to do is cascade the matrix
that describes the lens with a matrix that describes propagation through free space. And we have seen
this matrix of propagation through free space. It is simply 1, 0 in the first row. And then the distance and
1 in the second row. And there's actually, if you look back at your equation, it is distance divided by the
index of refraction. But, again, because we are propagating in air here, the index of refraction is 1. So we
don't have to worry about this at the moment. And because the free space is following the lens, the
matrix corresponding to free space will actually appear first before the matrix corresponding to the lens.
So this is the cascade [INAUDIBLE] correctly here. And we can solve this. And we could find that is given
by this equation over here. So what we observe now is that if we set the propagation distance to-- first
of all, I did this in the general case. So as the ray entrance angle, I left a general symbol alpha 1. But I
said already that the ray is arriving horizontal. That means alpha 1 equals 0. So therefore, the elevation
of the ray, with respect to the optical axis, is given by this equation. It is simply x2 equals x1, 1 minus z
over f, OK? And we can see very easily over here that if z equals f then x2 will equal to 0. So this means
that if I let the ray propagate by a quantity equal to this magical amount that appeared in the lens
maker's formula, then the ray will hit the axis. So the ray will land on the optical axis. And moreover, we
can very easily verify that this happens independently of x1, because as you can see, x1 is outside the
parenthesis here. If I set this quantity to equal 0, then independent of what x1 was, we will actually get
all of the rays to go through the same point of the optical axis. So this is a central focus. You can see that
the ray bundle that arrived parallel from infinity actually now comes to focus at this location of the
optical axis because of this simple equations that we just described. And this property over here justifies
the name focal length. It is the length at which the rays come to focus. OK. The inverse of the focal
length, just on its own, as a sort of standalone quantity, has a name, also. It is called the optical power.
And that is a little bit confusing because in our minds, usually, power is measured in what? Well, this
power is not the usual power that we measure as energy per time. It is a different power. And for
historical reasons, we use the same name in optics, but it is measured in inverse meters. And the inverse
meters, they're also known as diopters in optics. And they define the optical power as the inverse of the
focal length. So, for example, if the focal length is 1 meter, which is a pretty long focal length, you call it
one diopter. If the focal length is 10 centimeters, it is actually 10 diopters. If it is 1 centimeter, it is 100
diopters, and so on and so forth. Very often, people like myself who are myopic-- is anybody in the class,
is any of your myopic? Anybody use corrective lenses because you have myopia? OK. Do you know what
is the power of your prescription? AUDIENCE: 0.75. GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: 0.75, you're pretty likely.
You have very small correction. AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: That's a pretty small
correction. Can you say it in the microphone? AUDIENCE: 0.75 in the one eye and in the other, 1.25.
GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: OK, 0.25. Is it 0.25 or minus 0.25. AUDIENCE: Minus 1.25. GEORGE
BARBASTATHIS: Minus 1.25, OK. So that is also in diopters. AUDIENCE: Yeah. GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: It
means that the focal length of your lenses is approximately 80 centimeters, right? AUDIENCE: Right,
mhm. GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: Yeah. Do you have a--? Yeah. AUDIENCE: Mhm. GEORGE BARBASTATHIS:
OK. AUDIENCE: Yes. GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: So we will see later why then correction for myopic people
is negative. I'm also myopic. And my correction, I actually have pretty high correction. Mine minus 7 and
minus 5 diopters in my left and right eye, respectively. So it means, again, that the focal length of my
glasses is approximately minus 1 over 7, which is-- I don't know, what-- 17 centimeters or something.
OK. So that is the power. Now, why we use the term optical power? Actually, it is best explained if you
look at the final animation on this slide, which is what happens if the ray bundle comes from infinity
again, but it is not horizontal. It is coming at an angle alpha 1. So now, the angle alpha 1 is not 0
anymore. But I let it have a finite non-zero value. And if you do that, then you find relatively easily from
the equation over here. Let me write the equation. We have that x2 equals alpha 1 z plus x1, 1 minus z
over f. OK. So if I set z equals f to the above equation, then I get x2 because alpha 1 times f. This term
will disappear, of course. This will go to 0. And z will become f. So get x2 equals alpha 1 times f. So this is
the equation for the elevation of the focus for a parallel ray bundle that is arriving non-horizontal from
infinity at some angle alpha 1. So you can also write this equation-- it is not on the slide-- I will just add it
on the white board. x2 equals alpha 1 over the power, the optical power of the system. So the power is
kind of like a lever. It tells you as you change the angle alpha 1, it tells you how does the elevation of the
focus change, with respect to the optical axis. So it is basically, again, if your thinking is if you order
transduction amplification or something like that, it tells you as you change the angle that the rays arrive
into the optical system, how does the focus move with respect to the optical axis. OK. Now, basically,
these equations that we just described, let's see some different cases of what would happen to the rays.
So what I've done here is I put the different types of lenses together with a simple spherical refractor.
And the different types of lenses are plain or convex where you have one convex surface followed by a
planar surface, Then biconvex where you have two planar surfaces, then planar concave and biconcave.
So you can see from these that if you have a ray bundle that is arriving horizontal, now, horizontal from
infinity, you can see that what will happen at the output is actually different, depending on the type of
refraction that you get in the different surfaces. So I will let you work out, based on the equation, the
lens maker's equation, I will let you work out why these cases are all different. But what I would like to
do is actually work out the location of the image, depending on the different cases, and also, see how to
ask with respect to the sign convention. So starting, for example, with a biconvex lens, we can see that
the biconvex will focus the parallel bundle to the right-hand side of the lens. This is the case that we
have implicitly done so far. In my drawing so far, I have assumed that this is the case. However, you can
see that if I have a biconcave lens, like the one shown at the bottom of the slide, you can see that each
one of these rays will actually expand outwards after it passes through the lens. So in a sense that we
described so far, this lens does not really focus the rays. It creates a divergent ray bundle. You can get a
sense of focus if you extend the divergent rays, if you extend them backwards towards the optical axis. If
you do that, you will actually see that the rays meet. They do meet. But they meat on the left-hand side
of the lens. So now, this is an example of focusing that happens not on the right-hand side of the lens, as
our equations have shown, but on the left-hand side. And we can now justify this fact if you actually
define z to be negative and f to be negative. So this is what we call a negative lens, or a lens with
negative focal length, or a lens with negative power. And if you do that now, then you will see that the
focus will appear at the left-hand side, consistent with our sign conventions. And this is what we call a
virtual image, as opposed to the case of the biconvex lens that we'll call a real image. So this is an
example of a sign conventions, not convections, the sign conventions in action. Are there any questions
about this? This is a point when I often get a lot of questions. Let me move on to a different case. And if
you think of a question. Please interrupt me, or say something aloud. Push on your microphone button
first. Let me do a slightly different case, which is what happens if you try to-- so in the previous example,
we saw how a lens can take an object at infinity and focus it to a finite distance equal to the focal length.
What I will do now is I will argue that the positive lens actually can take a point object located at one
focal distance to the left and image it at infinity. Now, why is that true? I will do this in a second. But you
can very easily justify it to yourself if you simply reverse the orientation of the rays in the previous case.
What we did before is we had the ray bundle that was starting from infinity. And the lens was focusing
it. We can very easily reverse the radiation of the rays. And if we do that, then we can see that if I have a
point source over here, it will actually get imaged at infinity. Now, of course, according to my sign
conventions, this is not the proper way to write it. We have to make sure that the light propagates from
left to right. So therefore, the correct to write, it is not what is showing over here, simply by convention,
not because this is physically wrong. But it does not obey the convention. So we never actually draw
something like this. What we draw is what is shown on the slide where the rays are propagating from
left to right. They have a focus that is a point object on the left-hand side of the lens. And then the lens,
of course, will collimate these rays. They will convert them from a divergence spherical wave to a
parallel plane wave. And therefore, we limit at infinity. The same thing can be said about the negative
lens, except in this case, the ray bundle arriving at the lens has to be convergent and has to come to a
focus on the right-hand side of the lens. So therefore, in the same way that this type of lens formed the
virtual image in the previous case, in this case, we talk about the virtual object for this type of lens. OK.
So let me now try to put this all together so it can make some sort of sense. Again, recall the first sign
convention, which sees that the light propagates from left to right. If it propagates from the left to right,
it means that the object should be to the left of anything that is of interest. And the image should be to
the right of anything that is of interest to the optical system. So that is why if an object is to the left of
the optical element, as it is in this case, then we say that the distance from the object to the element is
positive. If, on the other hand, an object happens to be on the right of an optical element, as it happens
in this case with a negative lens, then we say that the object is virtual. And the image from the object to
the element is negative, because it has to be on the right-hand side, whereas in the proper case, it had
to be on the left. That's why we put a negative sign. Now, similar things can be can be said about an
image. Except, now, the image is properly positioned or the right-hand side of the optical element. So
everything is really on the right-hand side, as it happens with a positive biconvex lens. Then the distance
from the lens to the image will be referred to as positive, whereas on the other hand, if it happens to be
on the left, as it is for the case of the negative lens, then this image will be referred to as virtual, and the
distance will be referred to as negative. Finally, and I will conclude with this, and I will let Pepe do his
demo, is how this applies to off-axis objects. So remember we derived this equation, x2 equals alpha 1
times f, for an object that is at infinity. Now, for a positive lens, because the focal length is positive, if the
angle alpha 1 is also positive, as shown here, it means that x2 must also be positive. And this is indeed
what we can verify. If we apply Snell's law repeatedly for each one of these rays, we will see that indeed
this is the case. On the other hand, if I use a negative lens, where the quantity f, the focal distance, is
negative, but the angle of arrival is still positive, then I will get x2 is negative. That is, x2 will also appear
below the optical axis, OK? So this virtual image not only appears on the left of the negative lens, but it
is also below the optical axis. OK? Now, what about an off-axis image at infinity? I will skip this
derivation. It is very similar to the derivation that we did before for the case of an object at infinity.
Basically, what I've done here is I have reversed it. I have used an object at a distance f to the left of the
lens. I have cascaded the propagation matrix for this free space propagation to the propagation method
corresponding to the lens. And I have proceeded to solve. If I do this, I will let you do it at home and
then come back tomorrow if something is unclear about this. But what I've done is I have solved it. And
when I find an equation that looks like this, I find that the angle of propagation of the ray bundle to the
right-hand side of the lens actually equals minus the elevation of the object divided by the focal length.
Or another way to write this equation is alpha 2 equals minus x1 times the power of the optical element,
according to the definition of power that I remind you by definition equals 1 over the focal length. OK.
So there's a minus sign now, which means that if we apply this equation to our positive lens, the ray
bundle that will emerge from the lens will actually now propagate downwards, OK? Because in this case,
x1 is positive and the focal length is positive, alpha 2 has to be negative. And negative alpha 2 means
that ray bundle has to propagate downwards. OK? If I do the same exercise for the negative lens, then
we can see, again, very easily that because x1, If I pick it to be positive, f is negative and I have a spare
negative sign from the equation. Then I can see that the propagation angle, alpha 2, will be positive.
That is, the image at infinity will be on the positive side, above the optical axis, OK? I hope the positive
and negative signs are not confusing. Let me restate. When I learned optics, I found this to be also
horribly confusing. So I realize and I sympathize how at the beginning, this can be a little bit confusing.
I've done my best here to present them better than the professional who taught them to me solve them.
So I hope, because I sort of used my own confusion as a guide, I hope that I managed to make it a little
bit clearer for you if it is the first time you see it. But, of course, it will become even more clearer as you
practice, OK? So the homeworks and the examples that we see later, they will make it progressively
clearer. For now, what I want you to do between now and tomorrow's lecture is to go back and make
sure that these pictures that I've drawn, that they make sense with Snell's law. In other words, what you
do is you go to the spherical surface. You imagine a normal to the surface at each point. You apply
Snell's law. And you convince yourselves that the rays bend the correct way. And this is consistent with
the way they image is formed, OK? And then you apply all the methods, all the equations, and so on and
so forth. I broke my promise and I did not leave Pepe with his 5 minutes. But that's because it took us 5
minutes to fix the figures, the display, or whatever was happening at the beginning. So hopefully, you
guys can stay for a little bit longer, so we can do the demo. Is that OK? PROFESSOR: Sure. I'll try to do it.
We'll try to do it fast. GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: Also, and look at the-- PROFESSOR: So now-- GEORGE
BARBASTATHIS: Yeah. PROFESSOR: We can switch to their cameras, please. OK. So here we go. OK so we
tried to set up these webcams because last time it was a bit hard to see the demo. So this demo has
actually two parts. But today, we're just going to show one part, namely, the refraction. And we're going
to basically witness how Fermat's principle that we've been learning in the past couple of classes, the
Snell's law, applies in these systems, like lenses or prisms that we've been learning so far. So before
actually changing the exposure, let me just show the set up. So we are going to be focusing on this half
of the set up. So hopefully, you can see it fine here. Let me just move this window. So to avoid any
problems about chromatic dispersion or wavelength-dependent behavior, we're using a laser, a green
laser. So this component here is the laser. Then this is a new component that we're going to call-- it's
called spatial filter. This, for now, it has a very interesting property that we'll learn in the second half of
the course when we learn about Fourier optics. For this first part, just think about this produces a very
nice point source object. So therefore, after this lens, there's going to be a spherical wave emanating,
propagating. So what we want to do after that is to convert that spherical wave into a plane wave, right?
So this is what this lens here is doing. And that's what we call collimation. So after this lens, as you can
see-- well, you'll see it in a second. OK. So now, I reduce the exposure of the camera, and I can see the
rays. Now, I see parallel rays. Hopefully, you can see them clearly. Could you zoom in a little bit? OK. And
we have basically parallel rays coming out of the collimated lens. So now, this brings another interesting.
As you can see, our eyes, and we'll see it next lecture, how they are really robust to focusing in different
conditions, to change illumination. And more particularly, they're adapted to high-contrast in light, like
very high intensity in the light and low intensity. Your eyes can see it fine, whereas this camera, we just
need it to change exposure, so you could be able to see that. So this is a problem of dynamic range that
occurs in optical systems. So, all right, let's look at the first component. It's this lens here. I'm going to
put cylindrical lens. It's a plano curve lens here that it's cylindrical. Basically, it means that the surface
only depends on the x-coordinate. So we'll put it here. And [INAUDIBLE] wavelength. GEORGE
BARBASTATHIS: If I may interject here. Pepe, if I may interject something? PROFESSOR: Sure, sure, sure.
GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: That equations that we derived, strictly speaking, they're for cylindrical lenses,
right, because we only use x in our equations. PROFESSOR: Yeah. GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: If you have an
x and y, then you get the proper spherical lens. So strictly speaking, this is-- PROFESSOR: Yeah. GEORGE
BARBASTATHIS: --what that equations-- PROFESSOR: Exactly. GEORGE BARBASTATHIS: OK. PROFESSOR:
So now, you can see now the ray tracing, but now done optically. You can see how the rays started
focusing in to this point here. Well, in this case, now, since this is cylindrical lens, we see that it's a line.
And I can put this card here and we see that we actually form a line instead of a point. Other nice things
to see about this lens is that so far, we've been ignoring reflections that occur with this lens. But let me
just show you some of the reflections in this cardboard here. So we'll see in the second part of the
course that these reflections are occurring, transitioning from the air and glass interface and back again.
So in these interfaces are very sensitive to the angle of incidence and to the refractive indexes of both
the lens and the surrounding media. So in this case, you can see that quite a lot of power-- so this is the
incidence wave. And you can see quite a lot of power is actually going to this side because this lens
might not be AR-coated, or coated with an anti-reflection coating as a better lens would be. So now, let's
witness Snell's law with this prism here. So you see the little rays here that are going straight. So now, I
introduce this prism shown here. It looks very dark. But believe me, there's a prism here. And then as
soon as I started putting it into the system, you see how the light starts bending to one side more. And
then you can see how basically, the tilted surface is bending the light, and I can just change the angle.
And let's now see the other phenomena that we learned in the previous class, which is TIR. So I still
rotate this more. I make the angle to be larger than the critical angle, and boom. All the light gets TIRed
and we can actually see, now that it's getting to this side. But in this side of the prism, there is a diffuser.
And that's why you see the diffused light here very bright. So I'm going to do it one more time. Without
TIR. All the light goes, escapes out straight through. And now, I start rotating this more. And then you
see TIR here. There are any questions? So I also brought a parabolic reflector for you guys, like the
people here in MIT if you guys want to see the reflection, how you see your face. Look at your face with
this parabolic reflector. It's actually quite funny to see the virtual and the real images. And in this case,
you'll see, and we'll learn in next class, how the virtual image generated by such a reflector, it's actually
not inverted. It's erected, as it's called. So I'll leave it here, so you can come after class.

Lecture_05_

The following content is provided under a Creative Commons license. Your support will help MIT
OpenCourseWare continue to offer high quality educational resources for free. To make a donation or to
view additional materials from hundreds of MIT courses, visit MIT OpenCourseWare at ocw.mit.edu. SE
BAEK OH: Good morning. My name's Se Baek, and I'm a postdoc working with Professor Barbastathis.
And he has a personal emergency today, so he couldn't make it. So actually Pepe and I will give a lecture
today. And just for a reminder, you can turn in your first homework today before class or after class. OK,
so yesterday, we talk about a bunch of different things. The first one we derived-- by the way, excuse
me, we are going to do the same thing, same format. So if you have any questions, just feel free to
interrupt and ask questions, OK? So the last time, we actually derived the ray transfer matrix for a thin
lens, which is the spherical lens has two curvatures, the first one and second one, which is here, the 1
and negative 1 over f. f is focal length and 1, 0. And the focal length 1 over f, this actually we derived this
equation, the [INAUDIBLE] equation. So if you know the reflective index and the radius curvature, the
left side and right side, then you can just easily compute the focal length of your thin lens. Then, also, we
talked about the object at infinity and the image at infinity. So for example, in this case, we have the
object at infinity. So we have this ray is coming from the infinity. And we are going to have the focus
point at the focal plane. That's the definition of the focal length and focal plane. And the other way, if
we had the point object at focal plane, then we are going to have an image at infinity. So that's the same
thing. And if you have the negative length, I mean, the focal length is negative, then we have the same
thing. We have parallel coming in. In this case, it bent outside. But if you extract and extend, then we
have the focal point here. So as you know the object and image they are conjugate. And in this case,
[INAUDIBLE] object or image is at infinity. So we call it, I mean this configuration, as infinite conjugate.
[INAUDIBLE], please. Yeah. Because, you know, one of them is at infinity. So yeah, that's what we talked
about yesterday. And today, we're going to be talking about interesting topic. So what if we have our
object or an image is at finite distance? It's more realistic case. Just like when you take a picture of your
person, I mean, of a friend, then your friend is not going to be at infinity, right? So it's more realistic
case. And then we'll talk about thick lens. Because so far, we just assume our lens is infinitely thin. So
thick lens is more like the realistic case. And then the paper we'll talk about is human visual system. So I
guess this slide is probably one of the most important slides of this whole course. Because, you know,
we are dealing with the object and image at finite distance. So the situation is like this. We have a lens
with focal length F. And in object space, we are given our object as some distance. You know, the
situation's like this. You have a camera. And you take a picture of a person. Then where should I put my
screen or detector? Or in the other way around, there must be some condition that makes the perfect
image, right? So if you take a picture at some distance, then the other object which is not at that
distance will look blurry in your final image, right? So we are going to find what condition should be
satisfied here in terms of the distance in object space and focal length and distancing image space. And
we're going to see what kind of image we will get or how big it is, OK? So the first one is, what is image.
So what it image? So image is just replicate of an object, right? So in terms of this ray picture, we have
infinite number of rays-- oh, sorry-- emanating from the object point. And if this configuration is an
image configuration, which means you make a perfect image, then all these rays, at least most of them,
they should be converge at a point in object space somewhere, right? So that's the image in question.
You have bunch of ray coming from this point, and they should meet at one point. So you can draw
many, many ways, but of your choice is just two rays here, this first ray and the second way. And since
every ray should meet at one point in image space, these two ways also should meet at the same point.
And the reason why we chose only two rays is kind of obvious, because we know the infinite conjugate
configuration, right? So the first ray, the upper ray here, this ray, it looks like coming from the object at
infinity, right? It's parallel to the optical axis. So after the lens, it should pass the focal point like this. And
we call this point as back focal plane, since it is behind the lens. And what about the second ray here? So
if you choose, that ray is passing through the focal point which is in front of the lens, we call the front
focal plane, then at the lens it looks like coming from the focal point, right? So it should be going to the
infinity. So it's collimated and parallel to the optical axis. And these two rays meet at this point. So that
point is where you get the image. And the other rays, the infinite number rays, should meet at that
point. So this is how we draw the configuration image. So we have bunch of ray and bunch of ray in
image space. Any questions so far? OK. So to find the relation between the object distance and image
distance, let's define two distance here. So first one is x0, the distance from the object to the front focal
plane. And this second one is xi, so from that focal point to the image. So we are going to see how they
relate to the focal length here. So first thing is we can compare it to a big triangle here. So the first one
is-- oops-- this triangle OPFf and this one, BCFf. Since they are similar, so if you see this height of PO and
this BC is same as h-- actually, they are h object over xo, so ho and xo. And it should be same as negative
h i. The negative sign is because h i is negative. So to make the positive, you have to put the negative
sign here. And this [INAUDIBLE], right? So you get this first relation. And you can compare the other
triangles at image space, so this ACFb and IQF, this one. So if you do the same thing, then we have this
relation. So QI, which is the image height, and FPQ, this is xi. And we have the h, the object height, over
focal length. So we have this relation and the second relation. So if you combine them, we have two
interesting equation here. The first one is h, the image of height, over x, or the object height, is xi over h
or equal to negative f over xo. And it's also same as negative xi over f. Can anyone guess what this
quantity means, So h i over ho, so image height or object height? Yes. AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] SE BAEK
OH: Right, exactly. AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] SE BAEK OH: Yeah, for he said magnification. Yeah. Course,
you know, this is a ratio of the size of the image and object. So actually, this term indicate the
magnification of your imaging system, right? So magnification actually is defined by this, just h i over ho.
If the absolute value of magnification is larger than 1, then you're going to get the magnified image.
Course, the image height is bigger than object height, right? And if it is smaller than 1, we are going to
get the smaller image, right? And if you combine the rest, these two equations, so f over x and xo and xi
over f, then you can get this equation. xo times xi should be f squared. So xo is this distance, so object to
the focal plane, the front focal plane. And xi is from that focal point to the image plane. So this tells you
where should you put the detector or object to make an image condition, right? So they are related like
this. So this is one of the form of the imaging condition. And we it Newton's form, OK? And sometimes it
is more convenient to define the distance from object to the lens, not the focal plane. So we define two
other distance, so s o, object distant from object to the lens, and image distance, si, from lens to image.
And actually in this picture in this figure, we can draw another way, which is from object to the image.
But it passed through the center of the lens, and it looks like just a path straight through the lens. And
can anyone guess why? Because at the center of the lens, at the very center, the radius curvature is kind
of infinite, right? So it just looks like just piece of flat glass. So if you have this piece of glass, then you
know from the [INAUDIBLE] law the incident ray and the outgoing ray, they are parallel, right, if you
have the same median here and here. And also, we are talking about the very thin lens here. So we
don't really consider the thickness of the lens. So that's why it looks like just passing straight through the
lens. So you can draw actually three rays here, so the first one, this one, and this one, and this one. And
then you can compare two, actually, another big triangles, so OCA this one, and IQC, this one. So if you
compare that triangle, then we're going to get-- so CA over CB, so CA [INAUDIBLE] CB, which is the,
actually, magnification here, ho over negative h i should be same as this object distance and image
distance. So this tells you, if you have the object distance and image distance, they are related to the
magnification. So if your object is very far away from the lens, then you're going to get very small image,
right? Because you have [INAUDIBLE]. So you have the very big one here, so you're going to get a small
one. But if you move your object to the lens, then there are big change. You're going to get the
magnified one, magnified image. And if you combine this equation and this relation and these two, then
we are going to have the si over s o. And it's the same as f over xo. So xo is actually s o minus f, right, so
s o minus f. Yeah, let me do the [INAUDIBLE],, please. So let me rewrite that equation. I just flip the
numerator and denominator. So s o over si is same as s o minus f and f. And it should be same as s o
over f. And it's minus 1, right? And I divide by s o here. So I get 1 over si should be 1 over f-- AUDIENCE:
[INAUDIBLE] s i or [INAUDIBLE] s o, or so over [INAUDIBLE]? SE BAEK OH: No, I just flipped the
numerator, denominator. So it was si over s o, but I wrote s o over si. So this one also flips, right, s o
minus f over f. And I end up with 1 over si equal to 1 over f minus 1 over s o, which is the final equation.
So we call this the lens law. So 1 over object distance versus 1 over image distance should be 1 over f.
So, yeah. So actually, that's the equation in most of time we are going to use. OK, so we just finished
probably one of the most important slides. Any questions? So by using this equation, we can analyze
different situation. So let's first see the four different situation here. We have positive lens and negative
lens. And the upper left situation is what we just described. So the object distance is longer than front
focal length. So you draw the two rays, the upper one and right one. And you just trace them, and they
meet at one point. And you're going to get the image. And we call this one as real image, because all this
ray MRI is departing at that point. They actually meet at this point. So if you put a screen there, then you
can actually see those image of the object. So that's why we call the real image. And it's inverted, right?
Because it was going up right. It's down right. And magnification is definitely small. It's negative, because
inverted. And also, if you see the distance, object distance, this one and this one, then you can easily see
you're going to have-- actually, it depends on the object distance, but yeah. And in terms of equation, so
this s o is bigger than focal length, right? So this 1 over s o is actually smaller than 1 over f. So si should
be positive. You need to add something, right? Because this one is smaller than this one. So that's why
we have the si, which is positive distance here. But if you think about this situation, so object distance
now is smaller than focal length. It's closer than the front focal plane. Then you can still draw these two
rays. One is parallel to the optical axis. And the other one is passing through the front focal plane. But
after the lens, actually they don't meet, because they are diverging. So if you back trace, then they
actually meet in front of the lens. So we call this as a virtual image, because it looks like coming from
that point. But if you put a screen there, the-- just a second. So [INAUDIBLE],, I'm not using the
[INAUDIBLE] right now. So OK, thanks. So if you put the screen there, then you don't really see the actual
image. It just looks like these two rays behind the lens, they look coming from this point. So that's the
definition of the virtual image. And as you can see here, we have the erect image. And it's bigger than
the original object, which is green. So magnification is bigger than 1. In terms of the equation, so now s o
is smaller than f. So 1 over s o is actually bigger than 1 over f, right? So actually this guy should be
negative, which means si also should be negative, which indicate your image distance is negative. So you
are going to have the image in front of your lens, right? And the negative lens, we have the negative
focal length here. So that's why the front focal plane is actually behind the lens, not in front of the lens.
So you can still draw these two rays, but they don't meet. They make a virtual image in front of the lens.
And we have the virtual and erect image and magnification. We get actually the smaller image. And if
you do the same thing here, we are going to get the virtual, erect. And it's also smaller image. OK, so, so
far, we just talk about the thin lens and how they make the image-- sorry, Pepe will pass around the
convex lens, which was the upper case. So if you move your screen or eyes, then you can see actually it
was inverted, but it's erect. So you have to see the flipped image, right? So he's going to pass around.
GUEST SPEAKER: So one way to do it is just look at the lens, look at your notebook. And you can have it
just at the right distance, the image would look inverted and floating on top of the lens, which is the real
image. And if you put it closer, which means that now we have the second case there, the image will be
erect, so not inverted anymore, and would look behind the lens, right? So it's actually pretty dramatic,
the change. SE BAEK OH: Yeah. Actually, the upper right configuration is the exact same from as
magnifier. So you know, magnifier that detective are using? Yeah, So the next question is, what if we
have multiple lenses like this, this case? So here we have two lenses. Each one has a focal length of 10.
So let's say unit is a millimeter. So the focal length, is just 10 millimeter, 10 millimeter. And the gap
between the lens is 5 millimeter. And we are given an object, which is the distance from the object to
the first lens is just 5 millimeter. And we want to find what kind of image we get and where it is at
somewhere around here. So can anyone guess how to do it? Because we just talk about a single lens,
but what if we have the multiple lens? No one? So actually the answer is pretty straightforward. So you
just cascade, which means your first [INAUDIBLE] the first lens. So you just find the image of the object
through the first lens. And that image becomes the object to the second lens. And do the same thing to
find the image. And if you have more lens, you just repeat the same process, OK? So let's first try it. So
here I just neglect the second lens. I only have the first lens, which has the object distance 5 millimeter.
And the focal length is 10. So I can draw the two or three rays to find the image. But to be precise, I just
plug into equation. So 1 over 5, which is this distance, the 5 is this distance. We want to find the image
distance. If it is positive, then we are going to get real image. But if it is negative, then we are going to
get the virtual image here. And it should be 1 over 10, which is the focal length, right? And it turns out
that this s prime, this image distance, is actually negative 10, which means we have the negative image,
which is in front of the lens. This distance is 10 millimeter. And if you compare the magnification, which
is defined by the object distance and image distance, so it's negative, there is a negative side. So
negative, negative, negative 10 over 5 is actually 2. So we have a erect virtual image which is twice larger
than original image. This is the first lens. And this image is now an object to the second lens. So we had
the virtual image here, which was the 10 millimeter in front of the lens. But if you only think about
second lens, then this object distance should be 15 millimeter, right? So if you do the same thing. so
now we have the 1 over 15 from here to here. And we want to find the image distance. 1 over s prime
should be 1 over 10, which is just positive 30 millimeter. So after 30 millimeter, we are going to have the
real image. And if you compare the magnification of the second lens, then it's negative 30 over 15. So
we have the negative 2. So we have the real image here, which is inverted one. And that is twice larger
than this virtual-- I mean, the object of the second image. Because, actually, we initially had two lens like
this. So the overall magnification is just multiplication of individual magnification. So first one was
positive 2. And this is negative 2. So the final magnification is minus 4. So the answer to the question is
we are going to have the inverted real image behind the second lens, which is 30 millimeter behind the
second lens, and which is 4 times larger than the original object. So if you have fewer lens, like 2 or 3,
then this approach is pretty straightforward, right? We just consider one by one. And just apply the lens
law, and you're going to get the right answer. OK. So the previous slide we just derived the imaging
condition, which was the xo times xi should be x squared or 1 over s o plus 1 over si is 1 over f. We just
derived those equations from the geometry, right? We just compared the few triangles and get the final
equations. Well, I can do the same thing with the ray matrix transform. So let me do [INAUDIBLE],,
please. So the way you do it, in the ray transfer matrix, you first define the angle and height in object
space and image, right? So here I have alpha i and xi, which is this angle and the height of the image, h i
actually. And the input was xo and ho. It's just this angle and this height. This ray is propagating from left
to right, but I write the metrics from right to left, right? So first thing is the propagation from here to
here, which is the distance by s o. So the first matrix should be 1 0, s 1, am I right? Oh, as oh Yes so we
just first consider from here to here. And then you have the lens, which we just derived last time, which
was 1 negative 1 over f, 0 and 1. And the next one is from here to here, the same propagation. So we
have 1 0, si 1. So this is the matrix formulation in this case. So if I compute these matrices, then actually I
get this equation. So let me write s o f si plus s o minus si s o f 1 over f, 1 minus i over f ho. So can you
explain the imaging condition from this matrix? So we just derived the relation between angle and
height in object, for the angle and height in image. And we have the transfer matrix here. So what's the
imaging condition in this case? So let's go back to the first [INAUDIBLE].. So what is the image? So we
have a bunch of rays starting from the object point. And then all they arrive at the same point in the
image, right? So if you just think about the h i and ho here, so at that point all these rays have the same
height, ho. But they have different alpha o, these guys, right? But the image aside, the same thing, all
these rays they have the same height, h i. But they have a different angle, alpha i. So if you just compare
the h i and ho, you know, those rays, even though they have different angles, but they have the same
height, which means actually this h i should be independent from alpha 0. Because no matter how they
depart at that point, they have the same height here, right? So the answer is actually this term, because
this is alpha i and h i. So this term should be 0. Because as I just described, h i should be independent on
alpha object, right? So if I do the math, then this is 1 over-- I just divide by s o and si. So this one is 1 over
s o plus 1 over si minus 1 over f. It should be 0, which is, again, the lens law. Yeah, so that's the
[INAUDIBLE] I described. And if I plug in this equation in this matrix, finally I get these matrices So if I
continue at this occasion then minus x over F1 of them zero minus x I over f OK so the upper right on is
we still have a negative on about f which is our last power or optical power and what is this time the
upper limit Yeah this the last time negative x I over f anyone and there It's easy one. Press the button,
please. AUDIENCE: Magnification? SE BAEK OH: Yes. Since this time is 0, so if you think about the second
row here, then you have the h i is just this guy multiplied by ho, right? So if you just think about the
second element here, then h i is negative xi over f, which is ho or object height. So this time actually tells
you the relation between the object height and image height, which is the magnification. So I should say
the lateral magnification, because we are talking about the size. So this term is magnification. And it
turns out that the upper left term, this term, we call the angular magnification. Because there is related
with the alpha i and alpha o. To be more precise, actually angular magnification is defined by the ratio of
change in the image angle and object angle. And if you do the math, then we finally get this term,
negative xo over f. And it turns out that the angular magnification is 1 over lateral magnification. Yes.
AUDIENCE: Yeah, what's the idea of angular magnification? We understand that lateral magnification
means how much the object is scaled. Yes. But in the case of imaging, what does it mean? SE BAEK OH:
That's actually a good question. So actually, if you see the definition of the angular magnification, it's
actually there is the delta, right? So this delta alpha change in image angle over change in object angle,
which means let's think about us those rays here and here. So you have the ray angle in object space
and another ray in image space. If you change this angle in object space, then you're going to also
change the angle in ray, I mean in this side, the image space. So actually, angular magnification tells you
how they are related. So if you change this much, then what do you get in this side? How much change
you get in image space? So I guess that's the proper interpretation of angular magnification. It's the
answer to your question? AUDIENCE: Yeah, thanks. SE BAEK OH: Yeah. AUDIENCE: And does it relate to
numerical aperture in some sense? SE BAEK OH: Sure. Actually, the angular magnification is xo over f,
right? AUDIENCE: Yeah. SE BAEK OH: Not really. Yeah, it just depend on the-- you know, in this case we
don't have the notion of the size of the lens here. AUDIENCE: Yeah. SE BAEK OH: So it's not related.
Yeah. AUDIENCE: Yeah, thanks. SE BAEK OH: Any more question? I'm supposed to go very slowly, but
there's no questions. Then let's talk about the next topic, so thick lens. So, so far, we just think about
just thin lens. All these were ray transfer matrices or imaging condition. We just consider the thin lens,
which has the two curvature. But we didn't really account for the thickness of the lens. But if you think
about the real lens we've just seen, the biconvex lens, actually they have finite thickness, like this. So
you have the first surface and second surface, but it has the finite thickness. So what is the more
accurate or, I should say, more rigorous way to model, to make a model for this lens? This answer is
obvious, right? So you just first take the refraction at first surface and just propagate the array inside the
glass, right? And then take the second refraction at this second surface. So that's, you know, the proper
way to describe. So I can do the ray transfer matrix here. Yeah. So we start with the alpha 1 and x1,
which is the angle and height in left side and alpha 2 and x2. So it's alpha 2 and x2 and alpha 1 and x1.
And the first matrix should be the refraction at this first surface. So it should be one negative left to right
and R1 1 0. By the way, is R1 positive or negative? So R1 is the curvature, radius of curvature this first
surface. We talked about that last time. If the center of the radius curvature is that way, I mean, which is
the positive way, then this radius curvature is positive. So actually R1 is positive. And next matrix should
be propagation from first surface to the second surface, which is 1 0 d over n. So don't forget n in
denominator, because it's not [INAUDIBLE]. The ray is propagating inside the glass. And the last matrix
should be 1 and minus negative R left to right and radius curvature 1 0. So these three matrices describe
this thick lens, right? So we just consider the two reflection and the propagation through the glass. And
if I compute these matrices, then I get then actually M21 M22. So I'll get the four different elements,
right, which is-- AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] SE BAEK OH: So actually if you compute those three matrices, I
get this one. But I just symbolize M11, and M12, and-- AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] SE BAEK OH: Which one?
AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] SE BAEK OH: d over n. AUDIENCE: d over n. SE BAEK OH: Yeah. Because distance
is d, but the reflective [INAUDIBLE] is n. So you need to divide by n. Because, previously, we had the thin
lens, which is just thin lens like this and incoming ray. They converge at point like this. And this was focal
length, right? And the ray transfer matrix for this thin lens was 1 negative 1 over f, 0 and 1, right? So we
get the-- yes? AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] SE BAEK OH: Oh, where? Oh. [INAUDIBLE] I'm sorry, yes. All right,
so it should be n minus 1 and 1 minus n. Yeah, it's confusing. Actually, the way I remember is the
reflective index at left side minus the reflective index right side. But there was negative sign, so yeah. I
got [INAUDIBLE]. Yeah. Thank you. Sorry. Yeah. So what I was going to talk about is if we have the thin
lens, then the ray transfer matrix it was the 1 negative 1 over f and 1 0. But now, we have the thick lens.
That's why we have complicated these four terms. But we get the same analogy of distance, because
distance describe how much ray bend, right, the optical power or lens power. So we get the same thing
here, which is actually this complicated term, this term. And since it is a thick lens, we define a new
quantity which is effective focal length. So we consider that is a single quantity which was negative 1
over effective focal length. So effective focal length is actually the quantity inside the bracket, so n minus
1 and 1 over R1 minus 1 over R2. And we have extra term. So what is this term, the n minus 1 and 1 over
R1 minus 1 over R2? Yeah. Actually, that's what I described at the very first slide, right? So that's the lens
maker's equation. So focal length of thin lens and you can compute the focal length from the reflective
index and radius curvature, right? But now we have thick lens, so we have extra term, this function of
the d, the distance from the first and second surface. So if you consider a thick lens, then the effective
focal length is not same as the focal length, right? So we just find the-- AUDIENCE: Where is the focal
length measured from? Is it from the middle of the lens? SE BAEK OH: That's what I was going to talk
about, yeah. AUDIENCE: OK. SE BAEK OH: So we just find the effective focal length of the thick lens. But,
yeah, the exactly, where the focus will be? That's the next question, right? Because we didn't define any
planes yet. So let's think about it. So first one is back focal plane. So we have an object at infinity. And so
we have the ray parallel to the optical axis. And they bend twice, here and here. And finally, they want
to make our focus at here. So this is focal plane. And we can define the focal length from this point, OK?
To find that point-- actually, this distance, right? So actually, we defined this distance as back focal
plane, so from the second surface of the lens to this back focal plane. And then what I'm going to do is
find the distance by ray transfer matrices. So what I do is, so same as before, alpha 2 and x2, which is
here. But you know, the x2 is 0, because it is on the optical axis, right? So it is actually 0. And input is
alpha 1 and x1, this one, so this x1 and angle. But since it is parallel to the optical axis, the alpha 1 is 0.
And I just derived the ray transfer matrix of the thick lens, this guy. I mean this whole guy. So I have
M11, M12, M21, M22. And it's not the end, right? So we have to propagate again from here to here by
distance zb. So it's going to be 1 0 zb 1. So if you solve this equation, then-- so this is just what I've
written. So we have the 1 0, zb 1. And this is our M matrices. And if you solve this equation, then we get
two [INAUDIBLE],, right? We had the two equations. So one is alpha 2 is negative x1 and effective focal
length. So this sign means this alpha 2 is heading downward. So the amplitude means x1 over effective
focal length. And zb is actually effective focal length times 1 minus this guy. So in this case, actually the
zb is bigger than effective focal length or smaller than effective focal length. You know, in this case, n is
bigger than 1. So this guy is positive. So zb is actually smaller than effective focal length, right? Wake up,
guys. So we define this distance zb as a back focal length. And we just talk about the effective focal
length, the quantity in the bracket. And the 1 over effective focal length is power, the lens power or
optical power of this thick lens. So this distance is the effective focal length. This is the answer to your
question. And we can do the same thing in the other side. So we start from the point. We don't know
where it is yet, but the focal point in front of the lens, which is the front focal plane, front focal point.
And they bend twice. And finally, they get collimated, because it's going to the image at infinity. So the
ray matrices, in this case, are alpha 2 and x2 and alpha 1 and x1. But now, we start from the point on the
optical axis. So x1 should be 0. And at the end, we are going to have the x2, but alpha 2 equals 0. So this
should be 0. And first matrices we should consider is this propagation by the zf, right? So it's going to be
1 0 zf 1. And then we have the thick lens, so M11, M12, M21, M22. And if you solve this equation, then
we also get the 2 [INAUDIBLE],, which is the front focal length, which is zf from here to here. And this is
what you get. And the second in x2 is alpha 1 times effective focal length. Question? I guess it's time to
break. Yeah. Let's take a break here. So next time, I'm going to continue to explain these front focal
length and back focal length and how they are related. And meantime, we had the demo set up here. So
you're welcome to come and see. And what we have here is actually the imaging set up. We have a
single lens here and object, which is the resolution target. And we have the screen here. So if you move
this screen back and forth or lens and the image-- we cannot move the object. So basically we're going
to demonstrate the imaging condition. So if the distance is properly located, then we are going to see
the very nice image. But if not, then the image looks blurry. GUEST SPEAKER: So before we continue with
all the math, some of you came to see the demo. And for the ones that didn't come, I suggest you to
come after class. It's easier to see the image we try to form, because we don't have the dynamic range
problem that any camera has. But anyways, the main idea of this demo is to show what we've been
learning about, an imaging of a single lens, right? So if you can summarize this points so far what we've
learned, we've learned the thin lenses, thick lenses, right? So it's just a refractive element that is capable
of forming an image from a given point, either at infinity or a close distance, to another plane. That's
what we learned. Another important point that we've learned today is the imaging condition, right?
Imaging condition is just depending on three variables, the distance from the lens to the image plane, si,
the distance from the lens to the object plane, s o, and the focal length, right? This is one of the most
important things. Because basically this tells you, if I want to have an in-focus very sharp, nice image, I
can either play with two of variables, keep one constant. So for example, in these demo what I'm going
to show you is how a single lens, a positive lens, performs imaging of a thin transparency. So in this case,
I'm going to start showing here how I'm illuminating this transparency, which is here. It's just a piece of
glass that has some dark coded lines of different sizes. It's called a resolution target. And we're
illuminating these with white light from the back. So it's just like transparency for an overhead projector
you can think of. Then this is a positive lens here that will basically form an image at another screen
here, right? So now, let's look at these quantities physically that we've learned in the math here. This
distance from here to here is the object distance. That's the s o from the equation. This lens has a fixed
focal length, which I cannot change. It's just a piece of glass curved in a given way. So this distance here
is the distance to the image plane. So these two distances I really can change, A, to get a sharp focus to
make sure that my image is exactly on my screen, and/or if I want to play with a magnification. Because
remember from the math, if you can see the notes before, that the lateral magnification depends on the
ratio of minus si, which is these distance, over s o, which is this distance, right? So let's lower the
exposure here just to see the image that we have here, please. All right, so we lowered the exposure
again for the same reasons of dynamic range. So I'm going to try to focus here on the image. So this is
the image that we are forming on the screen. And as you can see, so there is a bunch of lines, stripes,
and squares with numbers. And it's very sharply in focus. So now what I'm going to do, and hopefully we
can see it with a camera, is that I'm going to change the ratio between these two distances. So what if,
for example, I want to demagnify my image? So the magnification quantities I use describe si over s o.
Forget about the minus sign. The minus sign just tells you that it's an inverted image. si over s o, I want
that quantity smaller. What should I do? I'm going to repeat the question one more time. Magnification
equal to 1, I want magnification, say, less than 1. How can I reduce that M number? M equals minus si
over s o. AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] GUEST SPEAKER: What? AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] GUEST SPEAKER: OK.
Just push the button and repeat what you just said. AUDIENCE: Increase the distance s o, so you move it
closer to the screen. GUEST SPEAKER: So if I move the lens closer to the screen, effectively I reduce si,
the imaging distance. So let's try it. So I'm going to move these lens closer to this side. So s o increases,
of course. And I can just look at the right position here for focus. So now, this distance is smaller. And it's
hard to see with a webcam, but the image is still in focus. It's smaller, demagnified respect to the one
that I showed you before. But yeah, that basically will accomplish this, right? So for this part, if you can
come and play with these distances later after class, you will see how this relationship works, right? So
in this case, we have these two variables, the s o and si that we're playing at. But as we'll see in a
second, for the eye, it's a very different story. Because in the eye, the lens of the eye and the retina, so
in this case would be your si, is fixed. You cannot change it. It's the shape of your eye. So how can the
eye focus far distance objects or when you read nearby objects? So it has to do similar tricks playing in
the imaging conditions, such that it always has a sharp image. The way the eye does it, and we'll see it in
a second, is by changing the focal length. So now, the two variables become f and s o. And you can do
the same trick. So this was a positive lens. We will learn about negative power lenses, so the ones are
curved like this, right? So in these ones, we've learned that these generate these weird non-intuitive
virtual images, right? So I was just asking the students that came here, what did they expect to see if I
put this lens here? Anyone wants to guess other than the students that already answered the question?
What do you think will-- let me put it in this way. Would I see an image and where? Or should I not see
anything if I put this negative lens? Image or no image? Singapore? AUDIENCE: Unless you form the
image with another lens, you don't see it. GUEST SPEAKER: OK, let's try it. I put the negative lens.
Actually, I'm going to put it in this. Oh. We lost the video. Give me just one second. All right, so I put the
negative lens. Let me move it back and forth. And yeah, you can see here I have just a bright patch of
light, no image, right? So you said that, if we use another lens, we can make that image into a real
image. What type of lens do you think we need to add and where? OK, I'll answer that one. OK. You can
answer? AUDIENCE: A positive lens after the negative lens, before the screen? GUEST SPEAKER: Exactly.
So essentially, physically what this is doing is that the light going out from the object gets even bent
outwards more, right? So it basically essentially forms a virtual object behind the lens, right? So the
positive lens, what it's going to do is grab these outward rays and focus them back into the screen to
form an image. And let's just try it. Now, I have the two lenses. Just make sure that the exposure is--
We're reducing the exposure. Oh, it's hard to see here, but there's lines again, right? So then we have an
image. So essentially, as I was mentioning before, this is what our eye would do for us when we see
virtual images. We have a visual image, and our eye is the lens that focuses this light and converts this
virtual image into a real image, right? We'll understand more how the eye works in a second. So I think
we're going to switch back to the normal class mode. Thanks for the presentation. SE BAEK OH: OK, so
we were talking about the thick lens. So by using ray transfer matrices, we just derived the effective
focal length of a thick lens. And we defined the back focal plane, back focal length, and the front focal
length, which is function of effective focal length. And let's see how they are related. So first one we
have the infinite conjugate configuration. So we have an object at infinity. And at back focal plane, we
have focus. And we just derived the two equations, which is alpha 2 is x1 over effective focal length. And
that focal length is effective focal length times some extra factor. And what I'm going to do here is I just
measure the effective focal length from the back focal plane. And since the back focal length it means
the focal plane to the second surface is shorter than the effective focal length, so actually in this case we
are going to have the plane, the virtual plane, inside of the glass. And from that equation, which is alpha
2 and alpha 2 equal x1 over effective focal length, it turns out that if you extend this ray over here and
this ray over here they actually meet at that plane. So it's essentially you can think, even though you
have thick lens, but you have thin lens there. So ray just-- propagating from straight and at this plane
and bend and make a focus there. So we call this plane a second principal plane, because it's associated
with a back focal plane. So it is a second principal plane. And you can do the same thing in the other
side, of course. So we had different focal plane. And I measure from here to here by effective focal
length. And effective focal length is actually longer than the front focal plane, zf, from here to there. So
it's still inside the glass. And if you extend out those rays, actually they meet at this plane. So we call this
first principal plane. So I just put these two figures together. So I have thick lens. And we have different
focal point. And this distance [INAUDIBLE] the surface of the lens is front focal length. And we defined
the same thing here. So we have the back focal point. And we defined the back focal length from here to
here. And from the ray transfer matrix, we defined the effective focal length of this thick lens. So we
defined the first principal plane and second principal plane. And that's the effective focal length. And so
conceptually, these thick lens can be assumed. We already computed ray transfer matrices, right? So we
can conceptually think we have the thin lens, but it's the first surface in a infinite thin lens. The first
surface and second surface is actually the first principal plane and the second principal plane. And if you
remember the infinite conjugate configuration, if ray from the object at infinity, so it's propagating
parallel to the optical axis, then it bends at the second principal plane and make focus at back focal
plane. And same thing here if you have the point object at the different focal plane. And it bends at the
first principal plane, and collinate it, and goes to the infinity. So actually reason why we introduced this
concept, the principal plane and effective focal length is actually pretty simple. Because we start with
the thin lens, but now we had the thick lens. So what if we have multiple lenses, like thick lenses? So no
matter how complicated the optical system is, we can always find the effective focal length and this first
and second principal plane. So once we have this first and the second principal plane and effective focal
length, f here, then we can treat this whole system as one thin lens. So for example-- come on. So we
have the object in object space. And ray, it's exactly the same as a thin lens. We choose two rays, right?
So the first one is bent at the second principal plane. And it's passed through the back focal plane-- back
focal point, sorry. And the second ray goes through the front focal point and it bend at the first principal
plane. And it's collimated. And they meet at some point. So you can easily find the image even though
your system is pretty complicated. But once you find these two principal plane and effective focal
length, then you can still use the same equation as a thin lens. Come on. Yeah, all these equations. So
you can define the same thing, xo and s o, the image distance and object distance like this. And you can
use the same equation, so Newton's form, xo times xi equals to f squared. And the lens law, 1 over
object distance plus 1 over image distance, should be 1 over f. So f is effective focal length in this case.
And the lateral magnification and angular magnification, they're defined the same way. And I just want
to mention that the-- yes? AUDIENCE: Where is [INAUDIBLE] on that picture? Because the effective focal
length you talked about depends on the [INAUDIBLE] between the first [INAUDIBLE].. SE BAEK OH: So
actually, the effective focal length depend on the stuff inside of the neuro-optical system. So the thick
lens we just consider one thick lens-- so one, the first surface, and lens, and second surface. But I'm
going to actually talk about that later. But what if we have two lens? So we first consider first lens and
propagation and the second lens. So you can define the effective focal length the same way, OK? So in
this case, the effective focal length is not related to the aperture or whatever. It just depend on the
reflective index and distance between the optical element. AUDIENCE: But in the effective focal length
you've got the parameter b, [INAUDIBLE].. SE BAEK OH: Yeah, distance between the elements, right?
AUDIENCE: OK, so that's width of the lens? SE BAEK OH: Yes. AUDIENCE: So-- SE BAEK OH: Yeah? Yeah.
AUDIENCE: Over here we have this duality between x object and x image, but we always have 1f. Is that
only because we're assuming that the lens has the same radius of curvature on either side for now? SE
BAEK OH: No, no. AUDIENCE: Or is it always just 1f? SE BAEK OH: No, no. So effective focal length is just
function of-- yeah, maybe it's confusing, but the-- so in this thick lens, the effective focal length is just
function of the radius curvature and reflective index and d, right? So the concept of this effective focal
length and principal plane, we treat the whole system as one thing lens. And one thing lens has the
same focal length in front side and rear side, right? So effective focal length is already same in front side
and the back side of the lens. But it depends on the system. Because right now, I just talk about this
thick lens. So that's why we have only, 1, 2, 3, 4 parameter here. But if I have another thick lens as
[INAUDIBLE] here, then effective focal length is more complicated, right? So it's also a function of the
reflective index, and distance, and the curvature of the second lens, OK? Now, we'll talk about-- I mean,
actually I'll show you [INAUDIBLE].. AUDIENCE: So for one lens, you always have one effective focal
length to characterize the entire lens? SE BAEK OH: Yeah. AUDIENCE: No matter what the sides are? SE
BAEK OH: Yeah. So let's say if you have the 100 length. But you can always find the one effective focal
length. Yeah. So actually, if you have a digital camera, then typically you have multiple lens, or three or
four or five. But you only have the one focal length in it. I mean, they only specify one focal length,
right? So that is actually effective focal length. So they already compute this whole thing, OK? So that's
the reason why we introduced this concept. And I just want to mention the center ray which is starting
from the object point, but is incident on the center at the first principal plane. And if you remind the thin
lens case, then at the thin lens that ray actually just pass through the center of the ray, right? So the
same here, so that ray is starting again at the second principal plane, at the center of the second
principal plane. And it goes to the image. And of course, if you have the same medium in front of the
principal plane and behind the principal plane, then this angle and this angle are same, right? Because
you know, at the center you will just have a piece of glass. So by the [INAUDIBLE] law, they should be
parallel. OK, actually, that's about it. So the take home message is we just talk about the imaging
condition. Anyway, by the way, he's going to talk about the human visual system. So take home message
of my part is we just talk about imaging condition, which is 1 over s o and plus 1 over si is 1 over f. And
there are some mathematical way to find or to write the condition, OK, which is the ray transfer
matrices. And we just introduced the front focal length and back focal length and principal planes. But I
didn't really talk about how to find this principal place OK so let me finish we are hard to find the
principal place if you have multiple elements which he was the of course we have the two example of
two lenses so that completes so initially we had the example that two lens which has focal length is 10,
10. And distance is 5 millimeter. And the object was also 5 [INAUDIBLE].. By the way, Professor
Barbastathis, he posted a different way to do it, to find where the image is, or how big it is, and where is
the principal plane, and what's the effective length. He summarized all these different method, and he
posted on a [INAUDIBLE] website in a supplement material. So please go to the website and review it.
And it looks complicated. But once [INAUDIBLE],, then it's pretty straightforward. And you will never
forget. You're not going to forget. So please do it. I strongly suggest you. So let's continue how to find
the principal planes here. So there are a bunch of different ways. So I'm going to do the first one the
easy way. So let's first find the back focal plane first, because we know. The definition of the focal plane,
if you remind the thin lens, like this, then these incoming rays, they converged at one point, right? So in
this case, let's first assume I have the ray coming from infinity like this. And I do the cascade method. So
I just consider first lens here. And where is my image? Actually, we already computed, like, it's already
computed. So this focal length is distance 10, right, so distance f. So by the first lens, I draw only one ray
here. This is parallel to the optical axis. So third ray actually goes to the focal point of the first lens,
which is 10, right? But we do have the second lens here. So if you do the lens equation, then actually it
bends more. So finally, what you get is it coming in, bend like this. It's supposed to go like this, but it
bend more like this. So this point is back focal point of these two lens system. And if you do the same
thing, so you extend the [INAUDIBLE] ray like this, and if you extend like this, then where they meet,
actually that's the position of the second principal plane. Because you have all the numbers, you can
easily find the position of this guy. And so this distance is actually the effective focal length. And the
distance from the second lens to the back focal point is actually back focal length. So we just find the
second principal plane here, second principal plane. And you can do the same thing in object side. You
start with the point source on optical axis. And at the end, you're going to get the collimated light. So
since it is symmetric, so it's actually you're going to put the ray like this and bend like this. And it's finally
collimated. So if you do the same thing, then you're going to get the first principal plane here. And this is
effective focal length, which is same as before. And you can find the front focal plane, front focal length.
So that's the just conceptual way to find the principal plane and effective focal length. But if you want to
be accurate or precise, then you can always use the ray transfer matrix. So let me do this. We have two
lens, focal length f. So let's start with actually this interface at the end of the second lens. So we have
here alpha o and xo and here alpha i and xi. So I have alpha i xi, alpha o and xo. And I assume this lenses
are thin lenses. So first matrices should be 1 over 1 and negative 1 over f and 0 1. And next one is the
propagation from here to here. So this should be 1 0. Actually, this is 4 1, because-- that's 5, 5. And the
second lens, it should be same as the first one, 1, 1 over negative f 0 1. So if you could compute this one,
then you are going to get this is 1 minus 1 0 and 1 0, 5 1, and 1 minus 1 10, 1 0, 0. And you're getting, it
should be, 1 over 2 negative 3 over 20 and 5 1 over 2 and alpha object and x object. So I should remind
the thin lens case, which is 1 minus 1 over f 0 1. So actually this guy is 1 over effective focal length. So in
this case, effective focal length should be 20 over 3. So this is how to find the effective focal length by
using ray transfer matrices. And you can find the back focal length and front focal length. Just cascade
another propagation, you know, just like what we did in class. So here and here, you can find the back
focal plane, back focal plane, and front focal plane, and front focal length, and, you know, first and
second principal plane. So since Professor posted the detailed material, he actually derived four
different rays. So please visit the website and do it by yourself. Thank you. GUEST SPEAKER: OK. So, so
far, we've been learning about lenses and some sort of imaging techniques and principles. But more
than that, we've learned about some optical principles that regulate how light propagates, namely
refraction, reflection so far, total internal reflection. So now the question is, how does nature does it?
And how has it evolved over the past several, several years? And it actually comes down, according to
these reference here, to eight different possible configurations of eyes. And just by the way, defining an
eye is more complicated than just a simple photoreceptor. So an eye, it's a little bit more evolved like
some sort of forming either an image or a shadow based system. So these type of eyes can be broadly
categorized or divided into chamber eyes, the ones that I'm showing here, OK? So let's look at these
eyes here and see what principles apply from what we've learned so far. So in C and in D, we can see
what? Snell's law, right? So this is refraction. So these type of eyes, again, like our human eye, focus the
light and form an image in some sort of photoreceptors located here, right? Then we have also
reflection based. These lenses here-- I'm sorry, this mirror base here where the light gets reflected and
forms an image in a photoreceptor here. And now, we also have another one that is an aperture based,
or you can think of these has been as a natural pin hole. And these images form by shadows, right? So
you see the shadow difference. So these are the four types of chamber eyes. But even more older type
of eyes, we have the compound eye, as we said in the very first lecture. They're made out of a
segmented array of many apertures or many elements. You can think about like many lenses for the
case of our refractive based system. Or for our reflective based system, it's several apertures that reflect
the light somewhere here and also focus it into some photoreceptive sensor. Or in this case, for
instance, here, each one of these segments sees a very tiny field of view and integrates all that field of
view into that photoreceptor. So in reality, it's not like the type of images that we're used to, right? It's
just sort of like a blurry version of our images in this case. But of course, of very important interest to us
is how the human eye works. Because as we know, we've experienced-- we have eyes-- it's an extremely
robust and very elaborate optical system. I just said one of the problems we've had with the demo is the
adaptive to dynamic range. Our eyes can do that very well. We can also go to read a book or just look at
something far away. And we can focus pretty well, too, right? So all these things and all these
adaptations regulate these optical principles that we presented are actually what made a lot of
researchers to try to study the eye and how the eye perceives light. So that's under the field of visual
perception. So this is the structure of the eye. The eye, it's essentially a sphere. And it's all covered by
some white opaque layer called the sclera. And that basically blocks straight light going through. The
only transparent section of the eye is the cornea, here. So in the cornea, the light can go through. And
the cornea is the first refractive element of the eye. It's curved. It has a refractive index of something
like 1.37, which basically is the largest bending of light. Because it comes from air to this 1.37 element.
So that's why you can think of that when you are actually swimming it's hard to see. Why? Because the
index of refraction of water is 1.33, very close to that of the cornea. So then the bending of light that
occurs in this first layer is very minimal. So after the cornea, we have some chamber filled with a
solution called aqueous humor, which basically nourishes the eye, especially the cornea, keeps it alive.
That is very similar to water. Now, we have then the iris. The iris is the element that controls-- well, it's
functional purpose is to control the amount of light that your eye receives. So as we know, the iris
expands and contracts depending on the amount of light present in the environment. And actually, it's
very impressive. It can go from, like, 2 millimeters in diameter to 8 millimeters in diameter depending on
the light condition. But it's also responsible for the nice color of the eyes that we see, like blue eyes,
green eyes, you know? That's the one to blame. The aperture or the hole that we have is what we call
the pupil. So after the iris, we have the second most-- yeah? AUDIENCE: Does the color of the eye
[INAUDIBLE]?? GUEST SPEAKER: No. It's due to-- and actually it's very interesting. So no, it basically just
blocks the light. It acts like an aperture, like of the aperture of your camera. So if you like, photography
would control the speed or the f number of your system. But the light reflected from the eye gets the
color in a similar principle to why the sky is blue. And I'll just let you investigate, because actually it's
very interesting. And we used to have that problem in the first p set. Why the sky is blue? Why clouds
are white? And I guess the physical phenomena of why that happens is very interesting. So you guys
should read. It's in Hecht. OK, so after the iris, we have these what is called the crystalline lens, this lens
here. This is the second optical component most important in our eye. It's basically multilayer fibrous
mass element covered by some elastic membrane. It's transparent. And it can contract and deform itself
in such a way that it changes the effective focal length of this lens. But you can think about this element
as some transparent quasi-onion. But in addition, it has very interesting properties. Because these lens is
actually a gradient refractive index lens, is, what we learned in some classes, a green lens, this element
here. It has a refractive index in the core something like 1.4. And it decays all the way to something like
1.38 to the edges. So the light gets basically-- see the transition. So this is similar to the p set one. And it
basically sees multiple layers. So depending indices of refraction, it starts bending accordingly. OK, so
this lens will, in conjunction with this cornea, form what we call or we could model this system as a dual
or double lens optical system. And combined, they have an optical power-- and remember the optical
power is 1 over the focal length, which it's measure in diopters-- of equivalent of something like 59
diopters, just so you get an idea for an unaccommodated eye or a relaxed eye just looking at infinity. So
then after this lens, we have another chamber with another fluid called vitreous humor. And it's another
fluid that basically gives support to the eye. And going back to our question, I think someone in
Singapore had in the very first lecture, this fluid has a lot of little particles floating, debris. And actually
sometimes you can see them. And maybe many of you have seen them. If you see to the sky or you
squint your eyes and see a bright light source, you see the shadows of these little particles that are
freely flowing in the vitreous humor. And you can see the fringes if you look carefully of the light
refracting that. OK, so after that, the light basically gets focused into the retina. We know the retina is
composed of photoreceptors, photoreceptive cells, cone and rods. And I'm going to explain those in a
couple of slides. And then we can also identify two other points. We identify here that each of these
cells are connected to optical nerves. And they all basically come together into this output that goes to
the brain. And this is what constitutes the blind spot. And I also explained that. And we have a fun
exercise in a second. And we also have this other region, which is like a spot of 3 millimeters in diameter,
more or less. It's like a yellow spot. It's called the macula. And it has the largest concentration of cones.
And I'll explain what is its role, but it is very important. Just that section here accounts for 90% to 95% of
our visual perception. So I talked about the ability of these crystalline lens to accommodate, change the
focal length. And similar to this demo that we were changing the distance between these guys, well, in
this case, as I said before, this isn't fixed, right, unless you have some sort of disease that actually
changes the length of your eye. And that actually happens. We can think of as this fixed. So if we want to
focus objects other than infinity, we need to play now with a focal length, right? So now, this lens has to
be capable of changing the effective focal length in such a way that it will conserve or preserve the
imaging distance here. So here, this lens does it by contracting or expanding the ciliary muscles that are
connected via some fibers to these lens, right? So in a relaxed state, you see this case here. The radius of
curvature of this lens, it's very large, like closer to infinity, say, like very flat. And then it focuses nice into
the retina, like a plane wave, whereas, for nearby objects, these muscles are stressed. So then the radius
of curvature of the lens changes. The focal length changes. Now, this image is focusing to, again, the
retina. So we can think about some of the conditions that would affect the normal behavior of the lens
of the eye. And the two very important conditions that we have is farsighted or nearsighted. So in the
farsighted case, for example, our eye lost its ability to focus effectively. And in a relaxed state, it will
actually form a focal point. So the back focal point, it will be far away behind our retina. So actually what
you see would be a blurry image. In their myopia case, or nearsighted, you see the opposite. Now, the
point is formed in front of the retina. And again, you see a blurry signal. And by the way, a far point for a
normal healthy eye it starts from something like 5 meters on. So 5 meters, more or less, what you can
see there is still like a five point. So for someone that suffers myopia, typically they see close by objects
pretty fine. But far objects, let's say further than the far point, something like 5 meters away, they
become blurry. And the near point, which is the counterpart of the far point, is how close can we see.
That's a point that also varies with age. Normally, teenagers the closer they can see is something like 7
centimeters. For us, maybe it's around 10 to 12-- you can try later by just trying to focus your notebook,
centimeters. And then if you are over 60 years old, it goes up to 100 centimeters. So basically, you can
see how the eye starts decaying in its ability to modify this crystalline lens. So to correct for these
conditions, we can use what we've learned so far, positive and negative lenses, right? So let's think
about it. In this case, the rays are not focusing enough, are not bending enough, right? Because they are
basically focusing behind that. So I want to help the rays to focus a little bit more. So a positive power
lens or a positive lens, like this one, allows me to bend the rays inward more, right? And this essentially
what this is happening. The positive power bends these parallel rays more and then assures that this
focuses in the retina. So let me ask a question. What do you think happens with the magnification for
this case? Any idea? For those of you that wear glasses, do you guys see the world larger, magnified?
No? There is shaking head, no. Why do you think it's not the case? OK-- so the power of the optical
system, the compound optical system. So if you work out actually the power of the cornea plus
crystalline lens-- which I said is something like 59 for a healthy eye. But in reality when it's unhealthy, it
changes. And if you consider the power added by this element here, it basically comes down to the
same power as the healthy eye. So therefore, you don't add or subtract any power. So therefore, the
magnification stays the same. For the myopia case, we can use the opposite. We can use a negative lens,
as shown here, to actually bend the rays a little bit outwards, right? So essentially this is interesting
because, again the myopia case you cannot you see far away objects blurry right but some objects are
closer than the fire point you can see them fine so what the negative lens is doing-- and again, going
back to these virtual images-- is bringing a far away object into a near distance closer to the far point. As
you can see, this appears to come from some virtual point here that is closer from a region that you can
see naturally with your eye. So therefore, intuitively this is how this ray makes this lens still project the
image into the retina. But as a side effect, the near point-- yup? AUDIENCE: So can people [INAUDIBLE]
focal point closer than [INAUDIBLE]?? GUEST SPEAKER: No. And actually, yeah, that was the second
point I was going to say. As a consequence of this, your near point, which I said that for like a healthy
eye would be something like 12 centimeters, becomes larger. So people that have myopia-- I don't know
if there's anyone here. But probably you know that sometimes, if you want to read a very close by
document, you need to remove your glasses, right? And people adjust OK for small print. They get out
their glasses. And for far away objects, they put their glasses on and see. All right, so any other
questions? OK, so the retina, the retina has a bunch of cells that are photoreceptive cells that can be
classified into two types, rods and cones, right? And we can see here rods and cones. For those of you
that like photography, you can think about the rods being equivalent of a high speed black and white
film. What is the meaning of that? It basically means that is very, very sensitive to light, OK? For very low
levels of light, you can detect them very fine. But it's insensitive to color and gives you images that are
not really good quality, sort of like blurry type of images, right? The cones, on the other hand, can be
thought of as low contrast or low speed color film. So the cones have cells that are sensitive to red,
green, blue, are responsible for the colors that we see and are also responsible of the nice, sharp
images. So all around the retina, we have sort of a combination of both. Although as you can see here in
the density plot shown here, there is a region that is called the macula. And inside the macula, there is
even a smaller region of something like 300 micron. That's called the fovea. That has the highest
concentration of cones, again, those responsible for the color vision-- as you can see, the plot just peaks
here-- and almost no rods, right? This is called the fovea centralis. And that's responsible of the central
vision. And basically, that's the one that I was saying that's responsible for 90% to 95% of the visual
perception that we have. So it's interesting to note that, in contrast to a normal camera, there sampling
of these photoreceptor elements-- so you can think of it as, like, pixels-- it's different. Outside the
macula, they are large and course. As you can see, these rods are just responsible for the peripheral
vision and black and white. But in this macula, they are very concentrated and dense. And as a matter of
fact, the cones inside this region, so when they are here, they have a different diameter than the ones
outside. There is something like a factor of two that are actually thinner. So they are very close packed
together. So you can see very sharp images here. As I mentioned before, each of these photoreceptors is
connected to these nerves that all bundle up together and go to the blindspot, shown here. Now, have
you guys been bothered by a blind spot all your lives? Not really. Why? Because as you can see, it's
actually just blocking a very small portion of your vision. As I said, a lot of the vision or visual perception
happens in this region, right? This is not true if you have a camera. If I have a camera and we have a
bunch of bad pixels like that, it might corrupt our system. And then we're done. Like, if a microscope
experiment, for example, forget about it. We lose a lot of pixels, and then the image gets really
corrupted. So I brought a little card. I'm going to pass it around. I have actually multiple of these. So this
is a fun experiment. It has, in the top part, a little cross and a little black circle. In the bottom part--
another cross and a line that is basically truncated, right? So what you're going to do when you get it is
that you're going to have the cross to your right side. And you're going to close your right eye. And then
you're going to just play with this distance staring at the cross. So you're going to focus your left eye at
the cross. And you're going to find a position here in which the circle will disappear, right? Because the
circle essentially will be imaged into this blind spot, and we're not going to see it. But the second one is
more interesting. Because you do the same thing, and the hole here disappears. But not only disappears,
it gets filled with a line. So you'll see a continuous line. And it's more shocking, because basically our
brain fills that missing information. It's actually pretty interesting. So I don't know if you can help me
pass this around. How do I go to the next one? [INAUDIBLE] this one? OK, takes forever. OK. So this is a
simulation that it was done by a group in Caltech. They were trying to simulate what would be the image
that our eye actually is projecting at the retina. What is exactly what we see? And interestingly enough,
compared to a normal image of the same scene produced by a CCD camera, as you can see, the image is
really blurry in the surroundings, very sharp in the center, as we described due to the sampling, et
cetera. So the eye tries to take advantage of the fact that it has a very small, very sharp region in focus
as much as it can. And the way it does it is by jittering the eye, moving it at a frequency of something like
30 to 70 Hertz, to scan a given scene and try to collect as much information to create the scene that we
perceive in our brain. And also, there is some interesting image processing to try to account for this
blurring. Or you can think of that, for those of you that are in signal processing, deep learning algorithms
embedded in our brains. I think it's pretty interesting. So the phenomena of moving of the eye, it's called
saccadic motion. Also, the cones and the rods, as I said, are connected with nerves. But it was first
proposed by studying the eye of a cat and then for humans that the eye actually has this type of
responds to a light as stimulus, that in some regions it's going to be positive. Some regions it's going to
be negative following what is called a Mexican-hat trend. And actually, this response is what is
responsible for many optical illusions that we see, for example, this one. So what do you guys see?
You've seen this one probably before, no? So you see this flickering gray dots that are really not there
right and if you try to focus your eye and if you are like as close as I am to the projector and I'm focusing
my eye here I don't see anything of the at least at that point I don't see any great does however if I focus
in another point right I'm also seeing this flicker.