Expand this Topic clickable element to expand a topic
Skip to content
Optica Publishing Group

Coherent control of the photonic spin Hall effect by Er3+ ion concentration in an Er3+-doped YAG crystal

Open Access Open Access

Abstract

We theoretically investigate the effect of doped Er3+ ion concentration on the spin Hall effect (SHE) of light reflected from a Kretschmann-Raether (K-R) structure. In such a structure, an Er3+-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (YAG) crystal acts as the substrate. The excitation of surface plasmon resonance(SPR) leads to the enhancement of the spin splitting of the reflected beam in the resonance reflection dip. Due to the variation of electric dipole moment and energy level lifetime induced by Er3+ ion concentration, the spin-dependent transverse shift is sensitively dependent upon Er3+ ion concentration. Furthermore, under different concentrations of Er3+ ion, the intensity and detuning of the control field have different effects on the magnitude, sign and position of the transverse shift. More importantly, the photonic SHE can be significantly enhanced via choosing the suitable values of the control intensity and detuning at 15${\%}$ Er3+ ion concentration. Therefore, our scheme may provide a basis for selecting suitable Er3+ ion concentration to enhance the SHE of light in future integrated systems.

© 2023 Optica Publishing Group under the terms of the Optica Open Access Publishing Agreement

1. Introduction

In the past several decades, the study of beam shifts has been one of the hot spots in the field of optics due to their application in optical sensor [1] and optical switching [2]. In $1947$, Goos and Hänchen first experimentally observed that the light beam totally reflected by the dielectric interface would suffer a lateral displacement in comparison with the prediction of geometric optics [3]. This displacement is the well-known Goos-Hänchen (GH) shift, which has been widely studied in different optical materials and structures, such as weak absorption medium [4], optical waveguide [5], graphene [6] and surface plasmon resonance (SPR) structure [7]. In recent years, many efforts have been made to realize the all-optical controllable GH shift in optical structures containing atomic vapors [811], quantum wells [1214] and quantum dots [15,16]. Apart from GH shift, the wave packet of light would suffer a spin-dependent transverse shift perpendicular to the incident plane. This phenomenon is called as Imbert-Fedorov effect [17] or photonic spin Hall effect (SHE) [1821]. It was first theoretically predicted by Fedorov [17] and experimentally demonstrated by Imbert [22]. When the finite light beam is linearly polarized light propagating in inhomogeneous medium, it can be regarded as the superposition of left-handed circular light and right-handed circular light, which is induced by the spin-orbit momentum coupling to conserve total angular momentum. When the beam is totally reflected at the interface, it can be divided into two spin elliptical polarization components: left-handed circular polarization and right-handed circular polarization. These two polarization components would split along the opposite direction [20,23], resulting a nonvanishing transverse energy flux inside the evanescent wave, and produce transverse shifts parallel and anti-parallel to the central vector, respectively. Previous experimental investigations have demonstrated that the splitting of the two spin components can be enhanced near the reflected Brewster angle [2427]. Up to now, the photonic SHE has been widely studied in different optical materials and structures, such as near-zero materials [28,29], metal films [30], metamaterials [31,32], multilayer nanostructures [3336], graphene [3739], PT symmetric systems [40,41] and metal-clad waveguides [42,43]. In recent years, Krechman-Reiter (K-R) structure provides a promising platform for the enhancement of the photonic SHE [4447]. In this structure, the transverse shifts of the two polarization components can be enhanced at the resonance angle due to the excitation of surface plasmon resonance (SPR) at the resonance reflection dip. However, these schemes are not equipped to optically control the SHE of light of the reflected beam. In order to overcome this problem, several schemes have been proposed to realize the all-optical control of photonic SHE in the interfaces or K-R structure containing cold atomic vapors [4850].

On the other hand, Er$^{3+}$-doped yttrium aluminum garnet (YAG, chemical formula Y$_3$Al$_5$O$_{12}$) crystal has attracted extensive research. Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal is an effective active medium for all-optically controlled solid-state lasers in the communication band. Besides, Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal has been applied to optical communication and optical information processing due to its inherent advantages such as flexible design, wide parameter adjustment range and non-atomic diffusion. Zharikov et al. first observed the stimulated emission of Er$^{3+}$ ions in Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal [51]. Based on the electromagnetically induced transparency (EIT) [52], Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal provides a promising solid-state system to explore various quantum optical phenomena, such as electromagnetically induced gratings [53,54], flat gain [55], normal dispersion and anomalous dispersion [56], enhancing refractive index with no absorption [57], fast and slow light [58], optical bistability and multistability [59,60] and GH shifts [61,62]. It is worthy noting that Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration can alter the electric dipole moments and the energy level lifetimes of Er$^{3+}$ ions, and thereby leading to the change of the absorption and dispersion properties of Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal. Thus, one question remains: how does Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration affect the photonic SHE of the reflected beam in a K-R structure?

In this paper, we investigate the effect of Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration on the SHE of light of the reflected beam in a K-R structure. Here, an Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal with a three-level ladder-typed Er$^{3+}$ ion system acts as the substrate of the K-R structure. The absorption and refractive index of the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal can be modified by the electric dipole moment and energy level lifetime induced by Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration. Using the experimentally achievable parameters, it can be seen that the SHE of light is sensitive to Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration. Furthermore, it is found that the magnitude, sign and position of the transverse shift can be effectively manipulated via tuning the intensity and detuning of the control field for different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. More importantly, the transverse shift can be significantly enhanced via adjusting the relevant parameters at 15${\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration.

2. Models and equations

As shown in Fig. 1 (a), we consider a K-R structure and set the prism-silver interface on the plane $z=0$. The K-R structure consists of a BK$7$ glass prism, a silver film with a thickness of $d$ and a substrate medium. In our proposal, an Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal with a three-level Er$^{3+}$ ion system is selected as the substrate of K-R structure. The dielectric constants of the glass prism, silver film and substrate medium are $\varepsilon _1$, $\varepsilon _2$ and $\varepsilon _3$, respectively. The dielectric constant $\varepsilon _3$ in Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal is obtained by the relationship $\varepsilon _3=1+\chi$, where $\chi$ is the probe susceptibility. The refractive index formula is $n = \frac {c}{v} = \sqrt { \varepsilon _ {r} {\mu }_{r}}$ , which is equivalent to taking ${\mu }_{r}=1$. Therefore, the permeability has little effect on the shifts. In this case, it is not necessary to consider the optical activity, and the optical activity of the Er$^{3+}$ -doped YAG crystal has little effect on the shift of the beam during reflection, and there is no significant difference between the SHE of light based on the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal and the SHE of light based on ordinary non-magnetic materials. When the silver film thickness is appropriate, an incident TM-polarized Gaussian beam can be reflected by the prism-silver interface due to the excitation of SPR. Subsequently, the SHE of light of the reflected beam can be enhanced, which is caused by the attenuation of the reflection in the resonance dip. Accordingly, the left-handed circular and right-handed circular polarization components of the reflected beam split along the direction perpendicular to the incident plane. Each of the two circularly polarized components can be divided to a $p$-polarized beam and a $s$-polarized beam. Therefore, the corresponding transverse shifts $\delta _{p}^{+}$ and $\delta _{p}^{-}$ of the two circularly polarized components depend on the reflection coefficients $r_p$ and $r_s$ of the K-R structure, where $r_p$ and $r_s$ can be written as [49]

$$r_{p,s}=\frac{r_{p,s}^{12}+r_{p,s}^{23}e^{2ik_{2z}d}}{1+r_{p,s}^{12}r_{p,s}^{23}e^{2ik_{2z}d}},$$
where $r_{p}^{ij}$ and $r_{s}^{ij}( i,j=1,2,3 )$ correspond to the Fresnel reflection coefficient of the $p$-polarized and $s$-polarized beams at the $i-j$ interface, which are expressed by [49]
$$r_{p}^{ij}=\frac{k_{iz}/\varepsilon _i-k_{jz}/\varepsilon _j}{k_{iz}/\varepsilon _i+k_{jz}/\varepsilon _j},$$
$$r_{s}^{ij}=\frac{k_{iz}-k_{jz}}{k_{iz}+k_{jz}},$$
in which $k_{iz}=\sqrt {\varepsilon _i k_{0}^{2}-k_{x}^{2}}$ represents the normal wave vector component of the incident beam in the $i$ layer. $k_x=\sqrt {\varepsilon _1}k_0\sin \theta$ represents the wave vector component along the $x$ direction. $k_0={2\pi }/{\lambda }$ is the wave vector of the incident beam in vacuum with $\lambda$ being the corresponding light wavelength.

 figure: Fig. 1.

Fig. 1. Level structure of atomic system and the position relation between field and atomic system. (a) Sketch of the SHE of light in K-R structure composed of a BK7 prism, a thin Ag film and an Er$^{3+}$ ion -doped YAG crystal; (b) Sketch of diagram of the three-level ladder-type Er$^{3+}$ ion system interacting with the probe and control fields.

Download Full Size | PDF

In the proposed K-R structure, the transverse shifts $\delta _{p}^{+}$ and $\delta _{p}^{-}$ of the left-handed circular and right-handed circular polarization components can be derived as [33,44,45]

$$\delta _{p}^{{\pm} }={\mp} \frac{{k_1}\omega _{0}^{2}[ 1+\frac{| r_s |}{| r_p |}\cos ( {{\varphi }_{s}}-{{\varphi }_{p}} ) ]\cot \theta }{{{k}_{1}}\omega _{0}^{2}+{{| \frac{\partial \ln r_p}{\partial \theta } |}^{2}}+{{| ( 1+\frac{r_s}{r_p} )\cot \theta |}^{2}}},$$
where $k_1=\sqrt \varepsilon _1{k_0}$ is the wave vector of the incident probe beam in the BK$7$ prism. $\omega _0$ stands for the waist of the incident Gauss beam. $\varphi _p$ and $\varphi _s$ represent the reflection phases of the $p$-polarized and $s$-polarized beams, respectively.

For the K-R structure, the $s$-polarized beam can be almost totally reflected, i.e., $| r_s |\approx 1$, while the $p$-polarized beam can excite SPR and leads to a resonance reflection dip. Note that the position and reflectivity of the resonance dip depends on the dielectric constant $\varepsilon _3=1+\chi$ of the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal, where $\chi$ represents the probe susceptibility. In the following, we derive the susceptibility of the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal. As shown in Fig. 1(b), we choose a three-level ladder-type Er$^{3+}$ ion system, where the levels $| 1 \rangle$, $| 2 \rangle$ and $| 3 \rangle$ correspond to the lowest Stark levels ${}^{4}I_{15/2}$, ${}^{4}I_{13/2}$ and ${}^{4}S_{3/2}$ of Er$^{3+}$ ion, respectively. A weak probe field $E_p$ with a central frequency $\omega _p$ is applied to the transition $| 2 \rangle \to | 1 \rangle$, while the transition $| 3 \rangle \to | 2 \rangle$ is driven by a strong control field $E_c$ with a central frequency $\omega _c$.

Under the electric-dipole and rotating-wave approximations, the interaction Hamiltonian of the three-level Er$^{3+}$ ion system can be written as ($\hbar =1$):

$$H_{I} = \Delta _p| 2\rangle \langle 2 |+(\Delta _p+\Delta _c)| 3 \rangle\langle 3 | -(\Omega _c| 3 \rangle\langle 2| +\Omega _p| 2 \rangle \langle 1| + H.c. ),$$
where $H.c.$ is the Hermite conjugate, $\Delta _p=\omega _{21}-\omega _p$ and $\Delta _c=\omega _{32}-\omega _c$ represent the detunings of the probe and control fields, respectively. The corresponding Rabi frequencies are $\Omega _p={\mu _{12}E_p}/{2\hbar }$ and $\Omega _c={\mu _{23}E_c}/{2\hbar }$, respectively. $\mu _{ij}$ is the electric dipole moment between level $| i \rangle$ and level $| j \rangle$.

The equation of motion of the density matrix can be written as [63]

$$\frac{d\rho }{dt}={-}\frac{i}{\hbar }[ {H_I},\rho ]-\frac{1}{2}\{ \Gamma ,\rho \},$$
where $\{ \Gamma,\rho \}=\Gamma \rho +\rho \Gamma$. Then, the equations of motion for the density matrix elements can be obtained as
$$\frac{\partial\rho_{11}}{\partial t} =( \Gamma_{21}+\gamma _{2})\rho_{22}+ \Gamma_{31}\rho_{33}-i\Omega_p\rho_{12}+i\Omega ^*_p\rho_{21},$$
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\partial\rho_{22}}{\partial t} &=-(\Gamma_{21}+\gamma _{2})\rho_{22}+(\Gamma_{32}+\gamma _{3})\rho_{33}-i\Omega _c\rho_{23} \\ &+i\Omega ^*_c\rho_{32}+i\Omega_p\rho_{12}-i\Omega ^*_p\rho_{21}, \end{aligned}$$
$$\frac{\partial\rho_{21}}{\partial t} =-(\gamma _{21}+i\Delta_p)\rho_{21}+i\Omega ^*_c\rho_{31}+i\Omega _p(\rho_{11}-\rho_{22}),$$
$$\frac{\partial\rho_{31}}{\partial t} =-[\gamma _{31}+i(\Delta_p+\Delta_c)]\rho_{31}+i\Omega _c\rho_{21}-i\Omega _p\rho_{32},$$
$$\frac{\partial\rho_{32}}{\partial t} =-(\gamma _{32}+i\Delta_c)\rho_{32}+i\Omega ^*_p\rho_{31}+i\Omega _c(\rho_{22}-\rho_{33}),$$
which is constrained by $\rho _{11}+\rho _{22}+\rho _{33}=1$ and $\mathop {\rho }_{ij}\text {=}\mathop {\rho }_{ji}^{*}$. $\Gamma _{ij}$ ($i,j=1,2,3$) is the spontaneous-emission decay rate from level $| i \rangle$ to level $| j\rangle$. $\gamma _m$ ($m=1,2$) represent the non-radiative decay rate of level $| m \rangle$ . $\gamma _{21}=( \Gamma _{21}+\text {}\gamma _{2} )/2$, $\gamma _{31}=( \Gamma _{31}+\Gamma _{32}+\gamma _{3} )/2$ and $\gamma _{32}=(\Gamma _{31}+\Gamma _{32}+\Gamma _{21}+\gamma _2+\gamma _3)/2$ are the coherent decay rates between the two corresponding levels. According to Refs. [60,64], we have $2\gamma _{21}=\Gamma _{21}+\gamma _2\approx 1/\tau _2$ and $2\gamma _{31}=\Gamma _{31}+\Gamma _{32}+\gamma _3\approx 1/\tau _3$, where $\tau _{2}$ and $\tau _{3}$ are the lifetimes of levels $| 2 \rangle$ and $| 3 \rangle$, respectively.

We assume that the intensity of the probe field is much smaller than the intensity of the control field, i.e., $\Omega _p\ll {\Omega _c}$. In this case, almost all Er$^{3+}$ ions remain in the ground state $| 1 \rangle$, i.e., $\mathop {\rho }_{11}=1$, $\mathop {\rho }_{22}=\mathop {\rho }_{33}=0$. Under steady-state condition ($\partial \rho _{ij}/\partial t=0$), the analytical solution of $\rho _{21}$ can be obtained as

$$\rho _{21}=\frac{i\Omega _{p}(\gamma _{31}+i\Delta _{p}+i\Delta_{c})}{(\gamma _{21}+i\Delta _{p})(\gamma _{31}+i\Delta _{p}+i\Delta _{c})+\Omega _c^{2}}.$$

Note that the polarization of the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal is given by $P=\varepsilon _{0}\chi E_p=N\mu _{21}\rho _{21}$. Therefore, the probe susceptibility $\chi$ can be written as

$$\begin{aligned} \chi & =\frac{N\mathop{| \mathop\mu _{12}|^2}}{\mathop\varepsilon _{0}\hbar \Omega _p}\rho _{21} \\ & =\frac{N\mathop{| \mu _{12} |}^{2}}{\mathop\varepsilon _0\hbar }\frac{i(\gamma _{31}+i\Delta _p+i\Delta_c)}{(\gamma_{21}+i\Delta_p)(\gamma _{31}+i\Delta _p+i\Delta _c)+\Omega_c^2}. \end{aligned}$$
where $N$ represents the density of Er$^{3+}$ ions and ${{\varepsilon }_{0}}$ is the dielectric constant in vacuum.

Previous studies [64,65] have demonstrated that both the electric dipole moment $\mu _{ij}$ ($i,j=1,2,3$) and energy level lifetime $\tau _{m}$ ($m=1,2$) are related to the doped Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration of the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal. The Y$^{3+}$ ions in YAG crystal can be replaced by Er$^{3+}$ ions of similar size to the Y$^{3+}$ ions, as this does not have much effect on the lattice structure. The percentage of the doped Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration of the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal indicates the percentage of Y$^{3+}$ ions substituted by Er$^{3+}$ ion in YAG crystal. The change of the doped Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration of the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal has little effect on the density of the medium. When we study the optical properties of Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal, the change of the doped Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration will lead to the change of electric dipole moment and energy level lifetime, but the near dipole-dipole interaction and Lorentz local field correction on the dielectric constant can be ignored. To present the influence of Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration on the probe susceptibility $\chi$, we treat the Er$^{3+}$ ion density $N_0$ and electric dipole moments $\mu _{12_0}$, $\mu _{23_0}$ at $0.5{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration as the the reference values. Then we set $N=C{N_0}$, $\mu _{12}=k_{12}\mu _{{12}_0}$, $\mu _{23}=k_{23}\mu _{{23}_0}$, where $C$, $k_{12}$ and $k_{23}$ are the ratios of the parameters between the corresponding Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration and the $0.5{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration. Then, Eq. (13) can be rewritten as

$$\chi =\beta\frac{iCk_{12}^2(\gamma _{31}+i\Delta _p+i\Delta_c)}{(\gamma_{21}+i\Delta_p)(\gamma _{31}+i\Delta _p+i\Delta _c)+k_{23}^2\Omega_{c_0}^2},$$
where $\beta =N_0\mathop {| \mu _{{21}_0} |}^{2}/\varepsilon _{0}\hbar$. Note that the complex refractive index $n_3$ of the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal consists of a real part $n$ and a imaginary part $\kappa$, i.e., $n_3 = n + i\kappa$, where the real part $n = 1 + \operatorname {Re}( \chi ) / 2$ represents the refractive index and the imaginary part $\kappa = \operatorname {Im} (\chi )/ 2$ represents the absorption coefficient. Therefore, $\operatorname {Re}( \chi )$ and $\operatorname {Im}( \chi )$ can directly reflect the variation of the refractive index and absorption properties of the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal.

Based on the experimental results [64,65], the values of the electric dipole moments ($\mu _{12}$, $\mu _{13}$ and $\mu _{23}$) and energy level lifetimes ($\tau _2$ and $\tau _3$) of Er$^{3+}$ ions for different concentrations of Er$^{3+}$ ion are listed in Table 1. Therefore, we have $C = (1, 6, 30, 66)$, $k_{12} = (1, 1.17, 0.87, 0.76)$, $k_{23}= (1, 1.09, 0.80, 0.70)$, $\gamma _{21}=( 0.5,0.36,0.36,1.63 )\gamma$ and $\gamma _{31}=( 0.23,0.31,3.25,6.5 )\gamma$ with $\gamma =1/\tau _{2_0}=0.154$MHz for $(0.5{\%}, 3{\%},15{\%},33{\%})$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. For the sake of the unit, the parameters $\beta$, $\Delta _p$ and $\Delta _c$ are scaled by $\gamma$.

Tables Icon

Table 1. Electrical dipole moments and energy level lifetime in an Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystals containing four different concentrations of the Er$^{3+}$ ion [64,65]

At the resonance wavelength of the transition ${}^4I_{{13}/2}\rightarrow {}^4I_{{15}/2}$ (i.e., $\lambda =1516$nm), the dielectric constants of the BK7 glass prism and the silver film are $\varepsilon _1=2.3059$ and $\varepsilon _2=-123.01+3.1354i$, respectively [66,67]. In the numerical calculation, we choose $d=15.16$nm, $\beta =0.05\gamma$. It is worth noting that the transverse shifts $\delta _p^+$ and $\delta _p^-$ have the same magnitude and opposite sign. In the following, we only analyze the transverse shift $\delta _p^+$ of the left-handed circular polarization component of the reflected beam.

3. Results and discussions

First, we investigate the influence of Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration on the SHE of light of the reflected beam when $E_c=35E_0$ and $\Delta _p=\Delta _c=0$. Here, $E_0/2\hbar =\gamma /\mu _{23_0}$ is treated as the unit of the electric intensity of the control field. For this assumption, we have $\Omega _{c_0}=\mu _{23_0}E_c/2\hbar =35\mu _{23_0}E_0/2\hbar =35\gamma$ at $0.5{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration and $\Omega _c=k_{23}\Omega _{c_0}$ at the other Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. It can be seen from Eq. (4) that the transverse shift $\delta _p^+$ of the left-handed circular polarization component is determined by the ratio of the reflection coefficients ${| r_s |}/{| r_p |}$ and the phase difference $\varphi _{s}-\varphi _{p}$. For the K-R structure, the $s$-polarized beam is totally reflected, i.e., $|r_s|\approx 1$, while the $p$-polarized beam excites SPR and results in a reflection dip at the resonance angle. The resonant shifts rely on a material resonance and, ultimately, the mechanism of weak measurements. When the total reflection of the incident beam occurs, the reflection spectrum decreases rapidly. This is because part of the incident energy spills into the structure, and the evanescent wave is converted in the optical medium and becomes a continuous radiation wave, which is coupled with the surface plasmon wave, indicating that the surface plasmon is excited. Near the SPR resonance angle, the phase difference changes drastically, which leads to the enhancement of the SHE of light. Whether SPR can be excited depends on the dielectric constant near the metal-dielectric interface. By adjusting the absorption of the medium, the SPR system is effectively adjusted, thereby greatly enhancing the SHE of light. Thus, the enhancement of the SHE of light can be realized via reducing the $|r_p|$. Figure 2(a) shows the reflection coefficient $|r_p|$ as a function of the incident angle $\theta$ for different values of Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration. The corresponding transverse shift $\delta _p^+$ of the left-handed circular polarization component is plotted in Fig. 2(b). As shown in Figs. 2(a) and 2(b), a reflection dip occurs due to the excitation of SPR at the resonance angle $\theta _{\textrm {res}}=41.67^\circ$, around which a negative or positive shift peak can be observed. In the case of $0.5{\%}$ and $3{\%}$ concentrations of Er$^{3+}$ ion, the two reflection curves overlap well and have the same reflectivity at the resonance angle [see the red-solid and blue-dashed lines in Fig. 2(a)]. Accordingly, the curves of the two transverse shifts coincide well and show a negative shift peak ($\sim -0.27\lambda$) around $\theta _{\textrm {res}}$ [see the red-solid and blue-dashed lines in Fig. 2(b)]. With the increase of Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration from $3{\%}$ to $15{\%}$, the reflection coefficient $|r_p|$ exhibits a narrower SPR dip and a lower reflectivity at $\theta _{\textrm {res}}$, which leads to the enhancement of the negative transverse shift $\delta _p^+$ [see the the pink-dotted lines in Figs. 2(a) and 2(b)]. When the Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration increases to 33${\%}$, the reflection dip becomes wider and the minimum reflectivity at $\theta _{\textrm {res}}$ increases [see the green-pecked line in Fig. 2(a)]. According, the magnitude of the spin splitting decreases in comparison with the case of $15{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration [see the green-pecked line in Fig. 2(b)]. However, the spin splitting $\delta _p^+$ transits from a negative peak ($\sim -0.83\lambda$) to a positive peak ($\sim 0.13\lambda$). In addition, it can be seen from Fig. 2 that the resonance angle $\theta _{\textrm {res}}$ remains unchanged for different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations.

 figure: Fig. 2.

Fig. 2. (a)The reflectivity $|r|$ and (b) the spin-dependent transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ as a function of incident angle $\theta$ for different values of doped Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration. The number represents the concentration of the doped Er$^{3+}$ ion. Other parameters are $\gamma =0.154$MHz, $\beta =0.05\gamma$, $E_c=35E_0$ ($E_0/{2\hbar }=\gamma /\mu _{23_0}$) and $\Delta _p=\Delta _c=0$.

Download Full Size | PDF

The above interesting feature of the photonic SHE of the reflected beam can be physically explained via the internal damping $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}$ and the radiation damping $\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ [49]. In the K-R structure, the excitation of SPR leads to a minimum reflectivity, which can be written as

$$|r_p|_{\textrm{min}}=|r_{12}|\sqrt{1-\frac{4\Gamma_\text{int}\Gamma_\text{rad}}{(\Gamma_\text{int}+\Gamma_\text{rad})^2}},$$
where the internal damping $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}$ originates from the intrinsic absorption loss of surface plasmon. For optically thin coherent medium, where $|\chi | \ll 1$, $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}$ can be written as
$$\Gamma_{\textrm{int}}\approx\frac{k_0}{2}\sqrt{\frac{1}{\varepsilon_2^{\prime}(\varepsilon_2^{\prime}+1)^3}}[\varepsilon_2^{\prime\prime}+\varepsilon_2^{\prime2}\textrm{Im}(\chi)],$$
where $\varepsilon _2^{\prime }$ and $\varepsilon _2^{\prime \prime }$ correspond to the real and imaginary parts of $\varepsilon _2$, respectively. In the derivation of Eq. (16), we assumed $|\varepsilon _2^{\prime }| \gg \varepsilon _2^{\prime \prime }$ and $|\varepsilon _2^{\prime }| \gg 1$. And internal damping $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}$ is positively related to Im$(\chi )$, while the radiation damping $\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ results from the back-coupled radiation loss, which is almost independent of Im$(\chi )$ and can be treated as a constant. Therefore, the photonic SHE can be efficiently controlled by adjusting the absorption of the Er$^{3+}$ -doped YAG crystal. In addition, it can be seen from Eq. (4) that the direction of the spin accumulations is related to the phase difference $\varphi _s-\varphi _p$ and depends on $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}$. The left-handed circular polarization component would suffer a negative transverse shift for $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}<\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ and a positive transverse shift for $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}>\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ [49].

In Fig. 3, we plot the spin-dependent transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ relative to the thickness $d$ of the metal film. When the film is relatively thin, each concentration can excite SPR by decreasing the reflectivity. When the incident angle is the resonant angle $\theta _{\textrm {res}} = 41.67^\circ$, SPR is resonantly excited, and the total reflection is attenuated, resulting in the spin-dependent transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ change. When the doping concentration of Er$^{3+}$ ion is $0.5 {\%}$ or $3{\%}$, as $d$ increases to 16.46 nm, $\Gamma _{\text {int}}= \Gamma _{\text {rad}}$. When the concentration of Er$^{3+}$-doped ion is $15{\%}$, the thickness of the metal film $d$ is 16.01 nm, and the maximum transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ can be obtained. When the concentration of Er$^{3+}$-doped ion is $33{\%}$, $\Gamma _{\text {int}}$ and $\Gamma _{\text {rad}}$ can be balanced when $d$ is 11.35 nm.We can conclude that changing the thickness $d$ of the metal film can obtain the optimal spin-dependent transverse shifts $\delta _{p}^{+}$ enhancement corresponding to different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations.

 figure: Fig. 3.

Fig. 3. The spin-dependent transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ as a function of the Ag film thickness $d$. The incident angle $\theta _{\textrm {res}}=41.67^\circ$ and other parameters are the same as in Fig. 2.

Download Full Size | PDF

In Fig. 4, we plot the imaginary part Im($\chi$) and real part Re($\chi$) of the susceptibility $\chi$ as a function of the probe detuning $\Delta _p$ for different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations, respectively. As we know, Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration can modify the electric dipole moment and coherent decay rate of Er$^{3+}$ ions and change the absorption and dispersion properties [52]. Actually, states $|1\rangle$, $|2\rangle$ and $|3\rangle$ construct a ladder-type EIT system. Under the drive of a strong control field, the excited state $|2\rangle$ splits into two dressed levels $\left | \pm \right \rangle ={\left ( \left | 2 \right \rangle \mp \left | 3 \right \rangle \right )}/{\sqrt {2}}$ with eigenenergies ${{E}_{\pm }}=\pm {k_{23}{\Omega }_{c_0}}$. For $0.5{\%}$ and $3{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations, an ideal transparency window with little resonance absorption can be observed (i.e., Im$(\chi )\approx 0$ at $\Delta _p=0$) [see the red-solid and blue-dashed lines in Fig. 4(a)]. When the Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration increases from $3{\%}$ to $33{\%}$, the increase of Er$^{3+}$ ion density and the decrease of the level splitting lead to the increase of the resonance absorption [see the pink-dotted and green-pecked lines in Fig. 4(a)]. For the selected parameters, we have $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}<\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ for $0.5{\%}$, $3{\%}$ and $15{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations and $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}>\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ for $33{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration, which correspond to the negative and positive transverse shifts, respectively. In the cases of $0.5{\%}$ and $3{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations, the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal is nearly lossless medium. Thus, $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}\ll \Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ and the corresponding negative transverse shift is very small. When Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration increases from $3{\%}$ to $33{\%}$, the resonance absorption increases, which leads to the increase of the $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}$. Say concretely, $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}$ is close to $\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ and $|r_p|_{\textrm {min}}$ decreases when Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration increases from $3{\%}$ to $15{\%}$. Accordingly, the negative transverse shift $\delta _p^+$ is enhanced at $15{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration. In addition, the shift of the resonance angle $\theta _{\textrm {res}}$ is proportional to the real part Re$(\chi )$ of the probe susceptibility [49]. As shown in Fig. 3(b), we have $\textrm {Re}(\chi )=0$ at $\Delta _p=0$. Therefore, the peak position of the transverse shift remains unchanged for different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations.

 figure: Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. (a) Imaginary part Im($\chi$) and (b) real part Re($\chi$) of the susceptibility $\chi$ as a function of the probe detuning $\Delta _p$. The inset in (a) shows the enlarged view of the Im$(\chi )$ near $\Delta _p=0$ for $0.5{\%}$, $3{\%}$, $15{\%}$ and $33{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. Other parameters are the same as in Fig. 2.

Download Full Size | PDF

We further explore the influence of the intensity $E_c$ of the control field on the photonic SHE of the reflected beam under the conditions of different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. Figure 5 shows the variation of the probe susceptibility with $E_c$ under the resonance condition (i.e., $\Delta _p=\Delta _c=0$). As the intensity of the control field $E_c$ increases from 25$E_0$ to 35$E_0$, the probe absorption is almost unchanged for $0.5{\%}$ and $3{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations, while it monotonically decreases for $15{\%}$ and $33{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations [see Fig. 5(a)]. Meanwhile, the refractive index of the crystal medium remains unchanged in the presence of different concentrations of Er$^{3+}$ ion [see Fig. 5(b)]. In Fig. 6, we plot the transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ as a function of the incident angle $\theta$ for different values of $E_c$. When the Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration is 0.5${\%}$ and 3${\%}$, the Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal is always a nearly lossless medium. In this case, the internal damping $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}$ is much smaller than the radiation damping $\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$. Therefore, the corresponding transverse shift is always negative and remains unchanged with a small value of $\delta _{p}^{+}=-0.26\lambda$ [see Figs. 6(a) and 6(b)]. As the concentration of Er$^{3+}$ ion arrives at 15${\%}$, the probe absorption crosses the critical value, where $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}=\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$. Accordingly, the internal damping is lager than the radiation damping for a small value of $E_c$, and the corresponding transverse shift is positive. For a larger $E_c$, the left-handed circular polarization component of the reflected beam suffers a negative transverse shift. Especially in the vicinity of $E_c^c=28.9E_0$, where $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}=\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$, the transverse shift can be significantly enhanced [see Fig. 5(c)]. Under the condition of 33${\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration, the probe absorption suffers a large reduction at a high level, where $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}>\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ is always satisfied. So, the transverse shift is always positive, which can be slightly enhanced via increasing $E_c$. Therefore, the control intensity plays different roles for the magnitude and sign of the transverse shift at different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. Besides, the resonance angle remains constant owing to the unchanged refractive index of the medium.

 figure: Fig. 5.

Fig. 5. (a) Imaginary part Im($\chi$) and (b) real part Re($\chi$) of the susceptibility $\chi$ as a function of the intensity $E_c$ of the control field. Other parameters are the same as in Fig. 2.

Download Full Size | PDF

 figure: Fig. 6.

Fig. 6. The spin-dependent transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ as a function of the incident angle $\theta$ and the control field intensities $E_c$ for different concentrations of doped Er$^{3+}$ ion. (a) $0.5{\%}$, (b)$3{\%}$, (c)$15{\%}$, (d)$33{\%}$. Other parameters are the same as in Fig. 5.

Download Full Size | PDF

Finally, we investigate the influence of the detuning $\Delta _c$ of the control field on the SHE of light at different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. The variations of Im$(\chi )$ and Re$(\chi )$ with the control detuning $\Delta _c$ are plotted in Fig. 7. With the increase of $\Delta _c$ from $0$ to $60\gamma$, the probe absorption is almost unchanged for $0.5{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration, while it monotonically increases for Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations of ($3{\%}$, $15{\%}$, $33{\%}$ ) [see Fig. 7(a)]. As shown in Fig. 7(b), the refractive index of the medium is linearly varied with $\Delta _c$ ,but the variation rate of the refractive index are different for different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. Figure 8 plots the variation of the transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ with $\Delta _c$ for different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. When Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration is $0.5{\%}$, the almost unchanged absorption at the low level (i.e., $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}\ll \Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$) leads to the negative transverse shift remaining almost unchanged ($\sim -0.26\lambda$) [see Fig. 8(a)]. As Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration increases to $3{\%}$, the absorption slightly increases at the low level with the increase of $\Delta _c$. Thus, the negative transverse shift is marginally enhanced [see Fig. 8(b)]. In the case of $15{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration, the probe absorption passes through the critical absorption value, where $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}=\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$. Accordingly, we have $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}<\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ for $\Delta _c<\Delta _c^c=43.5\gamma$ and $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}>\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ for $\Delta _c>\Delta _c^c=43.5\gamma$, where the negative and positive transverse shifts can be observed, respectively. With $\Delta _c\rightarrow \Delta _c^c$, the transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ can be significantly enhanced [see Fig. 8(c)]. For $33{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration, the probe absorption monotonically increases at the high level, where $\Gamma _{\textrm {int}}>\Gamma _{\textrm {rad}}$ is always satisfied. Thus, the left-handed circular polarization component of the reflected beam always suffers a positive transverse shift. And the significant reduction of the positive transverse shift with $\Delta _c$ can be induced owing to the increase of probe absorption [see Fig. 8(d)]. In addition, the linear decrease of the refractive index with $\Delta _c$ leads to the resonance angle linearly shifting to the smaller incident angle. But the variation range of the resonance angle are different for different concentrations of doped Er$^{3+}$ ion [see the inset in Fig. 8]. These results implies that the control detuning $\Delta _c$ has different effects on the magnitude, sign and position of the transverse shift under different concentrations of doped Er$^{3+}$ ion. According to the above discussions, one can conclude that the photonic SHE of the reflected beam is sensitive to the intensity and detuning of the control field at 15${\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration.

 figure: Fig. 7.

Fig. 7. (a) Imaginary part Im($\chi$) and (b) real part Re($\chi$) of the susceptibility $\chi$ as a function of the detuning $\Delta _{c}$ of the control field. $E_c=35E_0$ and other parameters are the same as in Fig. 5.

Download Full Size | PDF

 figure: Fig. 8.

Fig. 8. The spin-dependent transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ as a function of incident angle $\theta$ and the incident angle $\theta$ for different values of control field detuning $\Delta _c$ and concentrations of doped Er$^{3+}$ ion. (a) $0.5{\%}$, (b)$3{\%}$, (c)$15{\%}$, (d)$33{\%}$. The insets in (a)-(e) show the variation of the resonance angle $\theta _{\textrm {res}}$ with the control detuning $\Delta _c$ . Other parameters are the same as in Fig. 7.

Download Full Size | PDF

We present an experimental device for measuring transverse shift as shown in Fig. 9. When the laser beam generated by the tunable laser (DL100, local photon) passes through two irises (I), polarizer (P), beam splitter (BS), acousto-optic modulator (AOM) and reflector (M), a coherent control beam is formed. When the laser beam generated by another laser passes through two irises (I), polarizer (P), beam splitter (BS) and attenuator (A), a weak probe beam can be obtained. By adding a polarizer in front of the laser, the output beam has a linear polarization rate with high extinction ratio. Two irises are used to limit the divergence of the incident laser beam. The beam passes through an AOM, which changes the frequency of the light. In this scheme, the beam is completely reflected onto the prism K-R structure made of BK7 glass. The incident angle $\theta$ of the probe beam can be precisely controlled by a rotating stage. Finally, the transverse shift position of the beam after total reflection is detected on the position sensitive detector (PSD) adjusted to the appropriate position, and the corresponding shift is obtained by imaging the differential signal between the photocurrents generated by the PSD. In addition, we should explain that the Gaussian beam method is a better method to show the spatial distribution of the reflected light field when studying the beam shift. Using the Gaussian beam method to deal with the lateral shift is to transform the incident Gaussian beam into the frequency domain, calculate the reflectivity in the spatial frequency domain, and then do the Fourier transform, we will get the spatial distribution of the reflected light field. However, it can only be used to measure the lateral GH shift at present, and cannot give the field distribution when the spin Hall effect of light generates transverse shift. The method used in our article is already a very effective standard method. When the beam waist radius is wide enough, the method we used can accurately reflect the change of the spin Hall effect of light.

 figure: Fig. 9.

Fig. 9. The experimental setup of displacement sensor based on the SHE of light. BS: beam splitter, A: attenuator, AOM: acousto-optic modulator, PSD: position-sensitive detector, I: Iris, P: Polarizer, M: Mirror.

Download Full Size | PDF

4. Conclusions

In summary, we have theoretically investigated the effect of doped Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration on the photonic SHE of a reflected beam in the K-R structure backed by an Er$^{3+}$-doped YAG crystal with a ladder-type configuration. It is demonstrated that the photonic SHE of the reflected beam are sensitive to the concentration of Er$^{3+}$ ion. These features of the photonic SHE can be explained via the internal damping and radiation damping. Furthermore, it is found that both the intensity and detuning of the control field play different roles on the magnitude, sign and position of the spin-dependent transverse shift under different Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. More importantly, the transverse shift can be significantly enhanced via choosing the suitable values of the control intensity and detuning at 15${\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration. Therefore, our scheme may provide a basis for selecting suitable Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration to enhance the SHE of light in future integrated systems.

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China (11774054, 12075036, 12104067); Science and Technology Research Project of Education Department of Hubei Province (Q20211314).

Disclosures

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Data availability

Data underlying the results presented in this paper are not publicly available at this time but may be obtained from the authors upon reasonable request.

References

1. Y. Xu, L. Wu, and L. K. Ang, “Ultrasensitive optical temperature transducers based on surface plasmon resonance enhanced composited Goos-Hänchen and Imbert-Fedorov shifts,” IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron. 27(6), 1–8 (2021). [CrossRef]  

2. M. N. Baitha and K. Kim, “Polarization switchable enhanced photonic spin hall effect for optical switch and filters,” IEEE Photonics Technol. Lett. 34(24), 1329–1332 (2022). [CrossRef]  

3. F. Goos and H. Hänchen, “Ein neuer und fundamentaler versuch zur Totalreflexion,” Ann. Phys. 436(7-8), 333–346 (1947). [CrossRef]  

4. H. M. Lai and S. W. Chan, “Large and negative Goos–Hänchen shift near the Brewster dip on reflection from weakly absorbing media,” Opt. Lett. 27(9), 680–682 (2002). [CrossRef]  

5. X. Liu, Q. Yang, Z. Qiao, T. Li, P. Zhu, and Z. Cao, “Physical origin of large positive and negative lateral optical beam shifts in prism–waveguide coupling system,” Opt. Commun. 283(13), 2681–2685 (2010). [CrossRef]  

6. X. Zeng, M. Al-Amri, and M. S. Zubairy, “Tunable Goos-Hänchen shift from graphene ribbon array,” Opt. Express 25(20), 23579–23588 (2017). [CrossRef]  

7. L. Chen, X. Liu, Z. Cao, and S. Zhuang, “Mechanism of giant Goos–Hänchen effect enhanced by long-range surface plasmon excitation,” J. Opt. 13(3), 035002 (2011). [CrossRef]  

8. Ziauddin, S. Qamar, and M. S. Zubairy, “Coherent control of the Goos-Hänchen shift,” Phys. Rev. A 81(2), 023821 (2010). [CrossRef]  

9. H. Hamedi, A. Radmehr, and M. Sahrai, “Manipulation of Goos-Hänchen shifts in the atomic configuration of mercury via interacting dark-state resonances,” Phys. Rev. A 90(5), 053836 (2014). [CrossRef]  

10. X. J. Zhang, H. H. Wang, Z. P. Liang, Y. Xu, C. B. Fan, C. Z. Liu, and J. Y. Gao, “Goos-Hänchen shift in a standing-wave-coupled electromagnetically-induced-transparency medium,” Phys. Rev. A 91(3), 033831 (2015). [CrossRef]  

11. D. D. Zheng, H. M. Zhao, X. J. Zhang, and J. H. Wu, “Correlation-enhanced Goos-Hänchen shift in Rydberg atomic gases,” Phys. Rev. A 106(4), 043119 (2022). [CrossRef]  

12. W. X. Yang, S. P. Liu, Z. H. Zhu, Ziauddin, and R. K. Lee, “Tunneling-induced giant Goos-Hänchen shift in quantum wells,” Opt. Lett. 40(13), 3133–3136 (2015). [CrossRef]  

13. S. Liu, W. Yang, and Z. Zhu, “Coherent control of the Goos-Hänchen shift via Fano interference,” J. Appl. Phys. 119(14), 143101 (2016). [CrossRef]  

14. S. Asadpour, R. Nasehi, H. R. Soleimani, and M. Mahmoudi, “Phase control of Goos-Hänchen shift via biexciton coherence in a multiple quantum well,” Superlattices Microstruct. 85, 112–123 (2015). [CrossRef]  

15. M. Abbas and S. Qamar, “Study of Goos-Hänchen shifts of partially coherent light fields using a triple quantum dot system in the presence of giant Kerr nonlinearity,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 33(7), 1444–1450 (2016). [CrossRef]  

16. S. H. Asadpour, “Goos–hänchen shifts due to spin-orbit coupling in the carbon nanotube quantum dot nanostructures,” Appl. Opt. 56(8), 2201–2208 (2017). [CrossRef]  

17. F. I. Fedorov, “K teorii polnogo otrazheniya,” Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR 105, 465–468 (1955).

18. O. Hosten and P. Kwiat, “Observation of the spin hall effect of light via weak measurements,” Science 319(5864), 787–790 (2008). [CrossRef]  

19. M. Onoda, S. Murakami, and N. Nagaosa, “Hall effect of light,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 93(8), 083901 (2004). [CrossRef]  

20. K. Y. Bliokh and Y. P. Bliokh, “Conservation of angular momentum, transverse shift, and spin Hall effect in reflection and refraction of an electromagnetic wave packet,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 96(7), 073903 (2006). [CrossRef]  

21. K. Y. Bliokh and Y. P. Bliokh, “Polarization, transverse shifts, and angular momentum conservation laws in partial reflection and refraction of an electromagnetic wave packet,” Phys. Rev. E 75(6), 066609 (2007). [CrossRef]  

22. C. Imbert, “Calculation and experimental proof of the transverse shift induced by total internal reflection of a circularly polarized light beam,” Phys. Rev. D 5(4), 787–796 (1972). [CrossRef]  

23. K. Y. Bliokh and A. Aiello, “Goos–Hänchen and Imbert–Fedorov beam shifts: an overview,” J. Opt. 15(1), 014001 (2013). [CrossRef]  

24. Y. Qin, Y. Li, H. He, and Q. Gong, “Measurement of spin Hall effect of reflected light,” Opt. Lett. 34(17), 2551–2553 (2009). [CrossRef]  

25. H. Luo, X. Zhou, W. Shu, S. Wen, and D. Fan, “Enhanced and switchable spin Hall effect of light near the Brewster angle on reflection,” Phys. Rev. A 84(4), 043806 (2011). [CrossRef]  

26. X. Zhou, H. Luo, and S. Wen, “Weak measurements of a large spin angular splitting of light beam on reflection at the Brewster angle,” Opt. Express 20(14), 16003–16009 (2012). [CrossRef]  

27. L. Xie, X. Zhou, X. Qiu, L. Luo, X. Liu, Z. Li, Y. He, J. Du, Z. Zhang, and D. Wang, “Unveiling the spin Hall effect of light in Imbert-Fedorov shift at the Brewster angle with weak measurements,” Opt. Express 26(18), 22934–22943 (2018). [CrossRef]  

28. W. Zhu and W. She, “Enhanced spin Hall effect of transmitted light through a thin epsilon-near-zero slab,” Opt. Lett. 40(13), 2961–2964 (2015). [CrossRef]  

29. M. Jiang, W. Zhu, H. Guan, J. Yu, H. Lu, J. Tan, J. Zhang, and Z. Chen, “Giant spin splitting induced by orbital angular momentum in an epsilon-near-zero metamaterial slab,” Opt. Lett. 42(17), 3259–3262 (2017). [CrossRef]  

30. X. Zhou, Z. Xiao, H. Luo, and S. Wen, “Experimental observation of the spin Hall effect of light on a nanometal film via weak measurements,” Phys. Rev. A 85(4), 043809 (2012). [CrossRef]  

31. X. Yin, Z. Ye, J. Rho, Y. Wang, and X. Zhang, “Photonic spin Hall effect at metasurfaces,” Science 339(6126), 1405–1407 (2013). [CrossRef]  

32. A. Shaltout, J. Liu, A. Kildishev, and V. Shalaev, “Photonic spin Hall effect in gap–plasmon metasurfaces for on-chip chiroptical spectroscopy,” Optica 2(10), 860–863 (2015). [CrossRef]  

33. H. Luo, S. Wen, W. Shu, and D. Fan, “Spin Hall effect of light in photon tunneling,” Phys. Rev. A 82(4), 043825 (2010). [CrossRef]  

34. H. Luo, X. Ling, X. Zhou, W. Shu, S. Wen, and D. Fan, “Enhancing or suppressing the spin Hall effect of light in layered nanostructures,” Phys. Rev. A 84(3), 033801 (2011). [CrossRef]  

35. B. Wang, Y. Li, M. M. Pan, J. L. Ren, Y. F. Xiao, H. Yang, and Q. Gong, “Spin displacements of a Gaussian beam at an air–multilayer-film interface,” Phys. Rev. A 88(4), 043842 (2013). [CrossRef]  

36. X. Jiang, Q. Wang, J. Guo, J. Zhang, S. Chen, X. Dai, and Y. Xiang, “Resonant optical tunneling-induced enhancement of the photonic spin Hall effect,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 51(14), 145104 (2018). [CrossRef]  

37. W. Kort-Kamp, N. Sinitsyn, and D. Dalvit, “Quantized beam shifts in graphene,” Phys. Rev. B 93(8), 081410 (2016). [CrossRef]  

38. L. Cai, M. Liu, S. Chen, Y. Liu, W. Shu, H. Luo, and S. Wen, “Quantized photonic spin Hall effect in graphene,” Phys. Rev. A 95(1), 013809 (2017). [CrossRef]  

39. X. Bai, L. Tang, W. Lu, X. Wei, S. Liu, Y. Liu, X. Sun, H. Shi, and Y. Lu, “Tunable spin Hall effect of light with graphene at a telecommunication wavelength,” Opt. Lett. 42(20), 4087–4090 (2017). [CrossRef]  

40. R. Liu, G. H. Wang, D. M. Deng, and T. T. Zhang, “Spin hall effect of laguerre-gaussian beams in pt symmetric metamaterials,” Opt. Express 29(14), 22192–22201 (2021). [CrossRef]  

41. Y. Y. Fu, Y. Fei, D. X. Dong, and Y. W. Liu, “Photonic spin hall effect in pt symmetric metamaterials,” Front. Phys. 14(6), 62601 (2019). [CrossRef]  

42. F. Pillon, H. Gilles, S. Girard, M. Laroche, R. Kaiser, and A. Gazibegovic, “Goos-Hänchen and Imbert-Fedorov shifts for leaky guided modes,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 22(6), 1290–1299 (2005). [CrossRef]  

43. T. Tang, C. Li, L. Luo, Y. Zhang, and Q. Yuan, “Thermo-optic Imbert-Fedorov effect in a prism-waveguide coupling system with silicon-on-insulator,” Opt. Commun. 370, 49–54 (2016). [CrossRef]  

44. Y. Xiang, X. Jiang, Q. You, J. Guo, and X. Dai, “Enhanced spin Hall effect of reflected light with guided-wave surface plasmon resonance,” Photonics Res. 5(5), 467–472 (2017). [CrossRef]  

45. X. J. Tan and X. S. Zhu, “Enhancing photonic spin Hall effect via long-range surface plasmon resonance,” Opt. Lett. 41(11), 2478–2481 (2016). [CrossRef]  

46. L. Salasnich, “Enhancement of four reflection shifts by a three-layer surface-plasmon resonance,” Phys. Rev. A 86(5), 055801 (2012). [CrossRef]  

47. X. Zhou and X. Ling, “Enhanced photonic spin Hall effect due to surface plasmon resonance,” IEEE Photonics J. 8(1), 1–8 (2016). [CrossRef]  

48. T. Tang, J. Li, Y. Zhang, C. Li, and L. Luo, “Spin hall effect of transmitted light in a three-layer waveguide with lossy epsilon-near-zero metamaterial,” Opt. Express 24(24), 28113–28121 (2016). [CrossRef]  

49. R. G. Wan and M. S. Zubairy, “Controlling photonic spin hall effect based on tunable surface plasmon resonance with an n- type coherent medium,” Phys. Rev. A 101(3), 033837 (2020). [CrossRef]  

50. S. Asiri, J. Xu, M. Al-Amri, and M. S. Zubairy, “Controlling the goos-hänchen and imbert-fedorov shifts via pump and driving fields,” Phys. Rev. A 93(1), 013821 (2016). [CrossRef]  

51. E. V. Zharikov, V. Zhekov, L. Kulevskii, T. Murina, V. V. Osiko, A. Prokhorov, A. Savel’ev, V. V. Smirnov, B. Starikov, and M. Timoshechkin, “Stimulated emission from Er3+ ions in yttrium aluminum garnet crystals at λ= 2.94 µ,” Sov. J. Quantum Electron. 4(8), 1039–1040 (1975). [CrossRef]  

52. H. Xu, Z. Dai, and Z. Jiang, “Effect of concentration of the Er3+ ion on electromagnetically induced transparency in Er3+:YAG crystal,” Phys. Lett. A 294(1), 19–25 (2002). [CrossRef]  

53. T. Shui, L. Li, X. Wang, and W. X. Yang, “One-and two-dimensional electromagnetically induced gratings in an Er3+-doped yttrium aluminum garnet crystal,” Sci. Rep. 10(1), 4019 (2020). [CrossRef]  

54. C. Meng, T. Shui, W. X. Yang, and Y. H. Tian, “Control of an electromagnetically induced grating by er 3+ ion concentration in an er 3+-doped yag crystal,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 38(6), 2036–2042 (2021). [CrossRef]  

55. G. Wang, X. Yan, J. H. Wu, and J. Y. Gao, “The phase dependent properties of gain and absorption in an Er3+-doped yttrium aluminum garnet crystal,” Opt. Commun. 267(1), 118–123 (2006). [CrossRef]  

56. J. Qian, H. F. Zhang, and J. Y. Gao, “Positive and negative dispersion in an Er3+-doped yttrium aluminum garnet crystal,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 21(7), 1364–1368 (2004). [CrossRef]  

57. H. F. Zhang, J. H. Wu, X. M. Su, and J. Y. Gao, “Quantum-interference effects on the index of refraction in an Er3+-doped yttrium aluminum garnet crystal,” Phys. Rev. A 66(5), 053816 (2002). [CrossRef]  

58. S. H. Asadpour and H. R. Soleimani, “Role of incoherent pumping and Er3+ ion concentration on subluminal and superluminal light propagation in Er3+-doped YAG crystal,” Chin. Phys. B 24(1), 014204 (2015). [CrossRef]  

59. Z. Wang, “Optical bistability via coherent and incoherent fields in an Er3+-doped yttrium–aluminum–garnet crystal,” Opt. Commun. 283(17), 3291–3295 (2010). [CrossRef]  

60. S. H. Asadpour and H. Rahimpour Soleimani, “Comparison of optical properties between ladder and lambda-type EIT medium with Er3+ ion concentration in Er3+: YAG crystal,” J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Electron. 25(8), 3578–3585 (2014). [CrossRef]  

61. X. M. Chen, T. Shui, C. Meng, T. Zhang, X. Deng, and W. X. Yang, “Controllable goos–hänchen shift and optical switching in an Er3+-doped yttrium aluminum garnet crystal,” Laser Phys. Lett. 18(4), 045205 (2021). [CrossRef]  

62. T. Z. Chen, Z. Y. Shi, L. Ai, T. Shui, and W. X. Yang, “Role of Er3+ ion concentration on the goos–hänchen shift in an Er3+-doped yag crystal,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 40(6), 1591–1598 (2023). [CrossRef]  

63. B. S. Ham and P. R. Hemmer, “Coherence switching in a four-level system: quantum switching,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 84(18), 4080–4083 (2000). [CrossRef]  

64. V. Zhekov, T. M. Murina, A. M. Prokhorov, M. I. Studenikin, S. Georgescu, V. Lupei, and I. Ursu, “Cooperative process in Y3Al5O12: Er3+ crystals,” Sov. J. Quantum Electron. 16(2), 274–276 (1986). [CrossRef]  

65. Q. Wang, S. Zhang, and Y. Jia, “Effect of the concentration of the Er3+ ion on the spectral intensity parameters of Er3+: YAG crystals,” J. Alloys Compd. 202(1-2), 1–5 (1993). [CrossRef]  

66. M. Shinn, W. Sibley, M. Drexhage, and R. Brown, “Optical transitions of er 3+ ions in fluorozirconate glass,” Phys. Rev. B 27(11), 6635–6648 (1983). [CrossRef]  

67. P. B. Johnson and R. Christy, “Optical constants of the noble metals,” Phys. Rev. B 6(12), 4370–4379 (1972). [CrossRef]  

Data availability

Data underlying the results presented in this paper are not publicly available at this time but may be obtained from the authors upon reasonable request.

Cited By

Optica participates in Crossref's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from Optica Publishing Group journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (9)

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1. Level structure of atomic system and the position relation between field and atomic system. (a) Sketch of the SHE of light in K-R structure composed of a BK7 prism, a thin Ag film and an Er$^{3+}$ ion -doped YAG crystal; (b) Sketch of diagram of the three-level ladder-type Er$^{3+}$ ion system interacting with the probe and control fields.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. (a)The reflectivity $|r|$ and (b) the spin-dependent transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ as a function of incident angle $\theta$ for different values of doped Er$^{3+}$ ion concentration. The number represents the concentration of the doped Er$^{3+}$ ion. Other parameters are $\gamma =0.154$MHz, $\beta =0.05\gamma$, $E_c=35E_0$ ($E_0/{2\hbar }=\gamma /\mu _{23_0}$) and $\Delta _p=\Delta _c=0$.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3. The spin-dependent transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ as a function of the Ag film thickness $d$. The incident angle $\theta _{\textrm {res}}=41.67^\circ$ and other parameters are the same as in Fig. 2.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4. (a) Imaginary part Im($\chi$) and (b) real part Re($\chi$) of the susceptibility $\chi$ as a function of the probe detuning $\Delta _p$. The inset in (a) shows the enlarged view of the Im$(\chi )$ near $\Delta _p=0$ for $0.5{\%}$, $3{\%}$, $15{\%}$ and $33{\%}$ Er$^{3+}$ ion concentrations. Other parameters are the same as in Fig. 2.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 5. (a) Imaginary part Im($\chi$) and (b) real part Re($\chi$) of the susceptibility $\chi$ as a function of the intensity $E_c$ of the control field. Other parameters are the same as in Fig. 2.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 6. The spin-dependent transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ as a function of the incident angle $\theta$ and the control field intensities $E_c$ for different concentrations of doped Er$^{3+}$ ion. (a) $0.5{\%}$, (b)$3{\%}$, (c)$15{\%}$, (d)$33{\%}$. Other parameters are the same as in Fig. 5.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 7. (a) Imaginary part Im($\chi$) and (b) real part Re($\chi$) of the susceptibility $\chi$ as a function of the detuning $\Delta _{c}$ of the control field. $E_c=35E_0$ and other parameters are the same as in Fig. 5.
Fig. 8.
Fig. 8. The spin-dependent transverse shift $\delta _{p}^{+}$ as a function of incident angle $\theta$ and the incident angle $\theta$ for different values of control field detuning $\Delta _c$ and concentrations of doped Er$^{3+}$ ion. (a) $0.5{\%}$, (b)$3{\%}$, (c)$15{\%}$, (d)$33{\%}$. The insets in (a)-(e) show the variation of the resonance angle $\theta _{\textrm {res}}$ with the control detuning $\Delta _c$ . Other parameters are the same as in Fig. 7.
Fig. 9.
Fig. 9. The experimental setup of displacement sensor based on the SHE of light. BS: beam splitter, A: attenuator, AOM: acousto-optic modulator, PSD: position-sensitive detector, I: Iris, P: Polarizer, M: Mirror.

Tables (1)

Tables Icon

Table 1. Electrical dipole moments and energy level lifetime in an Er 3 + -doped YAG crystals containing four different concentrations of the Er 3 + ion [64,65]

Equations (16)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

r p , s = r p , s 12 + r p , s 23 e 2 i k 2 z d 1 + r p , s 12 r p , s 23 e 2 i k 2 z d ,
r p i j = k i z / ε i k j z / ε j k i z / ε i + k j z / ε j ,
r s i j = k i z k j z k i z + k j z ,
δ p ± = k 1 ω 0 2 [ 1 + | r s | | r p | cos ( φ s φ p ) ] cot θ k 1 ω 0 2 + | ln r p θ | 2 + | ( 1 + r s r p ) cot θ | 2 ,
H I = Δ p | 2 2 | + ( Δ p + Δ c ) | 3 3 | ( Ω c | 3 2 | + Ω p | 2 1 | + H . c . ) ,
d ρ d t = i [ H I , ρ ] 1 2 { Γ , ρ } ,
ρ 11 t = ( Γ 21 + γ 2 ) ρ 22 + Γ 31 ρ 33 i Ω p ρ 12 + i Ω p ρ 21 ,
ρ 22 t = ( Γ 21 + γ 2 ) ρ 22 + ( Γ 32 + γ 3 ) ρ 33 i Ω c ρ 23 + i Ω c ρ 32 + i Ω p ρ 12 i Ω p ρ 21 ,
ρ 21 t = ( γ 21 + i Δ p ) ρ 21 + i Ω c ρ 31 + i Ω p ( ρ 11 ρ 22 ) ,
ρ 31 t = [ γ 31 + i ( Δ p + Δ c ) ] ρ 31 + i Ω c ρ 21 i Ω p ρ 32 ,
ρ 32 t = ( γ 32 + i Δ c ) ρ 32 + i Ω p ρ 31 + i Ω c ( ρ 22 ρ 33 ) ,
ρ 21 = i Ω p ( γ 31 + i Δ p + i Δ c ) ( γ 21 + i Δ p ) ( γ 31 + i Δ p + i Δ c ) + Ω c 2 .
χ = N | μ 12 | 2 ε 0 Ω p ρ 21 = N | μ 12 | 2 ε 0 i ( γ 31 + i Δ p + i Δ c ) ( γ 21 + i Δ p ) ( γ 31 + i Δ p + i Δ c ) + Ω c 2 .
χ = β i C k 12 2 ( γ 31 + i Δ p + i Δ c ) ( γ 21 + i Δ p ) ( γ 31 + i Δ p + i Δ c ) + k 23 2 Ω c 0 2 ,
| r p | min = | r 12 | 1 4 Γ int Γ rad ( Γ int + Γ rad ) 2 ,
Γ int k 0 2 1 ε 2 ( ε 2 + 1 ) 3 [ ε 2 + ε 2 2 Im ( χ ) ] ,
Select as filters


Select Topics Cancel
© Copyright 2024 | Optica Publishing Group. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies.