A detailed comparison of non-Kolmogorov and anisotropic optical turbulence theories using wave optics simulations

Author(s):  
Daniel A. Paulson ◽  
Chensheng Wu ◽  
Christopher C. Davis
1999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas H. Nelson ◽  
Roger R. Petrin ◽  
Charles R. Quick, Jr. ◽  
L. John Jolin ◽  
Edward P. MacKerrow ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas H. Nelson ◽  
Roger R. Petrin ◽  
Edward P. MacKerrow ◽  
Mark J. Schmitt ◽  
Bernard R. Foy ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 103728
Author(s):  
Utku Görkem Yasa ◽  
Özgür Bozat ◽  
Ziya Gürkan Figen ◽  
Ali Rıza Bozbulut

Author(s):  
J. M. Cowley

The comparison of scanning transmission electron microscopy (STEM) with conventional transmission electron microscopy (CTEM) can best be made by means of the Reciprocity Theorem of wave optics. In Fig. 1 the intensity measured at a point A’ in the CTEM image due to emission from a point B’ in the electron source is equated to the intensity at a point of the detector, B, due to emission from a point A In the source In the STEM. On this basis it can be demonstrated that contrast effects In the two types of instrument will be similar. The reciprocity relationship can be carried further to include the Instrument design and experimental procedures required to obtain particular types of information. For any. mode of operation providing particular information with one type of microscope, the analagous type of operation giving the same information can be postulated for the other type of microscope. Then the choice between the two types of instrument depends on the practical convenience for obtaining the required Information.


1971 ◽  
Vol 105 (10) ◽  
pp. 359-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
O.A. Shustin ◽  
T.S. Velichkina ◽  
L.F. Mikheeva ◽  
Ivan A. Yakovlev
Keyword(s):  

2007 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
L'ubomír Martinovič

Light front field theory: An advanced PrimerWe present an elementary introduction to quantum field theory formulated in terms of Dirac's light front variables. In addition to general principles and methods, a few more specific topics and approaches based on the author's work will be discussed. Most of the discussion deals with massive two-dimensional models formulated in a finite spatial volume starting with a detailed comparison between quantization of massive free fields in the usual field theory and the light front (LF) quantization. We discuss basic properties such as relativistic invariance and causality. After the LF treatment of the soluble Federbush model, a LF approach to spontaneous symmetry breaking is explained and a simple gauge theory - the massive Schwinger model in various gauges is studied. A LF version of bosonization and the massive Thirring model are also discussed. A special chapter is devoted to the method of discretized light cone quantization and its application to calculations of the properties of quantum solitons. The problem of LF zero modes is illustrated with the example of the two-dimensional Yukawa model. Hamiltonian perturbation theory in the LF formulation is derived and applied to a few simple processes to demonstrate its advantages. As a byproduct, it is shown that the LF theory cannot be obtained as a "light-like" limit of the usual field theory quantized on an initial space-like surface. A simple LF formulation of the Higgs mechanism is then given. Since our intention was to provide a treatment of the light front quantization accessible to postgradual students, an effort was made to discuss most of the topics pedagogically and a number of technical details and derivations are contained in the appendices.


2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-71
Author(s):  
Geo Siegwart

The main objective is an interpretation of the island parody, in particular a logical reconstruction of the parodying argument that stays close to the text. The parodied reasoning is identified as the proof in the second chapter of the Proslogion, more specifically, this proof as it is represented by Gaunilo in the first chapter of his Liber pro insipiente. The second task is a detailed comparison between parodied and parodying argument as well as an account of their common structure. The third objective is a tentative characterization of the nature and function of parodies of arguments. It seems that parodying does not add new pertinent points of view to the usual criticism of an argument.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document