Category: optics

Teaching & Meaning

What adds meaning to my academic work?

Perhaps, an anonymous feedback on your teaching is one of them….

“very well taught course at a well defined pace. The interesting way various different aspects and fields in Optics was introduced was fascinating, made us so very keen on knowing more! The mind maps at the beginning of every topic, the indexes professor made was a great way to keep the bigger picture in mind and helped us glide through it. The assignment was also a great way to make us go through materials without feeling it it be imposing, rather finding it more interesting! Thank you so much Sir for this amazing course, the enthusiastic way in which you taught, all the great conversations you engaged in with us, and opened our eyes to explore so much more in this field! thank you!!“

I had a diverse class (BS-Physics majors, MS Quantum Tech, iPhD) with 110+ students, and I am glad a lot of students enjoyed the course this time.
I am a bit overwhelmed by the positive feedback I received on my teaching methods. For sure, I learnt about the subject as much as they did.

And as I always say: there is more to learn…for all of us..

Human interaction zindabad :-)

Quantum Optics – teaching in Jan 2026

More than 22 years ago, I started my journey as a research student in theoretical physics – Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) + Radiative Transfer (MSc summer project at the Indian Institute of Astrophysics), and my special paper in the MSc final semester was QED. Later in my PhD, I branched into experiments on light scattering (Raman, Mie & Rayleigh).

Over the years, QED and quantum optics have always been at the back of my mind while studying, researching and teaching.

Come January, I will be teaching a course on Quantum Optics to MS(Quantum Tech), MS-PhDs, and 4th-year physics UGs

I designed the first course on this topic at IISER Pune about a decade ago with the able inputs from Prof. Rajaram Nityananda, and I have taught the course a few times. Now, after a few years, I will teach it again.

With the emergence of quantum sci & tech, there is a new impetus and excitement on this topic.

Having said that, the foundations of the topic remain the same, and Quantum Optics has a wonderful history and philosophy associated with it…and where better to start than Dirac’s classic (see below).

Look out for ‘quantum blogs’ in 2026…

Random Walks in Polarization

I have been teaching polarization of light in my optics class. In there, I introduced them to matrix representation of polarization states. One of the standard references that I use for explanation is a 1954 paper in American J. Physics, by McMaster titled: “Polarization and the Stokes Parameters.”

While skimming through the pdf of the journal paper, I found an excerpt from a 1954 book, which quotes Fresnel writing to Thomas Young:

Further, I knew from the past that S. Chandrasekhar (astrophysicist) had a role in rejuvenating Stokes vector formalism in radiative transfer. Below is his description from AIP oral history archives (May 1977):

” I started the sequence of papers, and almost at the time I started it, I read the paper by Wick in which he had used the method of discrete coordinates,* and I realized at once that that method can be used in a large scale way for solving all problems. So that went on. I have always said and felt that the five years in which I worked on radiative transfer [1944 – 49] is the happiest period of my scientific life. I started on it with no idea that one paper would lead to another, which would lead to another, which would lead to another and soon for some 24 papers — and the whole subject moved with its own momentum.” (emphasis added)

He further states how he rediscovered Stokes polarization vector formalism:

“All this had a momentum of it own. Then suddenly I realized one had to put polarization in; the problems of characterizing polarized light — my rediscovery of Stokes original paper, writing on Stokes parameters and calling them Stokes parameters for the first time“

Chandra further adds that the Stokes formalism was almost forgotten for 50 years, and he had a role in resurrecting it.

Next, there was some noise on social media where some one questioned the utility of matrix multiplication. For them, below is a wonderful review article by McMaster (again), to explore from polarization viewpoint, and realize the power of non-commutative matrix algebra:

Finally, the original paper by Stokes on his formalism, which is hard to find (thanks to paywall). But, classic papers are hard to suppress, and I found the full paper on internet archives.

Below is a snapshot:

Enjoy your random walk !

Pursuit of Radiance – musical & philosophical

What happens when Carnatic music, eastern and western philosophy and optics come together?

Well….if you ask my friend Karthik Raveendran, who is a Carnatic vocalist and a physicist, he will say Kānthimathīm – which is his musical video perspective on ‘Pursuit of Radiance’.

Below I post his spectacular art, which includes his music and philosophical thoughts on the mentioned topics. All this visualized through Indian architecture, Finnish lakes and auroras over its sky.

He has been very kind to acknowledge me in his video for my minor input on scientific philosophy. I am truly honored.

Do watch+listen (~ 14 min)

Light pressure – Lebedev coin

Today, in my optics class, I discussed optical forces due to momentum in electromagnetic waves. Towards the late 1800s, it was realized that light can impart momentum. This manifested as radiation pressure in the electromagnetic theory proposed by James Maxwell.

Pyotr Nikolaevich Lebedev (24 February 1866 – 1 March 1912) was one of the earliest to experimentally measure (~1899) the radiation pressure on a surface (link to his 1900 paper in German). In 1991, the Soviet Union released a 1 ruble coin (pictured above) to commemorate Lebedev’s scientific achievement.

The formula expresses the total momentum transferred per unit time ( radiation pressure, P) by a beam of N photons, each of energy hν, that is incident on a surface with a coefficient of reflectivity ρ. The constant, c, is the speed of light.

The discussion in the class was mainly related to Ashkin’s work. I have written about this in the past.

Shared below is a delightful lecture given by Ashkin at the age of ~96, after he received his Nobel prize.

Liquid Crystal Droplets + Plasmonic nanoparticle clusters

A droplet of liquid can act as an optical resonator. One can create a droplet of a liquid crystal and utilize its optical and topological properties. In recent times, liquid crystal droplets have emerged as a ‘soft photonic element’ in topological optics and photonics. Studying their optical behaviour in a controlled environment is a contemporary research problem.

In this context, we have an arXiv preprint on liquid crystal droplets and their reversible coupling to a small assembly of nanoparticles on a glass surface (see video).

Specifically, we ask: What happens to the modes of light inside the droplet due to such an interaction?

Thanks to the efforts of Sumant Pandey, we experimentally demonstrate the utility of optical tweezers to proximally couple (and decouple) nematic liquid crystal droplets to gold nanoparticle clusters, and record whispering gallery modes in coupled and decoupled states. We observe tuning of sharp resonant modes.
For more details, see the preprint: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.10126v1

Art and Chu – in Bell labs

Steven Chu and Arthur Ashkin in 1986, in front of the apparatus shortly after the first optical trapping experiment was completed. Image from Chu’s Nobel lecture.

Steven Chu’s Nobel lecture has some gems. Below, he shares his experience of working with Arthur Ashkin.

“In 1986, the world was excited about atom trapping. During this time, Art Ashkin began to use optical tweezers to trap micron sized particles. While experimenting with colloidal tobacco mosaic viruses, he noticed tiny, translucent objects in his sample. Rushing into my lab, he excitedly proclaimed that he had ‘discovered Life’. I went into his lab, half thinking that the excitement of the last few years had finally gotten the better of him. In his lab was a microscope objective focusing an argon laser beam into a petri dish of water. Off to the side was an old Edmund Scientific microscope. Squinting into the microscope, I saw my eye lashes. Squinting harder, I occasionally saw some translucent objects. Many of these objects were ‘floaters’, debris in my vitreous humor that could be moved by blinking my eyes. Art assured me that there were other objects there that would not move when I blinked my eyes. Sure enough, there were objects in the water that could be trapped and would swim away if the light were turned off. Art had discovered bugs in his apparatus, but these were real bugs, bacteria that had eventually grown in his sample beads and water.”

Chu won the physics Nobel in 1997, and Ashkin won the same in 2018. Ashkin was the pioneer of optical trapping and tweezers, and applied it to a variety of problems, including the manipulation of biological matter. Chu harnessed the momentum of light to trap and cool atoms. Both started their work and collaborated at Bell Labs. Chu moved to Stanford, whereas Ashkin stayed back. Bell Labs was a remarkable place in the 1980s, as Chu describes in his lecture :

“Bell Labs was a researcher’s paradise. Our management supplied us with funding, shielded us from bureaucracy, and urged us to do the best science possible. The cramped labs and office cubicles forced us to rub shoulders with each other. Animated discussions frequently interrupted seminars and casual conversations in the cafeteria would sometimes mark the beginning of a new collaboration.”

Can the world afford to have another Bell Labs in 2025? Can it recreate the magic?

Real is imaginary and vice versa

This week in my optics class, I have been teaching Kramers-Kronig (KK) relations of electric susceptibility. It is fascinating to see the causality argument emerge from the relationship between the real and imaginary parts of the complex susceptibility. Whereas the time domain explanation is relatively easier to appreciate (that dissipation follows perturbation in time), for me, the frequency domain implication in KK relation is fascinating: the fact that information about the real part of the function at all frequencies can give you insight into the imaginary part at any given frequency (and vice versa) makes it such a powerful mathematical and physical tool. For example, by knowing the absorption spectrum of a medium, you can find out the refractive index of a medium at a particular frequency that is not easily accessible in experiments.

Two inferences I draw:

1) Complex analysis combined with differential calculus is one of the most beautiful and powerful mathematical tools invented, and exploring its application in experimental scenarios has made physics intriguing, useful, and profound.

2) The KK relationship shows how causality and the structure of matter are connected to each other, and by studying them, one will be able to extrapolate the idea beyond the problem at hand and apply it to a different context in physics. It just shows how ideas hop from one domain to another and how mathematics plays a critical role in intellectual arbitrage.

Real is imaginary and vice versa. Complex numbers zindabad!

Light as EM wave – in Maxwell’s words

Every year, I teach an optics course to physics majors (including physics iPhD students and MS Quantum Tech students). In the process of introduction, I discuss how light was discovered to be an electromagnetic wave. One of the thrills of this topic is to quote Maxwell from his legendary 1865 paper1, in which he makes this monumental connection. Every time I teach this, I get an intellectual kick, even after doing this for almost 1.5 decades.

The highlighted text is the famous statement. Before that, Maxwell compares his result with two experimental results and confirms his prediction. I follow this up with Hertz’s experiment.

Note: Electric waves and telegraphy were already known before Maxwell’s paper. There were papers that discussed about velocity of light and its connection to electric waves. See this paper2, for example. However, these interpretations were not as comprehensive as Maxwell’s case, and importantly, the field theory viewpoint needed Faraday’s experiments and Maxwell’s interpretation.

  1. Maxwell, James Clerk. 1865. “VIII. A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 155 (January): 459–512. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1865.0008.
    ↩︎
  2. https://www.ifi.unicamp.br/~assis/Weber-Kohlrausch(2003).pdf ↩︎