volume | PIER Journals

Abstract

Many scientists do not believe that Maxwell's fish eye mirror (MFEM) can provide perfect imaging even if there is a drain array around the imaging points. However, one microwave experiment found a case where a 0.2λ resolution could be achieved in an MFEM experiment [New J. Phys. 13 (2011) 033016]. In this paper, we show that the MFEM cannot resolve two imaging points at such a subwavelength resolution in most cases even in the presence of a drain array, and an extraordinary case of subwavelength imaging requires a particular phase difference between two coherent sources. Both numerical simulations and experimental results show that the phase difference of two subwavelength-distanced coherent sources greatly influences the field distribution around the drain array. In very few cases (when the phase difference of the two sources is chosen to be a very specific value), we might resolve the image points in the drain array under the assumption that the power absorbed by the scanning cable on the left side of the drain array should be symmetric to that on the right side of the drain array [New J. Phys. 13 (2011) 033016]. However, in most cases, we cannot obtain a super-resolution imaging, as other drains around the image points will greatly influence the imaging. We also note that the experiment assumed that the power absorbed by the scanning cable on the left and the right sides of the drain array is symmetric is not correct for the experiment reported in [New J. Phys. 13 (2011) 033016], as the drain array itself is not symmetric. The highly non-symmetric distribution of the absorbed power is also verified by our simulation and experimental results. The experimental ``result'' of resolving two image peaks could potentially be recovered using only a single image peak, which demonstrates the wrong assumption of mirror symmetry. Comparisons and comments on perfect passive drains, ``super-resolution'' in a spherical geodesic waveguide, and time reverse imaging are also given.

1. Ma, Y. G., S. Sahebdivan, C. K. Ong, T. Tyc, and U. Leonhardt, "Evidence for subwavelength imaging with positive refraction," New J. Phys., Vol. 13, No. 3, 033016, 2011.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/13/3/033016 Google Scholar

2. Ma, Y. G., C. K. Ong, S. Sahebdivan, T. Tyc, and U. Leonhardt, "Perfect imaging without negative refraction for microwaves," Physics Optics, arXiv: 1007.2530, 2010. Google Scholar

3. Leonhardt, U., "Perfect imaging without negative refraction," New J. Phys., Vol. 11, No. 9, 093040, 2009.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/11/9/093040 Google Scholar

4. Blaikie, R. J., "Comment on ‘perfect imaging without negative refraction'," New J. Phys., Vol. 12, No. 5, 058001, 2010.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/12/5/058001 Google Scholar

5. Blaikie, R. J., "Perfect imaging without refraction?," New J. Phys., Vol. 13, No. 12, 125006, 2011.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/13/12/125006 Google Scholar

6. Leonhardt, U., "Reply to comment on ‘perfect imaging without negative refraction’," New J. Phys., Vol. 12, No. 5, 058002, 2010.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/12/5/058002 Google Scholar

7. Kinsler, P. and A. Favaro, "Comment on ‘reply to comment on ‘perfect imaging without negative refraction”," New J. Phys., Vol. 13, No. 2, 028001, 2011.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/13/2/028001 Google Scholar

8. Leonhardt, U., "Reply to comment on ‘perfect imaging without negative refraction’," New J. Phys., Vol. 13, No. 2, 028002, 2011.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/13/2/028002 Google Scholar

9. Tyc, T. and A. Danner, "Resolution of Maxwell’s fisheye with an optimal active drain," New J. Phys., Vol. 16, No. 6, 063001, 2014.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/6/063001 Google Scholar

10. Sun, F. and S. He, "Can Maxwell’s fish eye lens really give perfect imaging?," Progress In Electromagnetics Research, Vol. 108, 307-322, 2010.
doi:10.2528/PIER10091003 Google Scholar

11. Sun, F., X. C. Ge, and S. He, "Can Maxwell’s fish eye lens really give perfect imaging? Part II. The case with passive drains," Progress In Electromagnetics Research, Vol. 110, 313-328, 2010.
doi:10.2528/PIER10110313 Google Scholar

12. Leonhardt, U. and T. G. Philbin, "Perfect imaging with positive refraction in three dimensions," Phys. Rev. A, Vol. 81, No. 1, 011804, 2010.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.81.011804 Google Scholar

13. Merlin, R., "Comment on ‘perfect imaging with positive refraction in three dimensions’," Phys. Rev. A, Vol. 82, No. 5, 057801, 2010.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.82.057801 Google Scholar

14. Leonhardt, U. and T. G. Philbin, "Reply to ‘comment on ‘perfect imaging with positive refraction in three dimensions”," Phys. Rev. A, Vol. 82, No. 5, 057802, 2010.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.82.057802 Google Scholar

15. Merlin, R., "Maxwell’s fish-eye lens and the mirage of perfect imaging," J. Opt., Vol. 13, No. 2, 024017, 2011.
doi:10.1088/2040-8978/13/2/024017 Google Scholar

16. Zhang, X., "Perfect lenses in focus," Nature, Vol. 480, No. 7375, 42-43, 2011.
doi:10.1038/480042a Google Scholar

17. Quevedo-Teruel, O., R. C. Mitchell-Thomas, and Y. Hao, "Frequency dependence and passive drains in fish-eye lenses," Phys. Rev. A, Vol. 86, No. 5, 053817, 2012.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.86.053817 Google Scholar

18. Ma, Y., T.Wu, and C. K. Ong, "Subwavelength drains designed for mirror-closed dielectric lenses," J. Opt., Vol. 15, No. 12, 125705, 2013.
doi:10.1088/2040-8978/15/12/125705 Google Scholar

19. Gonzalez, J. C., P. Ben´ıtez, and J. C. Minano, "Perfect drain for the Maxwell fish eye lens," New J. Opt., Vol. 15, No. 12, 125705, 2013.
doi:10.1088/2040-8978/15/12/125705 Google Scholar

19. Gonzalez, J. C., P. Ben´ıtez, and J. C. Minano, "Perfect drain for the Maxwell fish eye lens," New J. Phys., Vol. 13, No. 2, 023038, 2011.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/13/2/023038 Google Scholar

20. Xu, L. and H. Chen, "Coherent perfect absorber makes a perfect drain for Maxwell’s fish-eye lens," EPL, Vol. 100, No. 3, 34001, 2012.
doi:10.1209/0295-5075/100/34001 Google Scholar

21. Minano, J. C., P. Benıtez, and J. C. Gonzalez, "Perfect imaging with geodesic waveguides," New J. Phys., Vol. 12, No. 12, 123023, 2010.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/12/12/123023 Google Scholar

22. Minano, J. C., R. Marqu´es, J. C. Gonz´alez, P. Ben´ıtez, V. Delgado, D. Grabovickic, and M. Freire, "Super-resolution for a point source better than λ/500 using positive refraction," New J. Phys., Vol. 13, No. 12, 125009, 2011.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/13/12/125009 Google Scholar

23. Gonzalez, J. C., D. Grabovickic, P. Benıtez, and J. C. Minano, "Circuital model for the spherical geodesic waveguide perfect drain," New J. Phys., Vol. 14, No. 8, 083033, 2012.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/14/8/083033 Google Scholar

24. Minano, J. C., J. Sanchez-Dehesa, J. C. Gonzalez, P. Benıtez, D. Grabovickic, J. Carbonell, and H. Ahmadpanahi, "Experimental evidence of super-resolution better than λ/105 with positive refraction," New J. Phys., Vol. 16, No. 3, 033015, 2014.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/3/033015 Google Scholar

25. Born, M. and E. Wolf, Principles of Optics, 6th edition, Cambridge University Pres, Cambridge, 1998.

26. Leonhardt, U., S. Sahebdivan, A. Kogan, and T. Tyc, "A simple model explaining super-resolution in absolute optical instruments," New J. Phys., Vol. 17, No. 5, 053007, 2015.
doi:10.1088/1367-2630/17/5/053007 Google Scholar

27. Heintzmann, R. and C. Cremer, "Laterally modulated excitation microscopy: Improvement of resolution by using a diffraction grating," Proc. SPIE, Vol. 3568, 185-195, 1998. Google Scholar

28. Dunn, R. C., "Near-field scanning optical microscopy," Chemical Rev., Vol. 99, No. 10, 2891-2928, 1999.
doi:10.1021/cr980130e Google Scholar

29. Lerosey, G., J. De Rosny, A. Tourin, and M. Fink, "Focusing beyond the diffraction limit with far-field time reversal," Science, Vol. 315, No. 5815, 1120-1122, 2007.
doi:10.1126/science.1134824 Google Scholar

30. Neice, A., "Methods and limitations of subwavelength imaging," Advances in Imaging and Electron Physics, Vol. 163, 117-140, 2010.
doi:10.1016/S1076-5670(10)63003-0 Google Scholar

Prof. Sailing He

Dr. Fei Sun

Dr. Shuwei Guo

Dr. Shuomin Zhong

Dr. Lu Lan

Dr. Wei Jiang

Professor Yungui Ma

Mr. Tiantian Wu