Talk:Elliptical polarization

Untitled
Source of original text: Federal Standard 1037C, MIL-STD-188 and MIL-STD-2196

&mdash; J I P | Talk 15:28, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Jones vector interpretation
I believe that information given about meaning of theta and alpha in Jones vector is incorrect. Both tilt and axes ratio are more complicated. See for example.

Helical polarization
I reverted an edit that altered the article to describe elliptical and circular polarization as part of a broader category called "helical polarization". I'm not sure this is correct: isn't "helical polarization" just a synonym for "circular polarization"? It's worth mentioning that elliptical and circular polarizations have chirality while linear polarization does not, but I don't think this is best handled by creating a new category of polarization. At the least, a citation is needed to show that this classification is actually used in a reliable source.--Srleffler (talk) 04:39, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Elliptical_polarization_schematic.png
Hello!

This bot has detected that this page contains an image, Image:Elliptical_polarization_schematic.png, in a raster format. A replacement is available as a Scalable vector graphic (SVG) at File:Polarisation (Elliptical).svg. If the replacement image is suitable please edit the article to use the vector version. Scalable vector graphics should be used in preference to raster for images that can easily represented in a vector graphic format. If this bot is in error, you may leave a bug report at its talk page Thanks SVnaGBot1 (talk) 10:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Description of polarization direction
I made an edit that was reverted with the comment "you need to be clear about why you think your version is correct". My original edit was made "to more closely match the wording in Standard 1037C", which states "polarization, is elliptical and is traced in a clockwise or counterclockwise sense, as viewed in the direction of propagation".

Regardless of sign convention, the wording on this page should match this terminology, as "in the direction of propagation" is unambiguous, whereas "into the propagating wave" is quite ambiguous. RegulusMagnus (talk) 13:58, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Could mention optical and radio astronomy
Could mention optical astronomy and radio astronomy - both measure the % of linear and circular polarised radiation. Maybe just a see-also unless they actually refer to it as EP ? - Rod57 (talk) 13:49, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Phase is wrongly marked in polarization ellipse
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Polarisation_ellipse.svg/250px-Polarisation_ellipse.svg.png

The ωt+φ phase angle is wrongly marked in the polarization ellipse picture.

For example, a point P(x,y) on a ellipse with no θ=0, t=0, its location only defined by φ, A,B We know x=Acos(θ), y=Bsin(θ)

but y/x=A/B tan(θ)

So θ MUST NOT be the angle between the vector OP to the x axis! But in the picture it is mark as if it is! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wonderkismet (talk • contribs) 08:52, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Your equations are wrong. $$x=A\cos t$$ and $$y=B\sin t$$. The problem with what you have done is that $$t \ne \theta$$. As mentioned at Ellipse, $$t$$ is not the angle between OP and the x axis. See Ellipse.--Srleffler (talk) 16:18, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

'''Another ISSUE is x, y can be of different phase!

x=Acos(θx), y=Bsin(θy)

So it is really not that simple''' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wonderkismet (talk • contribs) 09:34, 24 August 2019 (UTC)


 * That's not an ellipse.
 * If you think $x$ and $y$ can have different phase, then you don't understand the meaning of $x$, $y$, or phase. I suggest you think about it some more...--Srleffler (talk) 16:20, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Wrong notation for axis orientation in figure


The figure shows theta as the axis orientation angle but phi is correct. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Polarisation_ellipse.svg Farhad.mazlumi (talk) 08:32, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
 * It looks like the drawing may not be correct. It was added to the article in 2014, separately from the math. --Srleffler (talk) 22:00, 2 September 2023 (UTC)