Abstract
In Sec. 6 (polarization monitor) of our recent publication [Opt. Express 29(5), 7024 (2021) [CrossRef] ], we assumed a small value of δ. This is however incorrect. The correct approximation for small β leads to the updated Eqs. (10)–(11), resulting in a corrected Fig. 12.
© 2022 Optica Publishing Group under the terms of the Optica Open Access Publishing Agreement
In Sec. 6 on the polarization monitor of [1], we assumed a small value of $\delta$, which is incorrect. The correct approximation $\beta \ll 1$ can be derived from a general treatment of the problem with the condition $\vert (S_3/S_0)_\mathrm {atom} \vert \lesssim 0.3$, and leads to the following corrected Eq. (10):
The corrected Eq. (11) then reads:
Since $\delta$ is in general not small (but can be on the order of $10^3 \pi$), even small relative fluctuations in $\delta$ will prevent the determination of $\Delta \psi _\text {atom}$ with our method. Furthermore, a single linear retarder is not a sufficient model for a combination of linear birefringent elements, but a circular birefringence term (rotator) must also be included [2]. The latter can be non-zero even when cascading multiple linear retarders only, nor can it be assumed to be constant. This additionally prevents the determination of $\Delta \psi _\text {atom}$ from $\Delta \psi _\text {back}$. However, from the polarization-maintaining properties of our fiber we know that the variations of this angle are always below $\Delta \psi _\text {atom} \lesssim 3 ^\circ$, which is sufficient for our experiment.
In contrast to $\delta$, the beam splitter retardance $\delta _\text {BS}$ can be small, such that Eqs. (12) remain unchanged as long as polarizing effects of the beam splitter can be neglected.
The corrected Fig. 12 of [1] resulting from the above corrections is presented in Fig. 1 .
Funding
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (EXC-2111-390814868, MA 7826/1-1); Max-Planck-Gesellschaft.
Disclosures
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
1. V. Wirthl, L. Maisenbacher, J. Weitenberg, A. Hertlein, A. Grinin, A. Matveev, R. Pohl, T. W. Hänsch, and T. Udem, “Improved active fiber-based retroreflector with intensity stabilization and a polarization monitor for the near UV,” Opt. Express 29(5), 7024 (2021). [CrossRef]
2. H. Hurwitz and R. C. Jones, “A New Calculus for the Treatment of Optical Systems. II. Proof of Three General Equivalence Theorems,” J. Opt. Soc. Am. 31(7), 493–499 (1941). [CrossRef]