All 609nm please stand up

[bloompyle]

In short, Sam and I (and likely Steve without him realizing it) need everyone with 609nm lasing to self-identify here. Preferably with some recent imagery of the line in question visible.

We have some theories that we need to test, and in doing so, we need two things.

1. All known owners of tube's lasing the line to self-identify.
2. All known members of spectrometers with <0.1nm accuracy to also self-identify.

This debate between 609.62nm and 609.07nm has gone on long enough. We need the final seal of approval to analyze the line in question. If you have a spectrometer that you are willing to use for this, please also post readings of "known" wavelengths. By this, I mean measuring ion and/or DPSS lines. Gas and ion lines are the best candidate, they will only change by thousandths of a nanometer based on cavity length changes - in other words, good to find a meter's margin of error.

The spectr doesn't have to be calibrated. As long as it always reads Ar+ 488 and 515 as 538 and 565..we are good.

Once we identify the line, I think I've created a test to actually coerce it into resonation. Though that's specifically for the 609.62nm line...still working on something for 609.07nm.

So please. Please, please, please...the three of us are counting on you.


-Sean

 

[ultimatekaiser]

-raises eyebrows- i've already had some pretty lengthy discussions about this topic as well as sent most of my info to Sam and Steve on the matter. I am quite sure it's 609nm, much like Sam. I highly doubt my spectrometer would be off by over half a nanometer. I took a measurement and all of the other lines were exactly where they should be down to the ~0.1nm in the same scan. Nor did I spot any contaminates in the tube. I even got hints of the yellow FWM line a few times.

 

[bloompyle]

We aren't worried about contaminants. There is a real noted He-Ne line at 609.62nm that will cause competition with 632.8nm when present - nothing to do with contamination that I know of.

 

[ultimatekaiser]

Yes I long threw out Ar contaminates. I haven't found a reference to a 609.7, all of mine just say 609nm, and Dr. Knollenburg's paper states 610nm. I can force a yellow tube to lase at this wavelength and it consistently measures 609nm. Along with 594.1, 604.6, 611.8, and even 632.8 all showing up down to the ~0.1nm as a check. It's pretty hard to argue with that. What do you plan to do?

 

[bloompyle]

It's 609.6 or 609.07 that we are deciphering between. Gas Lasers references 609.6nm, as does a source that Steve was mentioning to me. Some Russian paper on line competition with 632.8nm - 609.62nm was mentioned with some interest, but nothing more.

The plan was simple, use optics that would populate the cavity with 632.8nm, but not enough for lasing, just something to give the 609.6nm to feed on. See if I can coerce the line into lasing. I'd always lose the line when I made the tube lase 632.8nm, didn't click before, but it makes sense now. If the line has something to do with stealing energy from 632.8nm, maybe the two things were linked.

I'd like to explain more, but my ambien is kicking in, so it's lights out for me.

 

[ultimatekaiser]

Fair enough. I can get it to lase fine with and without red, but I see where you're going with it.

 

[LSRFAQ]

Kaiser, You got access to a frequency counter that does Ratio A/B in your lab?

I have access to a milling machine for the airtrack cart.

That would get it over with once and for all, us a short red laser for the reference and the 609 line to be the target.

Note for Bloom, a ratio counter is a common function on laboratory frequency counters and gets rid of the laborious construction of electronics to calculate the difference in wavelength. While I have one such counter here at work, I cant exactly loan it out.


See

A reliable, compact, and low-cost Michelson wavemeter for laser
wavelength measurement, P. J. Fox, R. E. Scholten, and M. R. Walkiewicz

http://www.phys.uni-sofia.bg/~os/Praktikum/Interferometer/wavemeter_2.pdf

Steve