Good day,

Indeed, there is a relationship between polarization and scattering, which, in finer detail, depends on the nature of the scattering. For instance, Rayleigh Scattering can be seen as impurities scattering light like dipoles and, thus, this process is sensitive to polarization. One easy way to observe this effect is look at a clear blue sky with a linear polarizer and notice that the blue light scattered is polarized at an angle of about 90 degrees from the position of the Sun. 

Hope that helps!

Good day,

Indeed, there is a relationship between polarization and scattering, which, in finer detail, depends on the nature of the scattering. For instance, Rayleigh Scattering can be seen as impurities scattering light like dipoles and, thus, this process is sensitive to polarization. One easy way to observe this effect is look at a clear blue sky with a linear polarizer and notice that the blue light scattered is polarized at an angle of about 90 degrees from the position of the Sun. 

Hope that helps!

Yes, there is a strong relation between polarization and scattering. See "Absorption and scattering of light by small particles" Bohren & Huffmann, for further details.

thank you Mr. Benoit Sévigny and Mr.Juan Marcos Sanz .

Multiple scattering will depolarize light. So with the increase in number of scatterer degree of polarization falls. 

Interestingly scattering can increase the degree of polarization too. Light scattered perpendicular to the incident direction will be linearly polarized.

Hi

For example during your spectroscopy , you have "S" polarized light and molecular sample. There are different characteristics that can change "S" polarization to another case such as "P" like dipole movement and so on. So, In fact the emission polarization does not guarantee that we have same polarization on scattered light. And in most of cases polarization changed

It is interesting to note that since scattered light can be polarized, then so can emitted light also be polarized.  This is often found in infrared applications.  Whatever the predominant polarization is for the scattered light, any emitted radiation will have its predominant polarization 90 degrees to the scattered light.  For relatively smooth surfaces, you can get emitted polarizations >10% at near grazing incidences.

Thar scattering of light depends on Polarization is clear even in the simplest scattering, viz. the Thomson scattering of plane polarized light. If the directions of propagation of incident and scattered light are fixed the differential scattering depends on the state of polarization.

For more difficult cases where nonlinearities play a role, e.g., harmonic generation and intensity dependence in scattering of the fundamental, the dependence is not only on the polarization states but also on the coherence properties. Intensity of second harmonic generated in scattering using chaotic light would be twice that obtained using coherent light of the same intensity.

Hi!

Powder-like surfaces (regoliths) as well as micron-sized dust particles do reveal an inverse correlation between their degree of linear polarization and brightness. In planetary astronomy, this phenomenon is often referred to as the Umov effect (or law). It was already mentioned in the discussion, the governing mechanism is the depolarization of multiple scattering in a particulate medium.

Quantitative form of the Umov law refers to the geometric albedo A (i.e., reflectance at backscattering ) and maximum value of the degree of linear polarization P_max. Note, degree of linear polarization varies with the geometry of observation/illumination, which is described with the scattering angle. In vast majority of samples (but not all), degree of linear polarization acquires a maximum value at the scattering angle being ~70-110 degree.

If the data for various regolith samples are plotted in the same figure within the scales log(P_max) and log(A), all the samples will group around a straight line. Such a simple interrelation makes it possible retrieval the geometric albedo of regolith from polarimetric measurements, of course, if the scattering angle of the polarization maximum can be achieved in the measurements. This makes a lot of pain in ground-based astronomical observations of the Solar system bodies.

The inverse correlation also holds for single-scattering micron-sized dust particles; however, the trend is not linear in log-log scales.

For some details and more references see, e.g., Zubko et al. 2011. The Umov effect for single irregularly shaped particles with sizes comparable with wavelength. Icarus, 212, 403-415. The manuscript is available from my profile.

Cheers,

Evgenij

Yes. There is a relation between polarization and scattering. For further details, you can see :

S. Morgan and M. Ridgway, “Polarization properties of light backscattered from a two layer scattering medium,” Opt. Express 7, 395–402 (2000).

F.C. Mackintosh, J.X. Zhu, D.J. Pine, and D.A. Weitz “Polarization memory of multiply scattered light,” Phys. Rev. B 13, 9342–9345 (1989).

Y. Piederriere, F. Boulvert, J. Cariou, B. Le Jeune, Y. Guern, and G. Le Brun, “Backscattered speckle size as a function of polarization: influence of particle-size and concentration,” Opt. Express 13, 5030–5039 (2005).

Just a comment about the previous response: This analysis is strictly correct only under the scope of conducting media, and it is not valid for dielectric media (there are no free electrons to oscillate, yet there are displacement currents).