Differences between the geometric phase and propagation phase: clarifying the boundedness problem.

We show white light interferometer experiments that clearly demonstrate the basic differences between geometric and propagation phases. These experimental results also suggest a way to answer the "boundedness problem" in geometric phase-whether geometric phase is unbounded (i.e.

Deciphering Pancharatnam's discovery of geometric phase: retrospective.

While Pancharatnam discovered the geometric phase in 1956, his work was not widely recognized until its endorsement by Berry in 1987, after which it received wide appreciation. However, because Pancharatnam's paper is unusually difficult to follow, his work has often been misinterpreted as referring to an evolution of states of polarization, just as Berry's work focused on a cycle of states, even though this consideration does not appear in Pancharatnam's work. We walk the reader through Pancharatnam's original derivation and show how Pancharatnam's approach connects to recent work in geometric phase.

Wave description of geometric phase.

Since Pancharatnam's 1956 discovery of optical geometric phase and Berry's 1984 discovery of geometric phase in quantum systems, researchers analyzing geometric phase have focused almost exclusively on algebraic approaches using the Jones calculus, or on spherical trigonometry approaches using the Poincaré sphere. The abstracted mathematics of the former and the abstracted geometry of the latter obscure the physical mechanism that generates geometric phase. We show that optical geometric phase derives entirely from the superposition of waves and the resulting shift in the location of the wave maximum.