an exponentially decaying wave instead of a propagating wave. It is for this reason that most metals are highly reflective for visible light (&omega < &omegap &asymp 10eV), but transparent for ultraviolet light (&omega > &omegap) [4, pg. 275].
Surface plasmons have an associated electromagnetic wave with both transverse and longitudinal field components. Such waves can only be excited at the interface between a conductor and dielectric, and are tightly bound to the surface. The fields reach their maximum at the interface (z=0), and exponentially decay away from the surface. The wave-vector of the surface plasmon mode (kspp) always lies to the right of the free space wave-vector (ko), such that &lambdaspp < &lambdao, where &lambdaspp is the wavelength of the surface plasmon and &lambdao is the wavelength of light in free space (vacuum). Additionally, this makes it impossible to directly launch a surface plasmon wave by illumination with free-space radiation: the free-space photons simply do not have enough momentum to excite the surface plasmon. As &omega increases, kspp gets larger and larger, moving further away from ko. As kspp increases, the surface plasmon wavelngth decreases and the wave is more tightly bound to the surface. This process has an upper limit of &omegasp, the surface plasmon resonant frequency, which occurs when the dielectric constant of the metal and the dielectric have the same magnitude but opposite signs.
|Fig. 2: Schematic of a Kretschmann coupling setup for launching surface plasmons optically.|
Surface plasmons were first predicted by Ritchie in 1957, and were experimentally verified by Powell and Swan[2,3] in 1959 with electron energy loss spectroscopy measurements. In these measurements, high energy electrons were used to bombard a thin metallic film and launch surface plasmons. The charge of the high energy electrons couples to the plasma oscillations of electrons in the metal; by tuning the energy and angle of incidence of the electrons, the wave-vector can be tuned and surface plas