|Message: Re: Boundary absorption or transmission?||Not Logged In (login)|
Click on the Forum title, e.g. on the "Forums by Category" page, to read a sequence of postings to the Forum and its threads all in one page. If you are only interested in one thread or the thread following a specific posting, click the thread or the posting, which takes you to a smaller page, which contains only the part you are interested in and may be easier to navigate.
Messages are "chained" if there are only replies at the first level, i.e. 1/1.html, 1/1/1.html etc. In case of "chained" messages the message number is replaced by the icon and there is no indentation.
Inline: Display the subject line only or also the text of the posting(s); for the choice "All" the "Outline" choices are switched off.
|1||0||1||no text / full text of posting|
|2||1||All||text for level 1 only / text for All postings|
Outline: Choose the depth of the posting thread, successive toggle controls provide increasing detail.
|1||2||1||2 levels / 1 level (original posting)|
|2||3||2||3 levels / 2 levels|
|3||3||All||3 levels / all levels (all postings)|
Let's ask what is going on on a dielectric surface in contact with another dielectric surface. Ideally, only Snell's Law applies. Now, let's assume the surface is 'dirty' and the dirt absorbs some of the photons. Let me suggest that this is going to happen regardless of whether Snell's Law results in reflection or transmission. - But yes, assigning a <1 'reflectivity' to such an interface is a misnomer. It should more properly be named '1-surface absorption'. That the code reads !G4BooleanRand(theReflectivity) is a result of code migration. Originally, there was no 'surface absorption' in the code for dielectric_dielectric interfaces until some users requested this, but there was a finite 'reflectivity' for dielectric_metal surfaces.