All Figures

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=9cm,clip]{3291fig1.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 1: Comparison of the results from the Mie and T-matrix theories. The solid line and the dotted line represent the best-fit polarisation values for spherical grains and prolate grains obtained from the Mie and the T-matrix theories, respectively. The Mie theory and T-matrix theory fits use different particle shapes and size ranges as explained in the text.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=9cm,clip]{3291fig2.eps} \end{figure}$ Figure 2: Comparisons of T-matrix calculations using prolate spheroid grains having effective radius, $r_{\rm eff}=0.218~ \mu$ m and effective variance, $v_{\rm eff}= 0.0036$ for different values of E (=0.475, 0.486, 0.560, 0.720) of the particle. A curve using the same size distribution for Mie particles (i.e., E = 1.000) is also shown.
Open with DEXTER

In the text

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=9cm,clip]{3291fig1.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 1: Comparison of the results from the Mie and T-matrix theories. The solid line and the dotted line represent the best-fit polarisation values for spherical grains and prolate grains obtained from the Mie and the T-matrix theories, respectively. The Mie theory and T-matrix theory fits use different particle shapes and size ranges as explained in the text.
Open with DEXTER

$\begin{figure} \par\includegraphics[width=9cm,clip]{3291fig2.eps} \end{figure}$	Figure 2: Comparisons of T-matrix calculations using prolate spheroid grains having effective radius, $r_{\rm eff}=0.218~ \mu$ m and effective variance, $v_{\rm eff}= 0.0036$ for different values of E (=0.475, 0.486, 0.560, 0.720) of the particle. A curve using the same size distribution for Mie particles (i.e., E = 1.000) is also shown.
Open with DEXTER