- #1
neelakash
- 511
- 1
Fermat's principle is well-known to everybody. If light travels from point 1 to point 2, it will take the path along which [tex]\int_{1}^{2}n dl[/tex] is stationary where [tex]\ n[/tex] is refractive index.
When points 1 and 2 are two points on the path of the light ray, there is no problem. However, 1 or 2 are source and image point, we know that the principle works fine. For example, remember the case where we derive law of reflection or refraction from Fermat's principle. Although we do not usually mention about the refractive index in these contexts, actually it is the optical path we are interested in.
What I want to clarify is does the inclusion of point 1 and 2 included in the integral make sense? Because, if point 1 is a source point, there we cannot define [tex]\ n[/tex] or and point 2 (image point) we cannot define [tex]\ n[/tex]. [tex]\ n(1)[/tex] or [tex]\ n(2)[/tex] is not defined. What is actually done in these case?
-Neel
When points 1 and 2 are two points on the path of the light ray, there is no problem. However, 1 or 2 are source and image point, we know that the principle works fine. For example, remember the case where we derive law of reflection or refraction from Fermat's principle. Although we do not usually mention about the refractive index in these contexts, actually it is the optical path we are interested in.
What I want to clarify is does the inclusion of point 1 and 2 included in the integral make sense? Because, if point 1 is a source point, there we cannot define [tex]\ n[/tex] or and point 2 (image point) we cannot define [tex]\ n[/tex]. [tex]\ n(1)[/tex] or [tex]\ n(2)[/tex] is not defined. What is actually done in these case?
-Neel