Light: Fringes and Interference

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around an interference pattern created by coherent light passing through two narrow slits, specifically focusing on the relationship between the wavelengths of light and the positions of bright and dark fringes on a screen.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the use of formulas for destructive and constructive interference to relate fringe positions to wavelengths. There is discussion about small-angle approximations and the implications for calculating slit separation.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging in deriving relationships between the first-order bright fringe and the first-order dark fringe. Some guidance has been offered on how to express the second wavelength in terms of the first, and there is a focus on symbolic manipulation before numerical substitution.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on using specific values for fringe positions and the need to maintain consistency in parameters such as slit separation and distance to the screen across different wavelengths. The problem context includes constraints related to homework guidelines and the requirement to derive relationships rather than compute direct answers.

Soaring Crane
Messages
461
Reaction score
0
Coherent light with wavelength 597 nm passes through two very narrow slits, and the interference pattern is observed on a screen a distance of 3.00 m from the slits. The first-order bright fringe is a distance of 4.84 mm from the center of the central bright fringe.

For what wavelength of light in micrometers will the first-order dark fringe be observed at this same point on the screen?

To solve this, I must use the formula for destructive interference:
d*sin(theta) = (m + 1/2)*lambda, where m= 0 or -1 since it is the first dark fringe,

but I am stuck on using small-angle approximations where sin(theta) = tan(theta) to find d.

Could someone please explain this method to me clearly?

After finding d, what formula must I use for the 2nd beam's interference pattern to find the 2nd wavelength?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Bright fringes are found where [itex]d \sin\theta = m\lambda[/itex]; dark fringes where [itex]d \sin\theta = (m + 1/2)\lambda[/itex]. m = 0, 1, 2, etc.

The position (y) of the fringes is given by [itex]\tan\theta = y/L[/itex]. For small angles [itex]\tan\theta = \sin\theta = \theta[/itex]. So the bright fringes are found at [itex]y = m\lambda L /d[/itex]; the dark fringes at [itex]y = (m + 1/2)\lambda L /d[/itex].

Note that d, L, and y stay the same for the two wavelengths. Hint: Solve for the new wavelength symbolically before plugging in any numbers.
 
What value is y in the problem? 4.84 mm?
 
Soaring Crane said:
What value is y in the problem? 4.84 mm?
That's correct. Note that the same value of y is used for both wavelengths:
For the first, y = 4.84mm is the postion of the first bright fringe
For the second, y = 4.84mm is the postion of the first dark fringe​

Hint: You don't really need to plug in that y value! What you need to do is find the second wavelength in terms of the first.
 
How do I do this? Do I use the formula for bright fringes for the second beam as a starting point?
 
Here's what I suggest: Call the first wavelength [itex]\lambda_1[/itex] and the second [itex]\lambda_2[/itex]. Now write the appropriate equation for each and compare. I'll write the equation for the first wavelength. Since it gives the location of the first bright fringe, I'll set m = 1:
[itex]y = \lambda_1 L /d[/itex]
Rearranging that gives you: [itex]\lambda_1 = yd/L[/itex]

Now you write the equation that applies to the second wavelength and compare.
 
Well, for the second, is it this?

y = [(m + 1/2)*lambda_2*L]/[d], where m = 0

lambda_2 = (2*y*d)/L
 
Exactly. So... how does [itex]\lambda_2[/itex] compare to [itex]\lambda_1[/itex]?
 
It's twice the value of lambda_1.
 
  • #10
Correct. Now express the answer in micrometers and you're done.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K