Two Converging Lense Questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter JM2107
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Converging
AI Thread Summary
For a converging lens with focal length f, achieving an image with a magnification of one is impossible, as this would require the object distance to equal the image distance, resulting in a contradiction in the lens formula. While a single converging lens cannot produce a non-inverted image, it can create a virtual image when the object is placed between the focal point and the lens, leading to a magnified image. The discussion highlights the geometric principles involved in lens behavior, emphasizing that inverted images correspond to negative magnification. Overall, the consensus is that while virtual images can be non-inverted, a magnification of one cannot be achieved with a single converging lens. Understanding these principles is crucial for optics applications.
JM2107
For a lens of focal length f, what value of the distance between the object and the lens[D0] would give an image with a magnification of one?

Is it possible to obtain a non-inverted image with a converging spherical lens? Explain please?

Any response would be greatly appreciated, and I would like to thank anyone for their response to this thread in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi JM2107,
to answer questions like this, you could use use 2 methods:
1) Draw 3 rays, remembering that...
... focal ray becomes parallel ray
... parallel ray becomes focal ray
... central ray is not refracted
2) Use the Law of lenses: 1/o + 1/i = 1/f
where
o = distance of object from lens
i = distance of image from lens
f = focal length

Got it? :wink:
 
It is not possible to obtain a non inverted image using a single converging lens. It is therefore not possible to obtain a magnification of 1, though it is possible to obtain a magnification of -1. (Inverted images have a negative magnification by convention).

The reason for this is purely geometrical. Arcnets outlined a standard graphical method of seeing why this is.
 
Originally posted by Claude Bile
It is not possible to obtain a non inverted image using a single converging lens.
R u sure? How about a virtual image? See here...

www.lightlink.com/sergey/java/java/clens/[/URL]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's the answer:

Yes, it is possible to obtain a non-inverted image with a converging lens. As long as the object is between the focal length point and the lens it is possible. Of course this would be a virtual image and the image would be magnified.


m=-d(image)/d(object)

If m=1 than we have an equation where we can put d (object) = - d (image). Since 1/f = 1/d (object) + 1/d (image) and since d (object) = - d (image), therefore 1/f = 0

So there is no distance that would give a magnification of one.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top