Ray transfer matrix method, I need explanations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the ray transfer matrix method, particularly the notation used in the context of optical systems. The user struggles with the equation A = {x_2 / x_1} |_{θ_1 = 0} and its implications for deriving the ray transfer matrix for simple cases, such as a ray passing through a medium with refractive index n. Clarification is provided that A is determined under the assumption of paraxial rays, leading to the equation relating x_2 and θ_2 to x_1 and θ_1. However, the user remains confused about deriving the value of D in the matrix, specifically why setting x_1 to 0 yields D = θ_2 / θ_1. The discussion highlights the need for a clearer explanation of these concepts to solve related exercises effectively.
fluidistic
Gold Member
Messages
3,928
Reaction score
272

Homework Statement


I can't understand my class notes nor wikipedia about this.
It's very important to know how to construct the ray transfer matrix since it allows to solve many thick lenses problems.

In wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_transfer_matrix_analysis#Definition_of_the_ray_transfer_matrix, I do not understand what they mean by A = {x_2 \over x_1 } \bigg|_{\theta_1 = 0}.
I don't understand the notation.
I can't even find the ray transfer matrix for a ray passing through a medium of refractive index=n (one of the most simple case I guess).

Can someone explain me what does the notation mean?

So that I can derive all the examples in the wikipedia page and solve a lot of exercises.
Thanks a lot... and sorry for being slow. I've also checked in Hecht's book, but I didn't understand most of it. As I said, I've absolutely NO IDEA about how to find the ray transfer matrix of the most simple cases.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ok, I now understand a bit better. We have to assume that the rays entering an optic system can be described by a linear approximation (that is, if the rays are close enough to the optical axis).
In that case we can write \begin{bmatrix} x_2 \\ \theta _2 \end{bmatrix}= \begin{bmatrix} A & B \\ C & D \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} x_1 \\ \theta _1 \end{bmatrix}.
Thus x_2=Ax_1+B \theta _1 and \theta _2=Cx_1 +D \theta _1.
Wikipedia's notation means that A=\frac{x_2- B \theta _1}{x_1} evaluated in \theta _1=0 (because of the paraxial rays approximation) and we reach A=\frac{x_2}{x_1}.
I have no problem understanding how to get A, B and C. But D really is an obstacle.

We have that D=\frac{\theta _2 - Cx_2}{\theta _1}. According to wikipedia, if we set x_1 =0, we reach D=\frac{\theta _2}{\theta _1}. Why is it so? If they meant x_2=0 I would understand, but x_1?
I would appreciate an explanation about how to reach D.
 
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 .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top