A 3rd method of finding wavelength in a double slit

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating the wavelength of light in Thomas Young's double slit experiment using three methods. The first two methods utilize the formulas Change in x = L (Lambda) / d and m(Lambda) = (d)(sin Theta). The third method proposed involves m(Lambda) = (d)xm / L, where xm is derived from the eighth antinodal line. However, the validity of the third method is questioned, as it closely resembles the second method and lacks sufficient independent variables for a distinct calculation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Thomas Young's double slit experiment
  • Familiarity with wave interference patterns
  • Knowledge of trigonometric functions in physics
  • Ability to manipulate and convert units (e.g., cm to meters)
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the wavelength using Change in x = L (Lambda) / d
  • Explore the implications of the angle in wave interference calculations
  • Learn about the significance of antinodal lines in interference patterns
  • Investigate the limitations of using similar formulas in different contexts
USEFUL FOR

Students studying wave optics, physics educators, and anyone interested in the practical applications of interference patterns in light experiments.

LionLieOn
Messages
45
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Upon using Thomas young’s double slit experiment to obtain measurements, the following data were obtain. Use these data to determine the wavelength of light being used to create the interference pattern. Do this in three different ways (6)
• the angle to the eighth maximum is 1.12◦
• the distance from the slit to the screen is 302cm
• the distance from the first minimum to the fifth minimum is 2.95cm
• the distance between the slit is 0.00025cm

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


I found 2 ways of finding the wavelength using the formulas

Change in x = L (Lambda) / d

and

m(Lambda)= (d)(sin Theta subscript m)

For my third method i thought about using the formula

m(Lambda)= (d)xm/ L

the problem is I was not given xm sincexm is the distance from a point on a antinodal line to the right bisector.

However, I was told by my friend that since the 8th antinodal is provided and that "change in x" is easily obtainable, xmcan be found by just multiplying the 2 together.

which would look like

change in x = 0.007375 (Converted to Meters from cm)
8th antinodal = 8

0.007375(8) = 0.059

therefore
xm= 0.059 meters

Is my friend right?
 

Attachments

  • Attempt46.jpg
    Attempt46.jpg
    11 KB · Views: 629
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Please define the variables you use. L, ##\lambda## and d are clear, what is everything else?

What is 0.059 meters? Certainly not the wavelength.

The third method has to be very similar to one of the other two methods, you don't have enough given values for three completely independent methods. Distance between slits and distance to the screen alone doesn't tell you anything about the wavelength, the given angle leads to one method, the given separation between minima leads to the second method.
 
mfb said:
Please define the variables you use. L, ##\lambda## and d are clear, what is everything else?

What is 0.059 meters? Certainly not the wavelength.

The third method has to be very similar to one of the other two methods, you don't have enough given values for three completely independent methods. Distance between slits and distance to the screen alone doesn't tell you anything about the wavelength, the given angle leads to one method, the given separation between minima leads to the second method.
Sorry, I was in a rush and I thought I attached my work when I posted. My work should be in the attachments now.
 
Method 2 and 3 are nearly identical, they just differ by a factor 8 in both numerator and denominator.
 
mfb said:
Method 2 and 3 are nearly identical, they just differ by a factor 8 in both numerator and denominator.

should I use a different one ?
 
See post #2: No matter what you do, two methods will look very similar. I guess the shown "third method" is as good as it gets.
 
mfb said:
See post #2: No matter what you do, two methods will look very similar. I guess the shown "third method" is as good as it gets.

Ahh ok.

Thank you so much for reviewing my work! I really appreciate it.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K