Air wedge interference pattern after being filled with water

Click For Summary
Filling an air wedge with water alters the interference pattern due to the change in refractive index. The book states that the fringe spacing will increase, but calculations suggest it should decrease because the formula for fringe spacing incorporates the refractive index. Specifically, the derived formula for water indicates that the fringe spacing is inversely proportional to the refractive index, which is greater than one. This leads to the conclusion that a higher refractive index means a smaller fringe spacing. The discussion raises doubts about the accuracy of the book's explanation.
Andrew Tom
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Air wedge interference pattern after being filled with water
Relevant Equations
##x=\frac{\lambda}{2\tan \theta}##
An air wedge is illuminated with light and an interference pattern is produced. What will happen to the interference pattern when the air wedge is filled with water?

The answer given at the back of the book is that the fringe spacing of the interference pattern will increase, however my reasoning is leading me to the conclusion that it will decrease.

The derivation for fringe spacing given in the book for an air wedge shows that it is ##\frac{\lambda}{2\tan \theta}## where ##\theta## is the wedge angle. When I re-derived the formula using the same reasoning but for water with refractive index n I got the fringe spacing ##\frac{\lambda}{2n\tan\theta}##. So the fringe spacing will decrease because n>1 for water.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Andrew Tom said:
the interference pattern will increase
Are those the exact words? I don't know what that means.
 
haruspex said:
Are those the exact words? I don't know what that means.
Sorry it says the fringe spacing will increase.
 
Andrew Tom said:
Sorry it says the fringe spacing will increase.
I agree with you. A higher refractive index would mean you don't need to go so far along the wedge for the optical path length to increase by a wavelength.
 
haruspex said:
I agree with you. A higher refractive index would mean you don't need to go so far along the wedge for the optical path length to increase by a wavelength.
So is the book wrong?
 
Andrew Tom said:
So is the book wrong?
I would say so. Others may chip in.
 
Thread 'Chain falling out of a horizontal tube onto a table'
My attempt: Initial total M.E = PE of hanging part + PE of part of chain in the tube. I've considered the table as to be at zero of PE. PE of hanging part = ##\frac{1}{2} \frac{m}{l}gh^{2}##. PE of part in the tube = ##\frac{m}{l}(l - h)gh##. Final ME = ##\frac{1}{2}\frac{m}{l}gh^{2}## + ##\frac{1}{2}\frac{m}{l}hv^{2}##. Since Initial ME = Final ME. Therefore, ##\frac{1}{2}\frac{m}{l}hv^{2}## = ##\frac{m}{l}(l-h)gh##. Solving this gives: ## v = \sqrt{2g(l-h)}##. But the answer in the book...