An interferometer with two arms is constructed above

  • Thread starter Thread starter fobbz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interferometer
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around an interferometer problem involving the splitting of waves in vacuum chambers and the relationship between wavelength, frequency, and interference patterns. Participants are exploring the implications of constructive and destructive interference in the context of the setup.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the nature of wavelengths and how they relate to the number of waves in a given interval. There is an exploration of the formulas for constructive and destructive interference and how they apply to the problem. Questions arise about the interpretation of wavelengths in the context of the interferometer's setup.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and questioning each other's reasoning. Some guidance has been offered regarding the relationship between wavelength and frequency, and there is an ongoing examination of how changes in conditions affect the interference pattern.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating assumptions about the behavior of waves in vacuum and the implications of changes in refractive index on interference patterns. There is a focus on the mathematical relationships involved, but some information remains unclear or debated.

fobbz
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
I have attached the problem as the image is needed for the question.

a) Basically, from what I understand the wave is being split, thus each chamber receives the total number of wavelengths/2. The chambers, however are vacuums, so the number of wavelengths passing in doesn't change right?
Looking at my formulae for interferometers for destructive and constructive interference I cannot see one that would contribute to solving this part of the problem?

my formulae: L=m\lambda/2 constructive interference, L=(m+.5)\lambda/2 for destructive interference.

b) I need a to find this part I believe.

c) Need b.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2013-04-12 at 8.15.49 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2013-04-12 at 8.15.49 PM.png
    20.5 KB · Views: 593
Physics news on Phys.org
fobbz said:
the wave is being split, thus each chamber receives the total number of wavelengths/2.
It doesn't mean anything to say that each receives some number of wavelengths. Each receives half the total light.
The chambers, however are vacuums, so the number of wavelengths passing in doesn't change right?
Do you mean, the number of waves entering in a given interval of time doesn't change? That would be true. "Wavelengths" are lengths - they don't enter anything.
Looking at my formulae for interferometers for destructive and constructive interference I cannot see one that would contribute to solving this part of the problem?
5a is not a question about interference. It just asks how many wavelengths long would a 1cm evacuated tube be if the light has the given frequency. What formula do you know relating wavelength to frequency?
 
well v=fλ. So if the wavelength is λ=c/f=(3E8 m/s) /(6E14 m) , λ=5E-7 m

So in 1 cm, 1 cm / 5E-7 = 20 000 wavelengths?

Okay that makes sense...

b) So next if the maxima changes to a minima, that means that an extra half wavelength is now being sent out making it destructive? So there would be 20 000.5 wavelengths?
 
fobbz said:
an extra half wavelength is now being sent out making it destructive? So there would be 20 000.5 wavelengths?
Wavelengths are not "sent out". Waves are sent out, and the number sent out depends on the frequency and the time period. What you mean is that the 1cm tube now represents 20000.5 wavelengths. (Or could it be 19999.5? How do you know which it is?)
 
I know it is 20 000.5 because what changed was only the refractive index - the m order value did not change. So because it's now a minimum, (m+1/2) wavelengths would appear?
 
fobbz said:
I know it is 20 000.5 because what changed was only the refractive index - the m order value did not change. So because it's now a minimum, (m+1/2) wavelengths would appear?
You know it changed by half a wavelength. It is not instantly clear whether it increased or decreased by half a wavelength. But suppose it has increased. What is the refractive index?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
923