Finding a Mistake in My Sketch: Can I Get Emergent Beam Perpendicular to AB?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the conditions necessary for an emergent beam to be perpendicular to face AB in a prism. The original poster identifies a potential mistake in their sketch, questioning the feasibility of achieving this configuration given the angles involved. It is clarified that for the emergent beam to be perpendicular, the incident ray must be perpendicular to side BC, suggesting a tilt of the prism. The conversation highlights the importance of correctly interpreting the diagram and the angles to avoid confusion. Ultimately, the conclusion points to the necessity of adjusting the prism's orientation to achieve the desired beam direction.
songoku
Messages
2,477
Reaction score
393
Homework Statement
A light beam from a laser source which is parallel to a horizontal surface hits an equilateral prism as shown in the figure above. What is the angle α (between AB and horizontal) if the emergent beam is perpendicular to face AB? (refractive index of prism is 2)
a. 42.5 degree
b. 24.5 degree
c. 15.0 degree
d. 46.0 degree
e. 30.0 degree
Relevant Equations
Snell's law
Total internal reflection
Untitled.png

This is my sketch:

aaa.png

I think the only possible way to get emergent beam perpendicular to AB is when the incoming ray is refracted towards side AC then total internal reflection occurs as shown in my sketch.

Angle QAR = 60o and angle ARQ = 90o so angle AQR = 30o

It means angle CQP is also 30o so angle QPC = 90o, which is impossible

Where is my mistake? Thanks
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
The diagram shows the ray emerging from AB, but the text does not say that.
Is that diagram as given to you, or did you make that assumption?
 
  • Like
Likes songoku
songoku said:
... so angle QPC = 90o, which is impossible
Why is this impossible?
 
  • Like
Likes songoku and jbriggs444
haruspex said:
The diagram shows the ray emerging from AB, but the text does not say that.
Is that diagram as given to you, or did you make that assumption?
The question states : " if the emergent beam is perpendicular to face AB".

The first diagram is from question, the second is my own sketch

TSny said:
Why is this impossible?
Because it means that the angle of refraction when the lights travels from air to prism is zero degree, which can only be obtain if angle of incidence is also zero degree.

Or are you suggesting that actually the incident ray is perpendicular to side BC so this means that the prism is tilted as far as 30o?

Thanks
 
songoku said:
The question states : " if the emergent beam is perpendicular to face AB".
Yes, but that is just a direction. It does not say it emerges from that face.
songoku said:
The first diagram is from question.
Ok, so it does emerge from that face, in which case...
songoku said:
the incident ray is perpendicular to side BC so this means that the prism is tilted as far as 30o?
which is indeed one of the options.
 
  • Like
Likes songoku
Thank you very much for the help haruspex and TSny
 
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...
Back
Top