Apparent depth equation proving

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around deriving the apparent depth equation for a fish viewed underwater, utilizing Snell's law and the index of refraction of water. The user attempts to manipulate equations involving the angles of incidence and refraction but encounters difficulties in progressing towards the desired formula. Suggestions are made to reconsider the relationships between specific ratios and angles to facilitate the derivation. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding the geometric relationships in the context of refraction. Ultimately, clarity on these relationships is essential for solving the problem effectively.
salivian selwyn
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


a fish at a depth d underwater.Takes the index of refraction of water as 4/3 show that when the fish is viewed at an angle of refraction θ , the apparent depth z of the fish is
z = (3d cosθ )/ √ (7 + 9 cos2 θ)

Homework Equations


snell's law
n1 x sin θ1 = n2 x sin θ2

The Attempt at a Solution


(nwater) (sin θ) = (nair) (sin r) ->[/B] since nair is 1
(nwater) (sin θ) = sin r --- square both side
(n2water) (sin2 θ) = (sin r)
(n2) (sin2 θ) = (x2) / (x2 + z2)
1/((n2)(sin2θ)) = (x2 + z2)/(x2)
1 + (z2/x2) = 1/((n2)(sin2θ))
z2/x2 =(1-n2*sin2θ)/(n2*sin2θ)

--subtitute x with d tanθ ,give me--
z2 = (d2) ((1- n2*sin2θ)/(n2*cos2θ))
using 1 = sin2θ + cos2θ identity, give me
z2 = (d^2)((1+ n2*cos2θ - n2)/(n2 * cos2θ))

im stuck here , this result in
z2 = d2((16cos2θ - 7)/(16cos2θ))

i think it's a little bit more , but I am stuck here
 

Attachments

  • 15120215.jpg
    15120215.jpg
    5.6 KB · Views: 596
Physics news on Phys.org
Your began the wrong way first look for the relationship between R and A. Start by looking at x/R and x/a
 
gleem said:
Your began the wrong way first look for the relationship between R and A. Start by looking at x/R and x/a
Sorry ,i don't get what you mean. Can you explain it to me ?
 
determine the relationships between the ratios x/R and x/A to the angles i and r and then to the index of refraction..
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top