Calculating Magnification: Diverging and Converging Lenses Equations Explained

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the total magnification of a system involving a diverging lens and a converging lens. The user successfully calculated the magnification for the diverging lens but struggled with the converging lens due to the object distance being infinite. It was clarified that the total magnification can be determined using the focal lengths of the lenses, regardless of the object distance. The user expressed confusion about not being taught this formula in class. The conversation concluded with an offer for further assistance on related topics.
brinstar
Messages
62
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


"Find the magnification of the following system: A diverging lens with focal point -9.5 cm is placed 4.35 cm to the right of a converging lens with its own focal point of 13.0 cm. Parallel light enters the converging lens from the left."

Homework Equations


M = -p/q
1/p + 1/q = 1/f
p of diverging lens = d - q of converging lens
Mtotal = M1 * M2

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
So I figured out the magnification for the diverging lens and got 11.17647059. I cannot for the life of me figure out the magnification of the converging lens, and this is all because the object distance is infinite. How exactly do I get the total magnification (which is the product of my two magnifications) if the object distance for my converging lens is infinite? That would leave me at 13.0 cm divided by infinity...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Magnification (of the whole telescope together)= fo/fe

fo is the focal length of the objective lens (converging)
fe is the focal length of the eyepiece lens (diverging)

The object distance doesn't matter.
 
DarkMatter5 said:
Magnification (of the whole telescope together)= fo/fe

fo is the focal length of the objective lens (converging)
fe is the focal length of the eyepiece lens (diverging)

The object distance doesn't matter.

Wow! >.< I feel so dumb.

Thanks so much for the reply!

For some reason, though, my teacher never gave me that formula in class. The ones I gave were all I had to work with. I didn't know you could get magnification without object distances and height!
 
  • Like
Likes DarkMatter5
No problem :oldbiggrin:. Now you know! Feel free to message me if you have any more telescope or astro questions.
 
  • Like
Likes brinstar
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