Can Ray Diagrams Explain Refraction through a Slab?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sparkle123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Refraction
AI Thread Summary
Ray diagrams can effectively illustrate refraction through a slab, demonstrating that parallel rays passing through a glass plate remain parallel but are laterally shifted. The amount of shift depends on the angle of incidence, with the direction of the shift influenced by the tilt of the glass. When lines are closely spaced, the angles of incidence and reflection remain consistent, resulting in the spacing between the image lines matching the real spacing. However, if the lines are farther apart, the angles of incidence can vary significantly, leading to a larger spacing between the images compared to the actual distance. Understanding these principles clarifies the behavior of light as it passes through different mediums.
sparkle123
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Please see attached. I tried drawing ray diagrams but I don't know how to see the answer intuitively. It seems that there is a relatively simple qualitative proof. Also the angle of incidence is unclear and I think that the direction of the shift depends on this angle.

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • Capture.JPG
    Capture.JPG
    41.5 KB · Views: 461
Physics news on Phys.org
Hey sparkle123!

For instance in this article (figure 14) you can see a picture of the effect of a plane glass plate on a ray.
The ray is shifted laterally to a parallel ray.
The only effect of angle is the amount that it is shifted.
As for the direction, that depends in which way the glass is tilted.

Two parallel rays that initiate from the lines on the paper will pass the glass plate and will afterward still be parallel with the same distance between them.

Does that suggest another answer?
 
Thanks I like Serena!
The answer is (b) unfortunately. I think this is because the slab is at an angle.
 
It is true that the image shifts to the left in case of the arrangement shown in the picture.

The problem says that the lines are closely spaced. This suggests that the light rays arriving at the eye from the lines are parallel. The angles of incidence are the same from both lines, and so are the angles of reflection. The spacing between the image lines should be the same as the real spacing. (See picture on the left.)

In case the lines are far away, the angles of incidence of the rays emerging from the lines and reaching the eye can be considerably different, and then the spacing between the images is different (larger) from the real distance. (Picture on the right)


ehild
 

Attachments

  • slab.JPG
    slab.JPG
    8.8 KB · Views: 411
  • slab2.JPG
    slab2.JPG
    10.6 KB · Views: 425
Thanks ehild! :)
 
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