Collimating light from diffraction grating

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the use of a thin lens equation to determine the position of the line focus after light diffracts through a diffraction grating. The user notes that the thin lens equation does not yield the expected results for the focus position, which is experimentally verified to be at 0.7m. They express confusion over treating the diffraction grating as a point source and seek clarification on the appropriate equations to use. Additionally, the user inquires whether the type of lens, specifically a plano-convex lens, affects the calculations. The conversation emphasizes the need for a better understanding of the relationship between the diffraction grating and the lens system in this optical setup.
$id
Messages
46
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Consider the following, A collimated light source impinges on a plane diffraction grating and diffracts via the well known diffraction equation. The diffracted light is then collimated by a 1 metre focal length lens (good quality one). It is experimentally verified that the line focus(fourier plane) is at 0.7m if the distance between the grating and lens is 0.3m.

Now is the time for a silly question. I've tried to use thin lens equation 1/image + 1/object = 1/focal length but this clearly doesn't solve the problem above. Any ideas which equation I should be using? I assumed diffraction grating as a point source of light with some divergence. I know I am making the mistake somewhere but not sure.

I am using a plano convex lens. Does this matter?

Edit/ I've added the diagram now to make it clear. what is the relationship between x an y in this configuration.

Homework Equations



I think thin lens equation and grating equation are well known already.

The Attempt at a Solution



As mentioned already , the thins equation doesn't correctly predict the position of the line focus(fourier plane).
 

Attachments

  • diffractionproblem.jpg
    diffractionproblem.jpg
    15.4 KB · Views: 1,007
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Any ideas chaps?
 
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 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top