Constructive wave interference problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter throllen
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Interference Wave
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the wavelengths of light that undergo constructive and destructive interference when reflected from a glass sheet coated with a 505nm thick layer of oil with a refractive index of 1.42. For constructive interference, the calculated wavelengths are 717 nm and 478 nm, while for destructive interference, the wavelengths are 574 nm and 410 nm. However, the initial calculations were deemed incorrect, prompting a reevaluation of the refractive indices involved. The importance of the refractive index of oil compared to glass is highlighted, suggesting that it influences the interference outcomes. The conversation emphasizes the need for careful consideration of these indices in solving the problem accurately.
throllen
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A sheet of glass is coated with a 505nm thick layer of oil (n = 1.42).

For what visible wavelengths of light do the reflected waves interfere constructively/destructively?

Homework Equations



For constructive interference

lamba=2nd/m

For destructive interference

lamba=2nd/(m-1/2)

The Attempt at a Solution



for constructive

2*1.42*505/(3 or 4) (since m=3 and 4 will give me a visible wavelength) lamba = 717 nm, 478 nm

for destructive

2*1.142*505/(3 or 4 + 1/2) (since m=3 and 4 will also give me a visible wavelength) lamba = 574, 410 nm

HOWEVER, they are wrong... so I am completely clueless of what to do next.. help please >.<
 
Physics news on Phys.org


throllen said:
A sheet of glass is coated with a 505nm thick layer of oil (n = 1.42).
Hint: How does the index of refraction of the oil compare to that of the glass. Does it matter?
 


glass is supposed to have a higher index of refraction.. yes it matters...
 


Hmmm... in that case your solution looks fine to me.
 
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 'Calculation of Tensile Forces in Piston-Type Water-Lifting Devices at Elevated Locations'
Figure 1 Overall Structure Diagram Figure 2: Top view of the piston when it is cylindrical A circular opening is created at a height of 5 meters above the water surface. Inside this opening is a sleeve-type piston with a cross-sectional area of 1 square meter. The piston is pulled to the right at a constant speed. The pulling force is(Figure 2): F = ρshg = 1000 × 1 × 5 × 10 = 50,000 N. Figure 3: Modifying the structure to incorporate a fixed internal piston When I modify the piston...
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