Destructive Interference of Light Waves in Bubble Film (165 nm)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining which light wavelengths will experience destructive interference in a bubble film with a thickness of 165 nm and a refractive index of 1.3. The condition for destructive interference is established, requiring a phase difference of 180 degrees between the waves. The relevant formula is provided, which relates the wavelengths to the film's thickness and refractive index. Participants clarify that by applying the formula, one can identify the specific wavelengths that meet the criteria for destructive interference. The initial confusion is resolved, leading to a better understanding of the problem.
stickplot
Messages
83
Reaction score
0
Ok so I've been thinking this problem over and over and I understand the problem and its concept but I just don't know where to start and how to do this, someone please guide me through this

Light waves of which wavelength will destructively interfere due to the thickness of the bubble film? The bubble film thickness is 165 nm, with an index of refraction of n = 1.3.

It also contains this picture just showing the different light waves

a= 430 nm
b= 650 nm
c= 860 nm
d= 285 nm
 

Attachments

  • light.gif
    light.gif
    9 KB · Views: 436
Physics news on Phys.org
Destructive interference occurs when the phase difference between the two waves is 180 degrees i.e. \pi

That is, if the two wavelengths are \lambda_1\;\;\;,\;\;\; \lambda_2, then the condition for destructive interference is:

\left|\frac{2\pi}{\lambda_1} nd - \frac{2\pi}{\lambda_2}nd\right|=(2k+1)\pi

Where d is the size of the soap film, and n is the refractive index. k is a positive integer.
so from here we have:

\left|\frac{1}{\lambda_1}-\frac{1}{\lambda_2}\right|=\frac{2k+1}{2nd}

See for which wavelengths this is satisfied, and you are done...
 
o ok thank you very much i understand it now
 
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