Determining Mica Thickness Using Interference Fringes

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the thickness of mica used in a double slit interference setup, where the mica covers one slit and shifts the central maximum to the 9th bright fringe. The relevant equation for determining thickness is derived from the path difference caused by the mica, expressed as (xb/L) = (n-1)t, where t represents the mica thickness. Users seek clarification on how to apply the equation, specifically what values to use for L (distance to the screen) and x (fringe distance). The wavelength of light used is 556 nm, and the refractive index of mica is 1.58. The conversation emphasizes understanding the relationship between interference patterns and the physical properties of the materials involved.
inflames829
Messages
40
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A thin flake of mica (n= 1.58) is used to cover one slit of a double slit interference arrangement. The central point on the viewing screen is now covered by what had been the 9th bright fringe before the mica was used. What is the thickness of mica if light of wavelength 556nm is used? answer in microns


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


n lambda = xb/L
where
λ is the wavelength of the light,
b is the separation of the slits, the distance between A and B in the diagram to the right
n is the order of maximum observed (central maximum is n=1),
x is the distance between the bands of light and the central maximum (also called fringe distance), and
L is the distance from the slits to the screen centerpoint.


This is the only equation i can find so i assume you use it. Is this correct? and if so can someone give me hints on what values to put in for L and x. please. THANKYOU
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The path difference when one slit is covered with mica will be slightly different.

\frac{xb}{L} = (n-1)t

where t is the thickness of the mica.
 
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