Diffraction Grating and Intensity

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that the maximum intensity for a diffraction grating with N slits is N^2 times greater than that of a single slit. The relevant equation for intensity is provided, along with the condition that the maximum occurs at Φ=0. A key step involves using the limit of sin(Nx)/sin(x) as x approaches 0, which can be derived through a specific trigonometric identity. The participants clarify the manipulation of the equation, leading to a better understanding of the proof. Ultimately, the original poster expresses gratitude for the assistance and confirms their comprehension of the topic.
silence98
Messages
9
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Show that the maximum intensity for a diffraction grating of N slits at the first principal maximum is N^2 times bigger than for a single slit.


Homework Equations



I=I(0)[sin^2(NB)/sin^2(B)] where B is (\pidsin\phi)/\lambda


The Attempt at a Solution



I feel i understand the concepts here but this question has stumped me. I've scoured the internet, read through the relevant chapters in my two textbooks and still i can't see how this would be proven. It is just stated in my lecture notes, is it that intuitive?

I really would be grateful for any help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The maximum is at Φ=0. You have to start with the limit sin(x)/x when x tends to 0. Find the limit of sin(Nx)/sin(x). Use that sin(Nx)/sin(x)=[sin(Nx)/Nx] N [x/sin(x)].

ehild
 
ehild said:
The maximum is at Φ=0. You have to start with the limit sin(x)/x when x tends to 0. Find the limit of sin(Nx)/sin(x). Use that sin(Nx)/sin(x)=[sin(Nx)/Nx] N [x/sin(x)].

ehild

Thanks for the help, but i don't really understand the bolded part. I haven't seen that trig identity before and i can't see how it would be found.
 
It is just multiplying both the numerator and the denominator with the same quantity and rearranging.

\frac{\sin(Nx)}{\sin(x)}=\frac{Nx\sin(Nx)}{Nx\sin(x)}=\frac{\sin(Nx)}{Nx} N \frac{x}{\sin(x)}

ehild
 
ehild said:
It is just multiplying both the numerator and the denominator with the same quantity and rearranging.

\frac{\sin(Nx)}{\sin(x)}=\frac{Nx\sin(Nx)}{Nx\sin(x)}=\frac{\sin(Nx)}{Nx} N \frac{x}{\sin(x)}

ehild

Thankyou, and i apologise for my stupidity!

I've got it now.
 
Last edited:
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .

Similar threads

Back
Top