Diffraction on periodic Structures

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the topic of diffraction on periodic structures within the context of solid state physics. Participants explore the implications of spherical and plane waves, coherence in light sources, and the conditions for Bragg scattering in crystals.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the meaning of a "fixed phase" at location Q, referencing differing interpretations from their textbook and Wikipedia.
  • Another participant suggests that a pinhole source can provide a coherent light source, which is necessary for maintaining a constant phase across a scattering region like a large crystal.
  • There is a discussion about the conditions for Bragg scattering, including the requirement for the angle of incidence to equal the angle of reflection and the path distance between reflected waves to be an integer multiple of wavelengths.
  • Participants note that coherent light, such as that from lasers, has a constant phase, which is relevant for the analysis of diffraction patterns.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the implications of path differences in plane waves and how they relate to constructive and destructive interference in Bragg diffraction.
  • There is mention of the distinction between elastic and inelastic scattering, with a participant seeking clarification on how these concepts relate to phase differences in reflected waves.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the coherence of light sources and the implications for diffraction. While there is some agreement on the role of coherence in maintaining a constant phase, the discussion includes multiple competing interpretations of how these concepts apply to diffraction phenomena, particularly in relation to Bragg scattering.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of mathematical treatments of Bragg scattering and the potential impact of thermal motion on scattering intensity, indicating that assumptions about fixed atomic positions may not always hold true.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to students and researchers in solid state physics, particularly those exploring diffraction phenomena, coherence in light sources, and the theoretical underpinnings of scattering in crystalline materials.

  • #31
Thank you, I think I get the principal, but what do you mean with the angle ##\phi##?

And could you explain again please, when to use a + sign before the cos() and a - sign before it? I can't imagine that part how I should work out this.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Gamdschiee said:
Thank you, I think I get the principal, but what do you mean with the angle ##\phi##?
The ## \theta ## is a polar type angle. If we are just working basically in two dimensions e.g. with a diffraction grating, the ## \phi ## is omitted. Similarly if we reflect from each plane so that ## \theta_i=\theta_r ##, we can essentially ignore the effect of the geometry of how the atoms are arranged on that plane. (That is only the case for the ## m=0 ## maximum). Then we can consider the planes as uniform, and only need to concern ourselves with the polar angle ## \theta_i ## (spherical coordinates) relative to the z-axis. If we are considering the ## m=1 ## case that occurs for reflection off of a single plane, it only occurs for ## \theta_i ## where ## (1)(\lambda)=d(\sin(\theta_i)+\sin(\theta_r)) ## (e.g. a rectangular array of atoms) if the azimuthal ## \phi ## angle is zero. ## \\ ##If we were to test this with a diffraction grating using a pinhole type (monochromatic=laser) source instead of a slit with a parabolic mirror to collimate the beam, and rotated the grating to some ## \theta_i ##, so that it has a plane wave incident on it at angle ## \theta_i ##, we could then test for the effect on the resulting ## m=1 ## bright spot that is found in a spectrometer where the far-field pattern is observed on the exit slit because a second parabolic mirror is used to focus the far-field pattern in the plane of the exit slit. If the grating is tilted backwards, it will make the focused ## m=1## spot occur slightly elevated on the upper part of the exit slit, but if that angle is tilted too much, I think the focused spot quality would be greatly reduced. It would start to become a big blob rather then a small focused spot. ## \\ ## Here, again is where I would really need to consult an x-ray crystallography textbook to see if they treat the case of a peak that doesn't satisfy the Bragg condition.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Gamdschiee
  • #33
This last item, which really came about because of your question @Gamdschiee in post 29, could use some further research. I was unable to locate any mention of it in a google search. Normally, researchers in this field of x-ray scattering are quite thorough. I think it is likely that there will indeed be peaks of this nature occurring on a somewhat regular basis, and I expect they do take them into account. This finer feature doesn't appear to be presented in most textbooks discussions on Bragg scattering, but mathematically, the conditions for constructive interference appear to be met by all of the atoms in this case, so I would expect occasionally such peaks would occur and be observed experimentally.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Gamdschiee

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K