Dispersion through an equilateral prism

  • Thread starter Thread starter SteveM-
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dispersion Prism
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating the angular dispersion "gamma" of white light passing through an equilateral prism with refractive indices of n(red) = 1.582 and n(violet) = 1.633. Participants utilized Snell's Law to derive the angles of refraction for both red and violet light. The key takeaway is that the angles must be calculated with respect to the second surface normal of the prism, and the difference between the outgoing angles will yield the angular dispersion. Geometry plays a crucial role in determining the correct incident angles at the second surface.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Snell's Law and its application in optics
  • Familiarity with the concept of angular dispersion in light refraction
  • Basic knowledge of geometry related to prisms
  • Ability to solve trigonometric equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Snell's Law in different optical media
  • Learn about the geometry of light refraction in prisms
  • Explore advanced topics in angular dispersion and its calculations
  • Investigate the effects of varying refractive indices on light behavior
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those focusing on optics, as well as educators seeking to enhance their understanding of light behavior in prisms.

SteveM-
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


white light propagating in air is incident at 45 degrees on an equilateral prism Find the angular dispersion "gamma" of the outgoing beam if the prism has refractive indices n(red) = 1.582 and n(violet) = 1.633.
NOTE: "gamma" is just a variable for describing the angular dispersion.

Homework Equations


Snell's law n1sin(theta)=n2sin(theta)
adjusted for our purposes I came up with:

For incoming wight light:

n(air)sin(45) = n(red)*sin(theta(r1)) and n(air)sin(45) = n(violet)sin(theta(v))

solving these equations we can find our angles and use those to determine our outgoing theta for each wave:

n(red)sin(theta(r1)) = n(air)sin(theta(r2)) and


n(violet)sin(theta(v1))=n(air)sin(theta(v2))


The Attempt at a Solution



Well this seems like a simple plug and chuck, but the approach seems like it may be oversimplified, I think there may be some geometry somewhere that needs to be added, (i.e. should I add 45 degrees to the theta(r1) and use that degree value for the "theta(r1)" for the outgoing red beam angle?

Assuming I find the output angles then all I would need to do is take the difference of those angles to determine the angular dispersion "gamma"?

The given text available provides about half a paragraph talking about angular dispersion for the entire chapter on reflection and refraction, so if you guy's happen to know of any useful links I could refer to for FYI purposes, that would be appreciated as well, but in the mean time am I doing this correctly?

When I solved the numbers I basically got output angles of red and violate that were suspiciously close making the difference near zero... the only thing that seems correct is that my angle for red is above the angle for violate which is expected...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
SteveM- said:
For incoming wight light:

n(air)sin(45) = n(red)*sin(theta(r1)) and n(air)sin(45) = n(violet)sin(theta(v))
OK.

solving these equations we can find our angles and use those to determine our outgoing theta for each wave:

n(red)sin(theta(r1)) = n(air)sin(theta(r2)) and


n(violet)sin(theta(v1))=n(air)sin(theta(v2))
Instead of theta(r1) & theta(v1), which are angles with respect to the first surface normal, you need angles with respect to the second surface normal.


The Attempt at a Solution



Well this seems like a simple plug and chuck, but the approach seems like it may be oversimplified, I think there may be some geometry somewhere that needs to be added, (i.e. should I add 45 degrees to the theta(r1) and use that degree value for the "theta(r1)" for the outgoing red beam angle?
Yes, you'll need a bit of geometry to find the incident angles at the second surface. But why 45 degrees?
 
Right, that's the ambiguity that needed addressing, we'll in that case because this is a equilateral triangle the incident angle of the light on the interior of the prism should be equal the incoming angle being subtracted from the axis normal to the prism surface.

The reference of 45 degrees being added to the initial angle was purely arbitrary for example purposes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
14K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K