Double slit interference pattern

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the number of maxima in a double slit interference pattern created by a 500-nm light beam with slits separated by 0.320 mm. The initial calculation suggests there are 640 maxima within the angular range of -30 degrees to 30 degrees. However, a participant points out that if the range is narrowed to -0.001 degrees to 0.001 degrees, the number of maxima would differ significantly. This highlights the importance of the specified angular range in determining the number of observable maxima. The conversation emphasizes the need to carefully consider the limits of the problem when calculating interference patterns.
svitak
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Two slits are separated by 0.320 mm. A beam of 500-nm light strikes the slits, producing an interference pattern. Determine the number of maxima observed in the angular range -30 degrees < theta < 30 degrees.

Homework Equations



d*sin(theta) = m*(lambda)


The Attempt at a Solution



(.32)sin(30)/.0005mm = m
m=320

so there are 320 maxima in 30 degrees. and thus 640 in this total range. is that right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Seems fine to me.
 
There is a problem.
What if it's from -0.001 degrees to 0.001 degrees? Find m corresponding to that case and you will find out what you missed :wink:
 
hikaru1221 said:
There is a problem.
What if it's from -0.001 degrees to 0.001 degrees? Find m corresponding to that case and you will find out what you missed :wink:

I think your comment has weight...but the range of visibility of this diffraction pattern are already set in place...namely between 30 and -30 degrees. OP, correct me if I'm mistaken in my interpretation of your problem statement, please.
 
I'm not entirely sure what you are getting at. But, I'm pretty sure it is meant to be strictly limited to 30 and -30.
 
No, I mean, what if the question asks for the number of maxima in another range. Just replace -30 with -0.001 and 30 with 0.001, solve the problem again, and you will see why.
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Back
Top