Error Checking Single Slit Diffraction Equation for Bright Lines

  • Thread starter Thread starter donotremember
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Course Errors
AI Thread Summary
The discussion identifies potential errors in a physics correspondence course related to the definitions and equations for charge and single slit diffraction. The definition of a coulomb is incorrectly stated, lacking the necessary time component for clarity. Additionally, the equation for calculating bright lines in single slit diffraction is presented inaccurately, leading to confusion about the relationship between variables. The participants agree that these errors are fundamental and reflect a lack of precision in the course material. Ensuring accuracy in these concepts is crucial for understanding the underlying physics.
donotremember
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I believe there are a number of errors in my physics correspondence course and I plan to include a page listing them when I write my final exam, but I would first like to make sure they are errors and not due to my lack of understanding.

1) "The coulomb is defined as the amount of charge passing any point in a circuit when a current of one Ampere is flowing."

I believe this should be

"The coulomb is defined as the amount of charge passing any point in a circuit when a current of one Ampere is flowing for a period of second."

2) For single slit diffraction the equation listed for finding bright lines other than the central one is

(n+ 1/2λ)/w

I believe this should be

(n+1/2)λ/wwhere n is the nth bright line λ; is the wavelength of the light and w is the slit width.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your understanding is correct. The correspondence course is sloppy. Both of those statements are dimensionally wrong. The most fundamental sort of wrong.
 
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