Exploring Different Methods for Measuring Refractive Index

sean_cameron
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I am currently undergoing advanced higher physics and my investigation is on measuring refractive index.
I have conducted 3 experiments so far: the standard ray lamp experiment from higher and two different versions of the apparent depth method.
However, these experiments have been simple and I was looking for any advice for another experiment.
Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
sean_cameron said:
the standard ray lamp experiment

Which is the standard one? Is that where you measure the angle of incidence and the angle of refraction?

Here's another one from HyperPhysics (great site!).

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/geoopt/prism.html#c1

From that page, "A refracting prism is a convenient geometry to illustrate dispersion and the use of the angle of minimum deviation provides a good way to measure the index of refraction of a material." So if you can get your hands on a prism then you might be in business.
 
You may also wish to try lenses.There are several ways to measure the focal length of a lens and by measuring the radius of curvature of the lens faces and then using the lens formula...1/f=(n-1)(1/r1+1/r2) you can calculate n.
 
Tom Mattson said:
Which is the standard one? Is that where you measure the angle of incidence and the angle of refraction?

Yes this is the one i was referring to.
Thanks for the help but i was hoping to stick to the same rectangular prism i have already been using, any other ideas?
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top