Solving Destructive Interference: Angle vs Wavelength

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on solving the destructive interference equation for single slits, specifically the equation angle = wavelength/(2a), where 'a' represents the slit width. A user initially misapplied a double slit equation, resulting in a calculated wavelength of 2491 nm instead of the correct 9982 nm. The correction involved recognizing the need for a factor of 2 and using the appropriate single slit equation, leading to a clearer understanding of the relationship between angle, wavelength, and slit width.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of wave optics principles
  • Familiarity with the single slit diffraction equation
  • Knowledge of angle conversion from degrees to radians
  • Basic algebra for manipulating equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the single slit diffraction equation in detail
  • Learn about the factors affecting destructive interference
  • Explore the relationship between wavelength and slit width in optical experiments
  • Review the concept of radians and their application in wave equations
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in physics, particularly those focusing on optics, as well as anyone involved in experimental physics or engineering applications related to wave interference.

JoeyBob
Messages
256
Reaction score
29
Homework Statement
See attached
Relevant Equations
angle=wavelength/(2a)
The destructive interference equation for small angles is angle=wavelength/(2a), where a is the width. I assume it means destructive interference since its talking about areas where no light is present.

Using the equation after changing degrees into radians I get the answer of 2491 nm when the answer shoould be 9982 nm. the answer is approx. 4 times as large. Where am I going wrong here?
 

Attachments

  • question.PNG
    question.PNG
    7.3 KB · Views: 154
Physics news on Phys.org
BvU said:
Hi,

Study http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/sinslit.html to find a factor of 2 (basically: you have the wrong relevant equation) and consider that the exercise text (were you not to be bothered retyping it ?) talks about the second angle to find another factor of 2 ...

##\ ##
i see, I was using a double slit eqn instead of a single slit. Looking at your link, tanx=x=y/D.

So i don't know what y is nor d.

d=y/x=y/0.108 = 9.2593y

Now I can use y=(m*wavelength*D)/a to find width. m i assume is 2 because second angle measurement...

0.108d=(2*539 nm *d)/a

a=9981.4815

This is good. Thanks. I have more understanding over slits now that *hopefully* I won't just haphazardly use an equation that seems appropriate.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BvU and berkeman

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
996
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
997
Replies
7
Views
6K