Focusing Monochromatic Light: Why Do We Need a Distant Object?

  • Thread starter Thread starter EIRE2003
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Light
AI Thread Summary
Focusing monochromatic light on a distant object is essential because a nearby light source does not produce plane waves, which are necessary for accurate measurements. Plane waves allow for meaningful results in experiments, particularly when determining the focal length of a lens. When the object is at infinity, the light waves become parallel to the lens axis, ensuring that the image is formed at the correct distance. This principle is crucial for obtaining precise data in optical experiments. Understanding this concept is vital for anyone conducting similar experiments with lenses.
EIRE2003
Messages
107
Reaction score
0
When I was in class today we were doing an experiment to measure the wavelength of monochromatic light. my teacher said ''focus the light on a distant object'', but the light source that we use is very close so why do we have to focus it on a distant object?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
A more complete description of your experiment would help, but...

A near by light source does not produce plane waves, while a source at infinty does. Many experiments of this type require plane waves to get meaningful results. My guess is that you are trying to approximate plane waves.
 
if you were trying to find the focal length ...this is the explanation.
because to find the focal length, the object has to be at infinity. only when the object is at infinity will the waves coming from it be parallel to the axis of the lens and only then will the image be formed exactly at at a distance equal to the focal lenth of the lens.
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field propagation'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
Thread 'Recovering Hamilton's Equations from Poisson brackets'
The issue : Let me start by copying and pasting the relevant passage from the text, thanks to modern day methods of computing. The trouble is, in equation (4.79), it completely ignores the partial derivative of ##q_i## with respect to time, i.e. it puts ##\partial q_i/\partial t=0##. But ##q_i## is a dynamical variable of ##t##, or ##q_i(t)##. In the derivation of Hamilton's equations from the Hamiltonian, viz. ##H = p_i \dot q_i-L##, nowhere did we assume that ##\partial q_i/\partial...
Back
Top