Graphing Power vs Polarizer Angle using Intensity

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the transmitted power of a laser through a polarizer, using intensity measurements. The data collected includes polarizer angles, recorded intensity, transmitted intensity, and ambient light levels. The main confusion arises from how to relate transmitted intensity, measured in lux, to transmitted power, as the lux meter only provides intensity readings. It is clarified that the relationship between intensity and power is proportional, allowing for the calculation of transmitted power if the maximum power or area of the polarizer is known. The conversation also addresses issues with data accuracy and the need to graph the results to identify outliers and better understand the relationship between polarizer angle and transmitted intensity.
  • #31
Oh wait, I think the OpenStax textbook just assumed an efficiency equal to 1.

Many thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
I plotted your data. Normally, one assumes the x values are reliable, so curve fitting minimises the sum of squares of the errors in y, but your data looks very odd. The trough on the left is about 112° wide, then the crest is only 68° wide. It's as though there is some systematic error in the angle readings.
Alternatively, the high crest on the right is what's wrong. If we throw away the data from 120° to 170° then the curve looks respectable. Sketching in the gap created, the peak would only be about 130.

I assume you only did one run-through of the settings, which is a shame.

Anyway, I was able to verify my formulae.
 
  • Like
Likes member 731016
  • #33
haruspex said:
I plotted your data. Normally, one assumes the x values are reliable, so curve fitting minimises the sum of squares of the errors in y, but your data looks very odd. The trough on the left is about 112° wide, then the crest is only 68° wide. It's as though there is some systematic error in the angle readings.
Alternatively, the high crest on the right is what's wrong. If we throw away the data from 120° to 170° then the curve looks respectable. Sketching in the gap created, the peak would only be about 130.

I assume you only did one run-through of the settings, which is a shame.

Anyway, I was able to verify my formulae.
Thank you for doing that @haruspex!

Many thanks!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
7K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K