How Does Lens Placement Affect Image Height and Orientation?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the height and orientation of the final image produced by a system of a diverging and a converging lens. The initial calculations for image distance from the diverging lens were found to be incorrect, leading to an erroneous final image height. It was suggested that the magnification from each lens should be calculated separately, as the object size changes after passing through the first lens. The final image height should be derived from the combined magnification of both lenses, rather than using the original object height. The correct final image height is stated to be 1.4 cm with an inverted orientation.
Rawr
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
A 1.5-cm tall object is placed 0.50 m to the left of a diverging lens with a focal length of 0.20 m. A converging lens with a focal length of 0.17 m is located 0.08 m to the right of the diverging lens. What is the height and orientation with respect to the original object of the final image.

Okay, first, I find the distance of the image with respect to the diverging lens first.

-1/.2 = 1/di + 1/.5
di = -0.1428...

Then, I add that distance image to the converging lens distance to get the object distance for the converging lens.

0.08 + -.1428.. = .2228 m

Then I use the lens equation again except with that object distance and the focal length of the converging lens.

1/.17 = 1/di + 1/.2228
di = 1.395...

Then I take the magnification equation and use hi/h0 = -di/d0

hi / (1.5) = -(1.395)/(.5)
Solve for hi.. and get -4.185.

Apparently, that is not the answer. The answer key says that it is 1.4 cm with an inverted image. I don't really know how they get 1.4. Where did I go wrong in my work? Or am I wwwaaayy off with what I'm doing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For your final di of 1.395 I think you forgot to invert it. It should be 1/1.395.
For the magnification, find the magnification due to the first lens, and then the second lens. The product of the two will give you the final magnification. Your way won't work because after the first lens, the size of the object is not 1.5 cm anymore. Also the object distance changes after the first lens. Work that out and see what you get.
 
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 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
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