Inferring Shape of Phasors in Multi-Slit Diffraction

AI Thread Summary
Phasors in multiple-slit diffraction differ significantly from those in single-slit diffraction. In single-slit analysis, phasors are associated with each point in the aperture and align only in the central direction, leading to minima when they form a closed polygon. Conversely, in multiple-slit scenarios, each slit corresponds to a single phasor, and maxima occur when these phasors are aligned. The phase angle between adjacent sources is crucial for understanding the interference pattern, as it determines the alignment of phasors. Overall, careful comparison of single-slit and double-slit simulations enhances understanding of these concepts.
hidemi
Messages
206
Reaction score
36
Homework Statement
At a bright diffraction line phasors associated with waves from the slits of a multiple-slit barrier:
A. are aligned
B. form a closed polygon
C. form a polygon with several sides missing
D. are parallel but adjacent phasors point in opposite directions
E. form the arc of a circle

The correct answer is A
Relevant Equations
d * sin(theta) = m * lambda
I know that phasors of a single-slit diffraction form a closed polygon or circle, but how could we infer the shape when phasors generated by slits of a multiple-slit barrier?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The ## m \lambda=d \sin{\theta} ## for constructive interference is sort of on the right track, but what you are needing is the phase angle between phasors from adjacent sources a distance ## d ## apart: ## \phi=(\frac{2 \pi}{\lambda}) d \sin{\theta} ##. Using the first expression, (since you are told that the sources constructively interfere), what can you say about ## \phi ##? Will the phasors be aligned?
 
hidemi said:
I know that phasors of a single-slit diffraction form a closed polygon or circle ...
Closed polygon's give minima (zero intensity), not maxima.

Think of adding phasors in the same way as adding vectors. The resultant is zero only when the vectors form a closed polygon.

There is an important difference between a single-slit and multiple-slits when using phasors.

For a single-slit analyis, each point in the aperture has a phasor. The phasors are aligned in only one situation - for the central direction.

For a multiple-slit analysis we associate each slit with a single phasor. A maximum is produced whenever the phasors are aligned (unlike a single-slit).

This video gives quite a good insight. You need to compare the single-slit and double-slit simulations carefully.
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link and hidemi
Steve4Physics said:
Closed polygon's give minima (zero intensity), not maxima.

Think of adding phasors in the same way as adding vectors. The resultant is zero only when the vectors form a closed polygon.

There is an important difference between a single-slit and multiple-slits when using phasors.

For a single-slit analyis, each point in the aperture has a phasor. The phasors are aligned in only one situation - for the central direction.

For a multiple-slit analysis we associate each slit with a single phasor. A maximum is produced whenever the phasors are aligned (unlike a single-slit).

This video gives quite a good insight. You need to compare the single-slit and double-slit simulations carefully.

Thank you! I got it
 
  • Like
Likes Steve4Physics and Charles Link
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 hanged 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