Interference pattern of a fan of plane waves

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the interference pattern created by a fan of plane waves, with an assumption of an odd number of waves symmetrically distributed around the z-axis. The angle of each nth plane wave is calculated in relation to the first wave, leading to a mathematical expression for the electric field of each wave. The intensity is derived from the magnitude squared of the sum of these electric fields, initially approached through complex exponentials. A geometric series approach is suggested to simplify the calculations, contingent on the assumption that the angles are small, allowing for approximations of sine and cosine functions. The conversation concludes with a realization that this method effectively resolves the complexity of the initial approach.
baseballfan_ny
Messages
92
Reaction score
23
Homework Statement
A fan of ##N## plane waves are propagating symmetrically with respect to the z axis, as shown in figure below. The angular spacing between successive members of the fan is fixed and equal to ##\Delta \theta##. Describe the interference pattern observed on a plane perpendicular to the z axis.
Relevant Equations
Intensity of interference of waves ## \alpha | A_1e^{i\phi_1} + A_2e^{i\phi_2}|^2##
1632653422746.png


So I've kind of made the assumption that there will be an odd number of plane waves and the same amount above and below the z-axis. Then, using the diagram below, I determined the angle the nth plane wave makes with respect to the z-axis to be the angle it makes with respect to the n =1 plane wave, ##n \Delta \theta##, minus the 1/2 the total angle between the n = N and n = 1 plane waves, ##\Delta \theta \frac {(N - 1)} {2} ##, giving me ##\theta_n = \Delta \theta (n - \frac {N - 1} {2} ) ##. Angles below the z-axis are negative and above are positive. Therefore, ## \theta_n = -\theta_{n - \frac {N - 1} {2}}## for ## n > \frac {N - 1} {2} ##.

1632654379147.png

Making the assumption that they all have the same wavelength (and hence wavenumber ##k## and amplitude, the nth plane wave would be of the form (also ##\Delta z## is distance along z-axis to perpendicular plane we are interested in) ...$$ E_n = E_0 e^{ik(x\sin(\theta_n) + \Delta z \cos(\theta_n))} $$

Then to get the intensity I would need the magnitude squared of the sum of this term over all n...

$$ I \propto | \sum_{n = 1}^N E_0 e^{ik(x\sin(\theta_n) + \Delta z \cos(\theta_n))} | | \sum_{n = 1}^N E_0 e^{-ik(x\sin(\theta_n) + \Delta z \cos(\theta_n))} | $$

From here, I might have messed up. I used the idea that ##\theta_n = -\theta_{n - \frac {N - 1} {2}}##. I then used Euler's formula and this condition to rewrite the sum as a sum of cosines and one complex exponential corresponding to the plane wave centered on the z-axis (the x = 0 one), which gave me an algebraic mess. I'm going to skip showing that because as I was writing this post I thought of another way that maybe gave me a reasonable answer?

That other way:
Maybe these sums should be added using the geometric sequence formula: ##S_n = \frac {a(1 - r^{n+1})} {1-r} ##. Calculating the r factor...
$$ r = \frac { E_0 e^{ ik(x\sin( \theta_{n+1} ) + \Delta z \cos( \theta_{n+1} ) ) } } { E_0 e^{ ik(x\sin(\theta_n) + \Delta z \cos(\theta_n) ) } } = e^{ ik( x\sin(\theta_{n+1}) + \Delta z \cos(\theta_{n+1} ) ) - ik( x\sin(\theta_n) + \Delta z \cos(\theta_n) ) } = e^{ik \gamma} $$

So then I make my sum from 0 to N-1 instead of 1 to N to apply the summation formula...

$$ I \propto \frac {E_0 [1 - e^{ik\gamma N}]} {1- e^{ik\gamma} } * \frac {E_0 [1 - e^{-ik\gamma N}]} {1- e^{-ik\gamma} } = \frac {E_0^2 [1 - e^{ik\gamma N}] - e^{-ik\gamma N}] + 1} {1 - e^{ik\gamma} - e^{-ik\gamma} + 1} = \frac {E_0^2 [2 - 2\cos{k\gamma N} ]} {2 - 2\cos{k\gamma} } = \frac {E_0^2 [1 - \cos{k\gamma N} ]} {1 - \cos{k\gamma} } $$

So there would be maxima when ## k\gamma N = m\pi##, where m is odd? I'm still not sure this is right because I'm not sure how to explain what happens when ##cos{k\gamma}## in the denominator equals 1 and the whole thing blows up...
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
baseballfan_ny said:
That other way:
Maybe these sums should be added using the geometric sequence formula: ##S_n = \frac {a(1 - r^{n+1})} {1-r} ##. Calculating the r factor...
$$ r = \frac { E_0 e^{ ik(x\sin( \theta_{n+1} ) + \Delta z \cos( \theta_{n+1} ) ) } } { E_0 e^{ ik(x\sin(\theta_n) + \Delta z \cos(\theta_n) ) } } = e^{ ik( x\sin(\theta_{n+1}) + \Delta z \cos(\theta_{n+1} ) ) - ik( x\sin(\theta_n) + \Delta z \cos(\theta_n) ) } = e^{ik \gamma} $$
In order to have a geometric series, the ##r## factor needs to be a constant (i.e., independent of the term index ##n##). This is not the case here. It does look like a mess.

But if you can assume that all of the ##\theta_n## are small so that ##\sin(\theta_n) \approx \theta_n## and ##\cos(\theta_n) \approx 1##, you will have a geometric series.
 
  • Like
Likes baseballfan_ny
TSny said:
In order to have a geometric series, the ##r## factor needs to be a constant (i.e., independent of the term index ##n##). This is not the case here. It does look like a mess.

But if you can assume that all of the ##\theta_n## are small so that ##\sin(\theta_n) \approx \theta_n## and ##\cos(\theta_n) \approx 1##, you will have a geometric series.
This is exactly the hint I needed and it worked perfectly. I apologize for the late acknowledgment. Thanks for the help!
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top