Is My Calculation for Film Thickness Using Interference Method Accurate?

tan-X1
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
After I read many articles about measuring film thickness by interference method.

I tried to calculate flow that papers but I can't

the equation is

d= (y1*y2)/(2*(n1y2-n2y1))

for an easy I approximate n1 =n2

so

d= (y1*y2)/(2*n(y2-y1))


y1 = 350 nm
y2 = 380 nm
n = 2.35

I want to find out "d"

it seems to be easy

but I always get d = 944 nm

unfortunately, it's wrong

d have to be 472

that means I forgot to divide 2 in this eq.

however, the eq use to be right.

I don't know what's wrong in my calculation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ahh, I am wondering

I track this eq from original eq

2nd=my1

2nd=(m+1/2)y2

I am able to get

d=(y2*y1)/(4*n*(y2-y1))

from this eq. I can get the right answer

so, what's wrong in this eq.

d= (y1*y2)/(2*n(y2-y1))

?
 
Please do NOT post the same question in more than one forum.
 
tan-X1 said:
the equation is

d= (y1*y2)/(2*(n1y2-n2y1))

for an easy I approximate n1 =n2

so

d= (y1*y2)/(2*n(y2-y1))
Why don't you explain what this equation represents and define the terms? What are n1 and n2? y1 and y2?
 
Sorry mate.

Now, I've already known.

Thank you.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top