Lens with different refraction index on each side

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the calculation of the location of a virtual image using a lens with different refraction indices on each side. The formula n1/p + n2/q = -(n2-n1)/R is initially applied, but an error in calculating n2 - n1 leads to incorrect results. After correcting the calculation from 1.3 - 1 to 1.3 - 0.3, the correct virtual image location is determined to be 60.88 cm above the water. Participants confirm the formula's validity while discussing potential sign conventions for R. Overall, the conversation highlights the importance of careful calculations in optics.
JoeyBob
Messages
256
Reaction score
29
Homework Statement
see attached
Relevant Equations
1/p+1/q=-2/R
So I am not really familiar with lens questions when there's 2 different refraction indexes. I tried using n1/p+n2/q=-(n2-n1)/R but it doesn't seem to work.

p would be the actual location of the fly and q would be the virtual location, what the fish sees if I am understanding correctly. n1 would be the index of refraction where the fly is and n2 where the virtual image is?

So 1/60+1.3/q=-1.3/64. q=-35.155

So the image is 35.155 cm above the water. But this is wrong, the answer is 60.88 cm
 

Attachments

  • question.PNG
    question.PNG
    16.4 KB · Views: 188
Physics news on Phys.org
JoeyBob said:
n1/p+n2/q=-(n2-n1)/R

So 1/60+1.3/q=-1.3/64
The 1.3 on the right side is not correct.
 
TSny said:
The 1.3 on the right side is not correct.
The rest is correct then?

Shouldn't it be on top according to the formula?
 
The rest is correct.

JoeyBob said:
Shouldn't it be on top according to the formula?
I'm not sure what you are asking here.
 
n1/p+n2/q=-(n2-n1)/R

is this formula incorrect here?
 
The formula looks correct, although I’m not sure what sign conventions you are using for R, etc.

You made a mistake in calculating ##n_2-n_1##.
 
  • Like
Likes JoeyBob
TSny said:
The formula looks correct, although I’m not sure what sign conventions you are using for R, etc.

You made a mistake in calculating ##n_2-n_1##.
ya I am dumb. 1.3-1 isn't the same as 1.3-0. I get q = -60.88 when I use 0.3, so 60.88 above the water.

Thanks.
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman
JoeyBob said:
ya I am dumb.
Not at all. We all make slips like this :oldsmile:

1.3-1 isn't the same as 1.3-0. I get q = -60.88 when I use 0.3, so 60.88 above the water.
Thanks.
Looks good.
 
Back
Top