Maximum Width of Single Slit for No Diffraction Minima?

AI Thread Summary
The maximum width (D) of a single slit that results in no diffraction minima is determined by the relationship D * sin(θ) = mα, where α is the wavelength. For no minima to occur, the angle θ must reach 90 degrees, indicating that D must equal the wavelength α for the first minimum to appear. Thus, if D is greater than α, diffraction minima will not be observed. This geometric understanding of single slit diffraction is crucial for solving related proof problems. The conclusion is that the maximum slit width for no diffraction minima is equal to the wavelength.
leolaw
Messages
85
Reaction score
1
Given a wavelength length \alpha, what is the maximum Width (D) of a single slit, which would have no diffraction minima?

It seems like a proof problem to me and I am trying to get a head start.
should I use D * sin (\theta) = m \alpha ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
leolaw said:
Given a wavelength length \alpha, what is the maximum Width (D) of a single slit, which would have no diffraction minima?

It seems like a proof problem to me and I am trying to get a head start.
should I use D * sin (\theta) = m \alpha ?

Yes, that and what you know about the sine function.
 
that sin of zero degrees is 0
 
leolaw said:
that sin of zero degrees is 0

Yes, but at zero degrees you will never have a minimum. From the geometry of the single slit diffraction setup, to not find any minima after the slit, the angle \theta would have to be 90 degrees for the first minimum. So then what does

D * sin (\theta) = m \alpha

tell you about D?
 
I see, so D sin (90) = (1) \alpha, which is the first minimum, and D has to be equal to the wavelength \alpha.
 
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