Minimum angular separation for viewing stars

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining the minimum angular separation that the human eye can resolve when viewing two stars, specifically considering diffraction effects. The context is rooted in optics, particularly the Rayleigh criterion for resolution.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss their attempts to apply the Rayleigh criterion using specific values for wavelength and aperture diameter, but express uncertainty about the correctness of their estimates. Questions arise regarding the assumptions made about the stars as diffraction points and the implications of using different values for the variables involved.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing their calculations and questioning the validity of their approaches. Some guidance is offered regarding the application of the Rayleigh criterion, but there is no consensus on the correct method or answer yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the lack of information provided in the problem statement and the constraints of an online system that does not reveal correct answers after incorrect attempts. There is also mention of a deadline for submission, adding urgency to the discussion.

grouper
Messages
52
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



What is the minimum angular separation an eye could resolve when viewing two stars, considering only diffraction effects?

Homework Equations



Rayleigh criterion: θ=(1.22*λ)/D

The Attempt at a Solution



This problem doesn't give very much to go on so I think there's a trick I'm missing. I tried estimating using λ=550 nm and D≈5.0 mm (which I got from the problem just before it), but this was incorrect. Our book also states that the best resolution of the human eye is 5e-4 rad, although I'm not sure how they came by this number and it is not the correct answer. I'm not really sure where to go with this one though, especially given so little information.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
what did you get in your estimate?
I got 1.34 x 10^-4 radians
 
That is what I got as well but that is not the correct answer. Perhaps I should have included the following equations as well (derived from Rayleigh):

circular aperture diffraction:

dark rings: sinθ=1.22*(λ/D) or 2.23*(λ/D) or 3.24*(λ/D), etc.

bright rings: sinθ=1.63*(λ/D) or 2.68*(λ/D) or 3.70*(λ/D), etc.

Still doesn't help much though because it yields the same estimates. This problem must not be looking for estimates. I think it has something to do with treating the stars like diffraction points but I'm not really sure if that's correct or how to do that.
 
I can't see anything wrong with the way we have worked it out... it is a standard textbook exercise.
What has been given as the 'correct answer'?
 
It's an online thing so it tells me when I get it wrong but I can't see the right answer unless I want to give up and lose that point. I'll think about it some more.
 
could you get the correct answer by using different (but reasonable) values for λ and D?
 
No, I tried that. I don't think estimation is what this problem is getting at. There's got to be some way to tease some of the variables out; perhaps by assuming the distance to be infinity, even though that's not correct. I'll keep playing around with it; it's due this weekend.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K