N-slit Interference/Diffraction

  • Thread starter Thread starter Warr
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the mathematical formulation of intensity in N-slit interference, specifically comparing the intensity equations for 2 slits and N slits. The intensity for 2 slits is expressed as A²={A₂}²(sin²(φ/2)/(φ/2)²)cos²(β/2), while for N slits, it is A²={Aₙ}²(sin²(φ/2)/(φ/2)²)(sin²(Nβ/2)/sin²(β/2)). A participant questions the validity of substituting N=2 into the N-slit equation, leading to a conclusion that the peak intensity should indeed be proportional to the number of slits squared, confirming the mathematical consistency of the equations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of wave interference principles
  • Familiarity with trigonometric identities, particularly the double angle formula
  • Knowledge of the mathematical representation of light intensity
  • Basic concepts of diffraction and slit experiments
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the N-slit interference formula
  • Learn about the implications of varying the number of slits in diffraction patterns
  • Explore the application of trigonometric identities in wave physics
  • Investigate experimental setups for observing N-slit interference
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in physics, particularly those focusing on optics and wave phenomena, as well as researchers involved in experimental physics related to interference patterns.

Warr
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
Hi, having trouble determining whether my lab book has made an error, or I have.

Intensity as a function of [tex]\phi[/tex] for 2 slits is given as

[tex]A^2={A_2}^2\frac{sin^2(\frac{\phi}{2})}{{(\frac{\phi}{2})}^2}cos^2(\frac{\beta}{2})[/tex]

but then it gives the amplitude for N slits to be

[tex]A^2={A_N}^2\frac{sin^2(\frac{\phi}{2})}{{(\frac{\phi}{2})}^2}\frac{sin^2(\frac{N\beta}{2})}{sin^2(\frac{\beta}{2})}[/tex]

However, when I sub in N = 2 for the equation (2), and use the double angle formula to reduce the right fraction in equation (2) I get 4*equation(1) rather than just the equation(1) alone. Am I doing it wrong?

To be more succinct, isn't [tex]\frac{sin^2(\frac{N\beta}{2})}{sin^2(\frac{\beta}{2})} = 4cos^2(\frac{\beta}{2})[/tex]?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't have my optics references handy, but I don't think you're doing anything wrong.

Warr said:
but then it gives the amplitude for N slits to be

[tex]A^2={A_N}^2\frac{sin^2(\frac{\phi}{2})}{{(\frac{\phi}{2})}^2}\frac{sin^2(\frac{N\beta}{2})}{sin^2(\frac{\beta}{2})}[/tex]
I'd say that should be:
[tex]A^2={A_0}^2\frac{sin^2(\frac{\phi}{2})}{{(\frac{\phi}{2})}^2}\frac{sin^2(\frac{N\beta}{2})}{sin^2(\frac{\beta}{2})}[/tex]

It makes sense that the peak intensity should be proportional to the number of slits squared.
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K