Optics aperture modeling rect functions

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on modeling a shape T aperture using 2D rect functions, with specific dimensions for the horizontal and vertical lines. The user is uncertain about how to combine the rect functions representing each line, particularly whether to add or multiply them. They express confusion over defining the vertical line's representation and whether the resulting combination would yield zero. Additionally, the user questions the appropriateness of introducing a unit vector in the horizontal line's definition, as it seems to contradict the hint about Cartesian separability. Clarification on these points is sought to accurately model the aperture.
binbagsss
Messages
1,291
Reaction score
12
I am trying to model a shape T aperture through 2D rect functions. Both the horizontal and vertical 'lines' have length b and width a, and do not overlap. The origin should be taken to be the centre of the vertical line.

The question has hinted at the function describing the aperture to be cartesian seperable.

My issues, I think, seem to stem from not knowing how the rect functions can be combined through operations together...

Here are my thoughts on the vertical 'line' :

The RHS of it (to the right of the origin) I believe is: \frac{a}{2} rect \frac{y}{b} [1]
Similarly the LHS i think is : -\frac{a}{2}rect\frac{y}{b}. [2]

My problem is then to express these two together. I am not sure how you define [1] + [2].
Would this be zero?

Perhaps you should multiply them, in which case I get -\frac{a^{2}}{4} rect^{2} \frac{y}{b}; so to me it then makes more sense to look at \frac{a}{2} rect^{2} \frac{y}{b}

Again I'm not sure how you would define a rect^{2} function.

Here are my thoughts on the horizontal 'line' :

First of all, it can not be a single rect function as either the top or bottom line would then be missing.

I think \frac{b}{2} e_{2} - \frac{a}{2}rect\frac{x}{b} for the bottom half, and (\frac{b}{2} + \frac{a}{2} )e_{2} + \frac{a}{2}rect \frac{x}{b} for the top half.

BUT as said above, the question hints towards the function being Cartesian separable, but in describing the horizontal 'line' I have introduced e_{2} - the unit vector in the y direction. This also doesn't look right in general, as isn't rect a scalar ?


Many thanks to anyone who can help shed some light .
!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bump?
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top