Optics: Soap Film and Other Things

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Prologue
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Film Optics Soap
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the optical interference effects observed in thin films, particularly soap films, and the reasons why these effects are not typically visible in thicker materials. Participants explore the relationship between film thickness, coherence length, and the conditions necessary for interference to occur.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the necessity for thin films to produce visible interference effects, suggesting that imperfections in thicker materials may obscure these effects.
  • Another participant notes that as thickness increases, the phases of incident and reflected rays become more randomized, which could affect visibility of interference.
  • A further inquiry is made into the cause of this randomization of phases, indicating a desire for deeper understanding.
  • It is mentioned that interference is dependent on the coherence length of the light; if the film exceeds this length, interference may not occur.
  • One participant proposes that under certain conditions, such as perpendicular incidence, interference effects could potentially be observed in thicker layers.
  • Another participant reflects on the mechanics of light entering and exiting a film, suggesting that the thickness relative to the wavelength affects the perceived path of light and thus the interference pattern.
  • A textbook reference is cited, stating that if a film is more than a few wavelengths thick, the interference fringes may be too close together to resolve, although the reasoning behind this is questioned.
  • One participant expresses agreement with the idea that thicker objects lead to greater path length differences, which could explain the visibility of thin bands in interference patterns.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the conditions necessary for interference effects in thick films, with no consensus reached on the exact mechanisms or conditions that would allow for observable interference in thicker materials.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various assumptions regarding the coherence length of light and the geometry of light paths, which may influence the discussion but remain unresolved.

Prologue
Messages
183
Reaction score
1
I understand the idea behind the optical interference that produces colors on thin films but have never figured out the reason that the films have to by 'thin'. What is the lack of similarity that I am missing between a film and a somewhat thick sheet of glass or something that makes these effects not visible in the thick thing? Is it merely that the thin films that do this sort of thing are very much close to perfect surfaces so that the effects can be recognized (and the thick things like glass are very imperfect and you can't see the now *very thin* bands)? Or is there something more sinister at play?
 
Last edited:
Science news on Phys.org
Well, yeah. You're on the right track.

As the thickness increases, the phases of the incident and reflected rays become more and more randomized.
 
What is the cause of the randomization of the phases?
 
DaveC426913 is correct, but I would have phrased the answer differently- when the thickness of the soap film exceeds the coherence length of the incident light, there is no interference.

The coherence length is given by the spread of frequencies present, and is a measure of how unequal the arms of a Mach-Zender interferometer can be while still producing interference fringes.
 
Prologue said:
I understand the idea behind the optical interference that produces colors on thin films but have never figured out the reason that the films have to be 'thin'.

Interesting question.

Let me explain why I think it interesting. In the case of a double slit setup there are numerous interference fringes. There will be one luminous area where the two paths that the light has followed are equal in length, next to that there will be areas where the length difference of the paths is a single wavelength, next to that the areas where the difference is two wavelengths, etc.
That illustrates that the the difference in pathlength can be a multiple of the wavelength; you always get interference effects.

Under the right conditions it should be possible to elicit interference effect with a thick layer.
If I hazard a guess I think interference effects with a thick layer can only be elicited when the light strikes the layer at right angles.

In the case of a thin film of petrol on water the interference effects are visible from all angles. I wonder: when light enters a fluid its direction is changed. If we are looking at a puddle of water with a petrol film on it then some of the light has reflected directly on the petrol, and some of the light has entered the petrol, it has reflected on the petrol/water boundary, and then it has exited the petrol again.

My guess is: if the film's thickness is about as large as a single wavelength of the light then the path of entering the petrol and exiting again is hardly displaced sideways compared to the pure reflection. It is as if the light is from the same source, but with different phase because the reflections were different.

As DaveC426913 points out, the thicker the layer, the more sideways displacement. It's no longer as if from the same source.

Generally, interference effects will occur only if the setup allows only a small set of possible pathways for the light
For instance, in a double slit setup the source of the light (the source that illuminates the double slit) must be a point source. You can use sunlight, but the Sun itself is not a point source, so if the double slit is illuminated by the Sun then there are no interference effects. To get interference effects the Sun must illuminate a barrier with a sufficiently small hole in it, and the light entering through that hole then illuminates the double slit.
 
I just read in my textbook (Serway) that it's because "If the film is more than a few wavelengths thick, the interference fringes are so close together that
you cannot resolve them." Not sure exactly how that follows...
 
I buy that (and that was what I was thinking intuitively). I see that the path length difference per angular displacement will be more for a thicker object and that would explain the thin bands.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
9K