Optimizing Lens Focal Length for Micro-Structure Laser Experiment

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining suitable lens focal lengths for a laser experiment targeting micro-structures separated by 5 microns. The laser wavelength is 632 nm, and the beam diameter is 1 mm, necessitating a focused spot size greater than 5 microns to avoid illuminating adjacent structures. The Rayleigh criterion is introduced as a relevant concept, highlighting the diffraction limitations of the laser beam and its impact on resolution. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding diffraction patterns, specifically the Airy disk, and suggests that using shorter wavelengths or alternative microscopy methods may be necessary for better resolution. Overall, the participants gain clarity on the principles affecting their experiment and the calculations involved.
Matt atkinson
Messages
114
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


In an experiment a laser beam is focussed on a sample by a lens. The sample has micro structures spatially separated by 5 microns. In the experiment, each micro-structure has to be studied individually using the laser, so that illumination of two or more adjacent micro-structures must be avoided. If the laser wavelength is 632 nm and the diameter of the beam is 1 mm, find focal lengths of the lens suitable for this experiment.


Homework Equations


I have no idea.


The Attempt at a Solution


I assumed that the spot sized needs to be focussed to >5 microns so it meets the requirements.
but I really have no idea.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Time to generate an idea, isn't it? Apparently the parallel beam isn't going to be focused to a zero diameter focal point. What can be the reasons for that ? Why do they tell you the wavelength ?

Is there any context for this question ? Did you learn anything recently that might apply here ?
 
I Learnt about the Rayleigh criterion recently, I wonder could that apply.
d/l>1.22*lambda/D
l=f?
But, I'm not quite sure how it could apply.
 
So you google Rayleigh criterion, get an article on angular resolution. The 1.22 appears to come from the diameter of the first minimum of the Airy disk: diffraction limitation! Follow the link and it even has a small section on focusing a laser beam!

Huijgens' principle states every point of the 1mm laser beam aperture is point source for waves that propagate in all directions. All the stuff that expands sideways effectively interferes itself away, only straight through adds up constructively. (Not even that is true: a laser beam has some minute divergence).

In the focal plane of the lens you get a diffraction pattern that is the Fourier transform of the aperture. Circular aperture -> Airy disc.

So yes, this is a nice relevant equation. Fill in the numbers to get l < a very small number.

No wonder if you want to distinguish something of dimensions 8 times the wavelength. And this very small number is a genuine upper limit, which you want to stay away from as much as you can! Use bluer light, or start saving for an electron microscope: ##\lambda## of the order of 10-5 x visible light!
 
oh wow, thank you so much.
I have been trying to do it for a while, and didn't fully understand my notes, I tried google but porbably didnt search the right things.
I think I understand now.
Thanks BvU
 
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