Question concerning Michelson stellar interferometer

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on using a Michelson stellar interferometer as a Fourier transform spectrometer to analyze radiation from a star's expanding gas shell. The visibility curve, represented as a sinc function, is linked to the temporal coherence of the emitted radiation rather than spatial coherence. Participants suggest that the visibility curve reflects changes over time during the shell's expansion, which can be used to estimate the shell's expansion velocity and the apparent width of spectral lines. Understanding the relationship between the visibility curve and the temporal characteristics of the gas shell is crucial for deriving these measurements. This highlights the importance of coherence in interpreting interferometric data.
arrektor
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hello there, I have a question concerning Michelson stellar interferometer.
It is about stars ejecting mass in a thin luminous shell of gas expanding to a size greater than that of star itself.
So it says in the exercise:
a michelson interferometer is used as a fourrier transform spectrometer to examine radiation from an area of sky neart he star so as to include contributions from the front and back of the shell but not from the star itself. the visibility curve obtained for a spectral line of wavelength 656 nm is given( sketch of sinc function).
How can I estimate the velocity of expansion of the shell and the apparent width of the component lines?

Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org


This is a good question. As a hint, Michaelson interferometers measure *temporal* coherence, not *spatial* coherence. So, what is the visibility curve actually measuring?
 


I suppose that it has to do with the temporal coherence of the source so this would mean that what we see in the graph is the change in visibility at different times during its expansion?
 
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