Single slit diffraction problem

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the conditions necessary for light to diffract through a single slit, specifically addressing the relationship between the slit width and the wavelength of light. Participants explore theoretical aspects and practical demonstrations of diffraction phenomena.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that for light to diffract through a single slit, the slit opening must be equal to or less than the wavelength of the light, using an example of 600nm light and a 600nm slit width.
  • Another participant counters that the slit width only needs to be comparable to the wavelength, suggesting that there is no sharp distinction regarding the slit dimensions that dictate diffraction behavior.
  • A further contribution mentions that diffraction effects can occur even with apertures much larger than the wavelength, provided the light interacts with the edges of the aperture.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the necessary conditions for diffraction, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain unresolved regarding the relationship between slit width and wavelength.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on specific interpretations of diffraction phenomena, and there may be assumptions about the definitions of "comparable" and "much larger" that are not explicitly stated.

Saado
Messages
44
Reaction score
0
I've read that if you want light to diffract through a single slit, the slit opening must be equal too or less than the wavelength of the light. So for example, light of wavelength 600nm would diffract through a slit with width 600nm or less. Is this true? Or am I missing something. Since when I saw a demonstration, the slit width was only 10^-4m apart and the light began to diffract.
 
Science news on Phys.org
Its not that the width of the slit should be less than or equal to the wavelength of the light,it only should be comparable to it.
Think about it this way: Imagine you want to throw a basketball through a hole.If the hole is a circle of radius 10m,you will have no trouble doing it and its very improbable that you hit the ball to the edges. But if the hole has a radius of 0.25m,then its really probable that you hit the edges.There is no sharp distinction in the radius spectrum that says radii greater than this one mean that the ball always goes through the hole and radii smaller than this one mean that the ball always hits the edges.
Some people may say that the dimensions of the hole must be somehow that the light "sees" the edges and so acts properly and if the dimensions are somehow that the light doesn't "see" the edges,there will be no diffraction(with a good approximation).
 
With apertures that are much larger than the wavelength, you do get diffraction effects at the edges, provided of course that the light actually passes by the edges. The width of the aperture can even extend to infinity in one direction, as in knife-edge (straight-edge) diffraction:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/difopa.html#c1

Here's a picture:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/bardif.html

A couple more pictures, with non-straight edges:

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/bardif3.html#c1
 
Ahh thank you for the replies
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K