Single-slit Diffraction Problem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the necessary diameter of a camera's aperture to read a license plate from a height of 160 km, given that the numbers are 5.0 cm apart and the light wavelength is 550 nm. The user attempts to apply the single-slit diffraction formula and the small-angle approximation to isolate the aperture width. They initially assume that constructive interference occurs every 5.0 cm, leading to confusion over the correct values for m and y. Ultimately, they find that using m = 1 and y = 5.0 cm yields the correct result, but they seek clarification on the underlying intuition for this choice. The conversation highlights the complexities of diffraction and the importance of understanding the relationship between aperture size and resolution in imaging.
lingualatina
Messages
12
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


A spy camera is said to be able to read the numbers on a car’s license plate. If the numbers on the plate are 5.0 cm apart, and the spy satellite is at an altitude of 160 km, what must be the diameter of the camera’s aperture? (Assume light with a wavelength of 550 nm.)

Homework Equations


Single-slit diffraction: wsinθ = (where w is the width of the slit, m = 1, 2, 3, ... for destructive interference)
Small-angle approximation: sinθ ≈ tanθ = y/D (where y is the vertical height above the central axis, D is the distance between the slit(s) and the screen) for small θ

The Attempt at a Solution


Since the goal of the problem is to solve for w, I used the small-angle approximation to set up the following equation: /w = y/D. I then rearranged the variables to isolate w, ending up with w = mλy/D. Now, I know that D = 160 * 103 m and λ = 500 * 10-9 m. I'm having trouble, however, figuring out what to do for m and y. Since the numbers on the plate are 5.0 cm apart, I'm assuming that, every 5.0 cm, we have constructive interference occurring. Since there will definitely be constructive interference along the central axis, I figured that the first-order minimum would occur halfway in-between the central bright fringe and the first-order bright fringe, which would give m = 1 and y = 2.5 cm. However, this does not give me the correct answer; if I try instead to use m = 1 and y = 5.0 cm, this does give me the right answer, but I can't come up with a sketch of the situation that would explain why. Some assistance with the intuition here would really be appreciated.

Thank you very much in advance for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You may find this useful in determining how to proceed.
https://www.boundless.com/physics/textbooks/boundless-physics-textbook/wave-optics-26/diffraction-175/the-rayleigh-criterion-640-6036/
 
The central maximum for single slit diffraction, (where ## m=0 ## and constructive interference occurs) is the item of interest here. Most of the energy is in this central part of the image which becomes a small blob (instead of a point) of width ## \Delta x=f \Delta \theta ## when focused by the lens with focal length ## f ##. The width of this blob is often taken to be ## \Delta \theta=\lambda/w ##. (Sometimes with a factor like 1.22 in front of ## \lambda/w ##. To actually read the numbers, it will need to have a resolution even better than the ## \Delta \theta=5 \, cm/160 \, km ## that they give you, but that is apparently the ## \Delta \theta ## they want you to use. ## \\ ## Additional info/question that might be helpful: What is the spacing ## \Delta x ## in the focal plane of the lens of two numbers on the license plate that are separated by ## 5 \, cm ##? ## \\ ## And additional item: The far-field diffraction pattern from light incident on the lens (such as perfectly parallel rays which are going through the aperture of width ## w ## (=the width ## w ## becomes essentially a slit width)) gets imaged by the lens in the focal plane of the lens. An angular spread ## \Delta \theta ## in the far-field diffraction pattern gets converted to a distance ## \Delta x ## in the focal plane given by ## \Delta x=f \Delta \theta ##. The light (all parallel rays on the lens) that would go to angle ## \theta ## in the far field winds up being focused at position ## x=f \, \theta ## in the focal plane of the lens. Thereby, the far-field diffraction pattern that would be created by a set of incident parallel rays on the lens winds up as the image that results in the focal plane, rather than getting the perfect focused point that the ray trace theory would give. (Instead of a perfectly focused point, you get a very small focused spot or blob).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes scottdave
@scottdave and @Charles Link Thanks very much to both of you for the help; I think I've gotten the right answer now.
 
  • Like
Likes scottdave and Charles Link
ZHIHZ said:
Is this diffraction??Help..sorry if I've posted in the wrong place.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top