Snell's Law Variation: Expressing with Cosines

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cider
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Law Snell's law
AI Thread Summary
Snell's Law traditionally expresses the relationship between the angles of incidence and refraction using sines, but a discussion arose about expressing it with cosines instead. While it is possible to define angles based on their relationship to the surface rather than the normal, this approach could lead to confusion, as it deviates from conventional definitions. The original poster seeks a formulation that uses only the cosine of the angle of incidence without any adjustments. However, the consensus suggests that such a formulation may not be feasible without compromising clarity and standard terminology in optics. Overall, the traditional sine-based expression remains the most accurate and widely understood method for applying Snell's Law.
Cider
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Is there a way to express Snell's Law using cosines of the angles of incidence instead of the sines without the cosines being squared? If no one here knows, is there anywhere I could look into this question?
 
Science news on Phys.org
Note that

\sin \theta =\cos(\theta - \frac{\pi}{2} )

Also,

cos(-x) = cos(x), therefore:

\cos(\theta - \frac{\pi}{2} ) = \cos( \frac{\pi}{2} - \theta)

pi/2 - theta = 90 degrees - theta = the angle the ray makes with the *surface* (instead of with the normal)

So IF you use angles of incidence and reflection defined as the angles the rays make with the surface instead of the angles they make with the normal to the surface, THEN Snell's law would indeed be expressed in terms of the cosines of THOSE angles. However, I would not encourage you to do this, because that is not the conventional definition for angles of incidence and reflection in optics. If you use that definition without telling somebody, and claim the angle of incidence is 35 degrees, he will think you are talking about the angle wrt the normal, which would actually be 55 degrees in that case.
 
Sorry, I probably should have made myself more clear. I need the equation to use only \cos \theta with no subtractions or additions within the cosine. And \theta has to be the angle of incidence. It cannot be the compliment to that angle.
 
I would like to use a pentaprism with some amount of magnification. The pentaprism will be used to reflect a real image at 90 degrees angle but I also want the reflected image to appear larger. The distance between the prism and the real image is about 70cm. The pentaprism has two reflecting sides (surfaces) with mirrored coating and two refracting sides. I understand that one of the four sides needs to be curved (spherical curvature) to achieve the magnification effect. But which of the...

Similar threads

Back
Top