Solve Optics Problem with Lensmaker's Equation

  • Thread starter Thread starter dzza
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Optics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving an optics problem using the lensmaker's equation, specifically involving a converging lens with a focal length of +30cm and a diverging lens placed 10cm away. The user is confused about the image distance from the first lens, questioning if the object is on the focal plane, which would result in parallel rays and no image formation. It is clarified that while the image distance calculation seems to yield no solution, the image actually forms at infinity, indicating that the object distance for the diverging lens is effectively +∞. This understanding resolves the confusion regarding the signs of the focal length and object distance. The key takeaway is that the image formed by the converging lens is at infinity, allowing for further analysis with the diverging lens.
dzza
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Hey, so I've got a HW for an optics lab and haven't studied optics for a while, so I could use a little help.

The problem is a lensmaker's equation question involving a system of optical devices. An object at a distance of 30cm to the left of a converging lens of focal length +30cm. The converging lens is then 10 cm away from a divering lens of known focal length.

Now, I know the general procedure for solving this sort of problem, using the image of the light through the first lens as the object for the second lens. If I could just find the image distance from the first lens I'd be in good shape. But, isn't the object on the focal plane? and if it is, don't all rays of light incident on the first lens from the object emerge parallel to optical axis? In that case, no image is formed.

From the lensmaker's equation, i get 1/30 + 1/s = 1/30, where s is the image distance, and this has no solution. My question is do I have a sign messed up for the focal length or object distance?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No.You are in the right track. Remeber mathematically that the inverse of avery large number is very small. That is if one make the denominater larger and larger the inverse appoaches zero. So the image will be formed at infinity. This means that the object dinstance for the divergiing lens will be +\infty.
 
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 '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