Solving Double Slit Arrangement Q's

  • Thread starter Thread starter Qyzren
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Double slit Slit
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving homework questions related to a double slit arrangement producing interference fringes. The initial calculations reveal the slit separation as 2.25 mm using the wavelength of sodium light. Doubling the slit separation results in a new separation of 4.50 mm, while the effect of doubling the distance to the screen on angular separation is clarified through the relationship between fringe distance and screen distance. The impact of immersing the apparatus in water is noted, with the wavelength effectively reduced, leading to a smaller angle. The calculations for replacing the sodium lamp with an argon ion laser yield an angular separation of 0.012 degrees, confirming the approach to solving the problem.
Qyzren
Messages
41
Reaction score
0
Some homework q's i don't quite understand. Any help is appreciated.

A double slit arrangement produces fringes on a distant screen. Using the light from a sodium spectral lamp (lamda = 589 nm) the fringes have an angular separation of 0.015 degrees.
a) What is the separation of the slits?
b) What would the new angular separation be if
i) the slit separation were doubled?
ii) the distance to the screen were doubled?
iii) the entire arrangement were immersed in water (n=1.33)?
iv) the sodium lamp were replaced by an argon ion laser (lamda = 488 nm)?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How have you attempted to solve this question?

You need to show some work before you get help.
 
i'm not sure if I'm doing it correctly, thus the reason why i posted.
let L = lamda so i don't have to figure out how to type lamda on this.

part a) d = mL/sin @
assume m = 1?
L=589*10^-9
d=2.25*10^-3 metres (using calc in degree mode)
d=2.25mm

bi)double the separation means d = 4.50mm
@ = arcsin (mL/d) (keeping calc in degree mode)
@ = 0.0075 degrees

bii)i think this has something to do with the equation y = R mL/d but am unsure. (where y is the distance of the fringes on the screen and R is the distance from the slit to the screen.)

biii)putting the apparatus in water shouldn't affect it i don't think.

biv)use @ = arcsin (mL/d) where m = 1, L = 488*10^-9 metres and d 2.25*10^-3 metres gives @ = 0.012 degrees
 
Qyzren said:
i'm not sure if I'm doing it correctly, thus the reason why i posted.
let L = lamda so i don't have to figure out how to type lamda on this.

part a) d = mL/sin @
assume m = 1?
L=589*10^-9
d=2.25*10^-3 metres (using calc in degree mode)
d=2.25mm

Do you realize why to assume m=1? The value of theta is the angular separation for m=1 (ie, the first maximum)

bi)double the separation means d = 4.50mm
@ = arcsin (mL/d) (keeping calc in degree mode)
@ = 0.0075 degrees

Didn't check the numbers, but your idea is right. (With m=1)

bii)i think this has something to do with the equation y = R mL/d but am unsure. (where y is the distance of the fringes on the screen and R is the distance from the slit to the screen.)

If the distance to the screen is doubled, would theta change? Hint: \tan \theta = y/R

biii)putting the apparatus in water shouldn't affect it i don't think.

No, not right. What property of light, relevant to interference, changes when it travels in water?

biv)use @ = arcsin (mL/d) where m = 1, L = 488*10^-9 metres and d 2.25*10^-3 metres gives @ = 0.012 degrees

Yes.
 
Last edited:
Hey thanks for your help. just some things i want to verify.

siddharth said:
If the distance to the screen is doubled, would theta change? Hint: \tan \theta = y/R
QUOTE]
i'm assuming no. because
tan @ = y/R
but y = RmL/d
so tan @ = [RmL/d]/R = mL/d which is independant of R.

and

siddharth said:
No, not right. What property of light, relevant to interference, changes when it travels in water?
QUOTE]
(new L)= L/n where (new L) has been reduced so the angle will be smaller.

again thank you so much for helping me with this :)
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top