Some diffraction slits/gratings questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter lol_nl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Diffraction
AI Thread Summary
Single-slit diffraction patterns occur when waves from different parts of a slit interfere, creating minima and maxima based on their path differences. Minima occur when the path difference is a whole wavelength, while maxima occur at half-wavelength differences. The intensity of the maxima decreases with the number of gaps, leading to a reduction in intensity as more gaps are considered. For the given problem, the distance from the lens to the screen is determined to be 70 cm, as the lens focuses light rays at the focal point. The discussion clarifies that while light rays are parallel when reaching the lens, they can still create a diffraction pattern on the screen.
lol_nl
Messages
40
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



First I have one general question about single-slit diffraction patterns. I've never fully understood this phenomenon. In my book it is stated that there will be minima when the waves from the top and the bottom of the slit differ exactly a whole wavelength, because one can then divide the slit into pairs of gaps that will then interfere destructively. Then maxima should occur more or less in between these minima, when the top and bottom waves differ k+0.5 (k integer from 0 on) wavelengths. Is it correct that the intensity then decreases with I = I0 (1/(2k+1))? Each time one divides the slit into an odd number of gaps, from 3, 5, 7 etc. on, there will still be pairs of gaps interfering destructively, so only 1/3, 1/5, 1/7, etc. of the intensity remains.
Then I do not understand why one doesn't consider the situation when pairs of gaps differ k wavelength. E.g. you divide the slit into two gaps and the top of these two gaps differ one wavelength, so a/2 sin(theta) = k(lambda). But one can reduce that to a sin(theta) = (2k)(lambda), which overlaps with the formula for the maxima! Where am I getting stuck?

Then there is one problem I couldn't solve.
1) A plane wave of wavelength 590 nm is incident on a slit with a width of a = 0.40 mm. A thin converging lens of focal length +70 cm is placed between the slit and a viewing screen and focuses the light on the screen.
(a) How far is the screen from the lens?
(b) Calculate the angle (theta) of the first diffraction minimum

Homework Equations


Diffraction formulas for single silt, lens formula..


The Attempt at a Solution


For the problem: I can't see how you can derive the distance from this information and don't understand what the lens does to the interference pattern.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't remember much about diffraction, so I'll try to give you my opinions as much as I can.

First, I don't believe the intensity decreases that slowly. I recall that the second maximum is a lot smaller the 1st one. I also remember that the equation sin(theta)=k*lambda/a (k is any integer but 0) is for minima only. Have a look at this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffraction#Single-slit_diffraction

And about the problem, consider minima for convenience. Each minimum corresponds to only one angle, i.e. all the light coming from all points at the slit under that angle will give us the corresponding minimum. Because all the lights of a minimum comes out under only 1 angle, they are parallel. Now in order that all those lights can focus at one point of the screen to give us one-pointed minimum pattern, what should the distance between the lens and the screen be?
 
Ah. Because the light rays are perpendicular when they reach the lens and the lens has to focus all the light rays to one point, that point has to be the focal point of the lens.
So the distance is 70 cm. Then (b) can simply be solved using sin(theta)= lambda/a.

Thanks.
 
Is it true that all of them are perpendicular to the lens?
If all the lights are focused at one point, how can we observe the diffraction pattern?
 

Attachments

  • untitled.JPG
    untitled.JPG
    14.3 KB · Views: 430
The three light rays on your drawing are parallel to each other (first order minimum, so two halves interfere destructively) and create a minimum on the lens that is then focused onto the screen. And the light rays between them... they should at least be perpendicular in pairs that produce destructive interference, right?
 
Last edited:
I guess you meant "parallel" instead of "perpendicular", right?
The rays I drew don't have to correspond to the first minimum. They just come out at the same angle.
 
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 'Calculation of Tensile Forces in Piston-Type Water-Lifting Devices at Elevated Locations'
Figure 1 Overall Structure Diagram Figure 2: Top view of the piston when it is cylindrical A circular opening is created at a height of 5 meters above the water surface. Inside this opening is a sleeve-type piston with a cross-sectional area of 1 square meter. The piston is pulled to the right at a constant speed. The pulling force is(Figure 2): F = ρshg = 1000 × 1 × 5 × 10 = 50,000 N. Figure 3: Modifying the structure to incorporate a fixed internal piston When I modify the piston...
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...
Back
Top