- #1

kent davidge

- 933

- 56

Is it because they are the only two tratable types of diffraction?

I mean, in the sense that one can really work out the equations to get results.

You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

- Thread starter kent davidge
- Start date

- #1

kent davidge

- 933

- 56

Is it because they are the only two tratable types of diffraction?

I mean, in the sense that one can really work out the equations to get results.

- #2

sophiecentaur

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 27,851

- 6,343

Fresnel diffraction calculations are when path lengths are short enough for the angles to change across the pattern and that the 1/r starts to be relevant when summing the vectors.

If you want to know where one takes over from the other then I guess it would be a matter of how accurate the result of the easier Fraunhoffer method is for your particular application.

You could have the same problem with specifying Distance measurement. What's considered to be close and what's far away would depend on context.

- #3

DaveE

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 2,857

- 2,504

When calculating the wave propagation, for example using Huygens principle, you would use a spherical wave-front for accuracy, which is necessary in the near field. However, the math is a bit of a pain with spheres, you end up with square roots in the exponent, etc. So Fraunhoffer approximated the sphere with a quadratic (Taylor's expansion), which works well in the far field.

I thought this Wikipedia page was good; it has some approximate rules for when you should use each.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fresnel_diffraction

- #4

DaveE

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 2,857

- 2,504

- #5

kent davidge

- 933

- 56

However I think you didn't understand what I'm asking.

I want to know if Franhoufer diffraction and Fresnel diffraction are the only two types of diffraction that can possible occur.

- #6

DaveE

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 2,857

- 2,504

Diffraction is also used in the same way for other stuff, like electrons. But that gets into QM. We have been in the classical physics realm in this thread.

- #7

sophiecentaur

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 27,851

- 6,343

There is only one Diffraction and it is the result of a wave (any form of wave) interacting with a discontinuity in its path. That can be an object or an aperture. It is calculated by following the same process as Huygen's description from years ago. You (vector) sum the waves arriving by all possible paths at any particular point of interest.the only two types of diffraction

I have a pet hate of 'classification' of Science terms and this is an example that has managed to confuse you. I can sympathise but hopefully it will now be clearer for you.

- #8

DaveE

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 2,857

- 2,504

- #9

DaveE

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 2,857

- 2,504

Oops, said the same thing at the same time, LOL!

- #10

jtbell

Mentor

- 15,962

- 4,732

Follow the link in the quote above and you'll find out about Kirchhoff's diffraction formula which is the basis for both Fraunhofer and Fresnel diffraction, using different approximations. That article shows the derivations for both Fraunhofer and Fresnel, at the end.In optics, the Fresnel diffraction equation for near-field diffraction is an approximation of the Kirchhoff–Fresnel diffraction that can be applied to the propagation of waves in the near field.

- #11

sophiecentaur

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 27,851

- 6,343

Our posts are in agreement, of course.any wave propagation situation with multiple sources.

You would probably need to use the term "distributed sources" because that implies the need for Integration, rather than a simple summation of point sources.

- #12

- 22,124

- 13,031

Exact solutions for diffraction problems are very difficult (you have to go beyond Kirchhoff's approximations and take into account the full vector nature of the em. field). It was solved for the half-space by Sommerfeld in his Habilitation Thesis (that's a second large work on top of the PhD thesis in Germany to get the "venia legendi" at a university).

- #13

DaveE

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 2,857

- 2,504

OK. I don't really see a much difference between integration and the summation though. Huygen's implies the need for integration; I don't know how else you would use it. This is more a semantic difference than conceptual, IMO.Our posts are in agreement, of course.

You would probably need to use the term "distributed sources" because that implies the need for Integration, rather than a simple summation of point sources.

- #14

sophiecentaur

Science Advisor

Gold Member

- 27,851

- 6,343

Share:

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 788

- Replies
- 3

- Views
- 887

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 381

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 299

- Last Post

- Replies
- 17

- Views
- 767

- Replies
- 7

- Views
- 2K

- Replies
- 52

- Views
- 506

- Replies
- 6

- Views
- 572

- Last Post

- Replies
- 2

- Views
- 566

- Last Post

- Replies
- 1

- Views
- 322