Thin film / interference question

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating the minimum thickness of a thin transparent coating that causes destructive interference in a double-slit experiment using monochromatic laser light. The coating has a refractive index of n=1.35, and the first bright fringe is observed at an angle of 3º. The derived formula indicates that removing 106.6 nm of the coating will restore the interference pattern. The thickness of the coating is noted as 1.1x10^-5 m, confirming that the required removal is valid under the assumption that the refractive index of the screen material is greater than 1.35.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of thin-film interference principles
  • Familiarity with the double-slit experiment
  • Knowledge of the refractive index and its implications
  • Ability to apply trigonometric functions in physics equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of thin-film interference in detail
  • Learn about the double-slit experiment and its applications
  • Explore the effects of varying refractive indices on interference patterns
  • Investigate the relationship between wavelength, slit separation, and interference angles
USEFUL FOR

Students in physics, particularly those studying optics, as well as educators and anyone interested in the practical applications of interference phenomena in light behavior.

whatislifehue
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Monochromatic laser light is shown through a double-slit apparatus with a slit separation of onto a screen, but no
interference pattern is seen because the thin transparent coating (index of refraction n=1.35) on the screen is creating a thin-film destructive interference effect. This is known because when the light is shown on an old uncoated screen, they saw an interference pattern with the first bright fringe deflected at an angle of 3º.Find the minimum thickness of coating that needs to be scrubbed off so that the interference pattern for that light will
appear as brightly on the screen as if it were uncoated (i.e. no destructive interference at all).

Homework Equations


dsin(\theta) = m\lambda \\<br /> t = \frac{\lambda}{2n} (constructive)\\<br /> t = \frac{\lambda}{4n} (destructive)<br /> <br />

The Attempt at a Solution


We know that m = 1 at theta = 3 degrees since that's where the first interference pattern is, so the first equation becomes lambda = d*sin(theta). Plug in lambda = d*sin(theta) into t = lambda / 4*n to find the thickness at which destructive interference occurs, so t = d*sin(theta)/(4*n) (where n = 1.35) and get 106.6 nm. If 106.6nm of the coating is removed, then constructive interference on the film will occur, so 106.6nm has to be removed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Your derivation looks correct , but what is the distance between the slits?
And it is not sure that the coating has lambda/(4n) thickness.
 
ehild said:
Welcome to PF!

Your derivation looks correct , but what is the distance between the slits?
And it is not sure that the coating has lambda/(4n) thickness.
Hi, thanks!

Woops, sorry I forgot to include the thickness. The thickness is 1.1x10^-5 m. And you make a good point that the coating might not have lambda/(4n) thickness, but the problem doesn't say how thick the layer is. It only says the minimum thickness so I assume that it is greater than 106.6nm
 
Your result is correct that 106.6 nm should be removed (supposing the refractive index of the screen material is greater than 1.35. Hopefully, it is.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
909
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K