Wavelength used in double slit experiment

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of wavelengths in the context of the double slit experiment, specifically addressing discrepancies in the expected and calculated values for the wavelength.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between the wavelengths for bright and dark fringes, questioning the correctness of the original problem statement and calculations. There is discussion about the order of the bright fringe and potential errors in the provided values.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with each other's calculations and interpretations, with some suggesting that the original problem may have been miscopied or that errors exist in the provided answers. There is no explicit consensus on the correct wavelength, but multiple interpretations and calculations are being explored.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of the original wavelength not being provided with sufficient precision, which may affect the calculations. Additionally, the possibility of an error in the problem statement is being considered.

songoku
Messages
2,512
Reaction score
394
Homework Statement
In two separate double slit experiments, two different wavelengths are used. First wavelength is 708 nm and it is observed the second order bright fringe occurs at same position as third order dark fringe of second wavelength. Determine the second wavelength
Relevant Equations
Bright fringe: d sin theta = m.lambda

Dark fringe: d sin theta = (m - 1/2).lambda
m × lambda for bright = (m - 1/2) × lambda for dark so:
2 × 708 = 2.5 × second lambda
Second lambda = 566.4 nm

But the answer is 495 nm. Where is my mistake? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks like they did it for 3rd order bright fringe. Did you copy the problem correctly? Looks like they may have made an error.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: songoku
I agree with your answer. You could round it to 566 nm, however, the original wavelength was not given with more digits either.

708/495 = 1.43 and 495/708 = 0.70 both don't look like plausible fractions and I don't find an easy typo that would lead to this answer.

@Charles Link: That would be 472 nm.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: songoku and Charles Link
@mfb has the 472 correctly computed. I should have multiplied it out, instead of estimating it. (495 is not correct for any choice).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: songoku
Thank you very much for the help Charles Link and mfb
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Charles Link

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K