What Is the Minimum Thickness for Constructive Interference in a Thin Film?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the minimum thickness required for constructive interference in a thin film placed on glass, considering the refractive indices of the film and the glass. The original poster expresses confusion regarding the relationship between the film's thickness and the refractive indices, as well as the appropriate formula to apply.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the formula for constructive interference, noting the need to consider the refractive indices of the materials involved. There is a focus on the phase changes that occur upon reflection and how they affect the conditions for interference.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into the conditions for constructive interference based on the refractive indices, while others are exploring different scenarios based on whether the index of the film is greater or less than that of the glass. The conversation reflects a mix of understanding and uncertainty, with various interpretations being considered.

Contextual Notes

There is an indication that the original poster may be under time constraints, as they mention the impending due date for their homework. Additionally, the discussion includes references to previous problems and a casual tone among participants, suggesting a collaborative environment.

Joza
Messages
139
Reaction score
0
A thin film is put on the surface of glass, with indexes of refraction of x and y respectively.

If light, with wavelength L in air, is reflected from the 2 sides of the film, to interfere constructively, what is the minimum thickness required.


The question is stated just like that, so I think it is vague in some parts.

I can't think of a formula to work this out. I know for con. interference, 2t=mL, where m is a whole number. But this isn't enough, and doesn't relate the indexes of r.

Any hints?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Shouldn't be doing your Homework 3 and half hours before its due.. tut tut:-p
 
Haha. I'd usually do it on Saturday, but with a boozin session going down, it didnt get done.

Besides, I'm a member here ages, so the guys can be great help when needed.

So did you get this one? Hey I helped you with the polarizer one :approve:
 
Sure i got it......

Nah i think I'm retarded, on 40%..

Still can't get the polarizer one or this one or the last one lol
 
Ah...there would have been a nice a pav pint in it for ya.

Hey, what's your name? Don't tell me your TP...:rolleyes:
 
Im taking a break, think "Fringes from Different Interfering Wavelengths" may be answerable! If i hit 60 i'll be proud! lol ;)
 
I don't think I'll hit 60 this time...


Damn weekends...;)
 
Joza said:
I can't think of a formula to work this out. I know for con. interference, 2t=mL, where m is a whole number. But this isn't enough, and doesn't relate the indexes of r.
Assuming x < y, the phase change on reflection is the same for both reflections so all that matters is the phase difference due to traveling through the film. That equation (2t = mL) will work, but L must be the wavelength in the film. That's where the index of refraction comes in.

If x > y, things will be a bit different. Learn more here: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/phyopt/thinfilm.html"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, x > y.

I understand it when x < y.

Then 2t=L, where L is wavelength in the film. So L would be index of refraction in film times wavelength in air.

But x > y...
 
  • #10
Joza said:
Yes, x > y.

I understand it when x < y.

Then 2t=L, where L is wavelength in the film. So L would be index of refraction in film times wavelength in air.
Not exactly. Is the wavelength shorter or longer in the film?

But x > y...
In that case the second reflection undergoes a different phase shift than the first (actually no phase shift). See that link for details.
 
  • #11
Sorry, divided by...

So does that mean 2t=L?? Or t=L?
 
  • #12
Joza said:
So does that mean 2t=L?? Or t=L?
When x > y, the condition for constructive interference (and minimum thickness) is 2t = L/2 (where L = wavelength in the film).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
994
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K