Why Does the Brightness of Particles in Water Change with Viewing Angle?

AI Thread Summary
The brightness of particles in water changes with viewing angle due to the principles of light travel and reflection. When viewed directly along the light beam, the intensity is highest because light travels straight to the observer's eyes. At perpendicular angles, less light reaches the observer since it primarily reflects off particles at specific angles, reducing visibility. The scattering effect varies based on particle size; smaller particles like salt in water may not scatter light effectively, while larger smoke particles scatter light more uniformly. This difference in scattering explains why visibility changes based on the angle of observation.
An Architect
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
light and particles in water

I'm an architecture student with a very basic knowledge of phyics! My project involves shining a beam of light through water that contains particles (in this case salt). What I want to know is why the brightness of the illuminated particles changes when you look at it from different angles i.e. the beam almost disappears when you stand perpendicular to it and the intensity increases as you walk through a 90 degree angle to stand parallel to the beams of light (caught in the headlights!). Obviously, when you stand facing the beam of light its at its brightest, but why is is it that you don't see the reflection of light off the salt when standing perpendicular to the beam direction?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
uh ? Its optics!

When you stand in front of a headlight, the intensity is more because the light rays are coming from the headlight straight to your eyes. In the other case, they aren't.
 
2 simple rules
Light travels in straight lines
You can only see light which ends up in your eye!

So you can only see light which either goes directly form the source to you or is reflected from another object.
In the case of the fog tank - you can see the brightest light looking straight through the tank toward the light source.
As you go to the side you see light which has been only slightly deflected by hitting a few particles, then at 90deg you onlysee light which happens to have bounced off particles at exactly 90deg. Finally as you go round the back it brightens again because you see light which has bounced back from any particle in the fog.

It's all a question of probabilities and the number of available paths - it's a bit like the path of a ball in a pinball machine.
 
equivalent set up but with smoke

ok, I understand.

I've set up a similar experiment projecting a beam of light through smoke (rather than particles and water) but in this case you can see the beam of light reflected off the smoke particles from whichever angle you view it. How come there's a difference?
 
The scattering depends on the size of particles.
For paticles roughly the size of a wavelenght of light raleigh scattering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rayleigh_scattering) is th emost important, this is about the size of dust in the air. Smoke particles are a little bigger so you don't get the colour effects - they scatter all wavelengths similairly.


Re-reading your original post, you sholuldn't get much scattering from salt in water - it dissolves so there shouldn't be any particles to scatter from?
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Back
Top