Why Does the mth Interference Maximum Vanish in Single Slit Diffraction?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the phenomenon of single slit diffraction and its interaction with interference patterns produced by two narrow slits. The original poster attempts to understand why the mth interference maximum vanishes due to its coincidence with a diffraction minimum.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between the conditions for interference maxima and diffraction minima, questioning how these conditions lead to the suppression of certain maxima.

Discussion Status

Some participants provide guidance on how to approach the problem, suggesting a connection between the equations for interference and diffraction. There is an acknowledgment of the original poster's confusion, and further exploration of the second part of the question is encouraged.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of posting guidelines and expectations for showing effort, indicating that the discussion is taking place within a structured homework help context.

slyman
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Two narrow slits of width a are separated by center-to-center distance d. Suppose that the ratio of d to a is an integer d/a=m.

Show that in the diffraction patterns produced by this arrangement of slits, the mth interference maximum (corresponding to dsin(theta)=m[tex]\lambda[/tex]) is suppressed because of coincidence with a diffraction minimum. Show that this is also true for the 2mth, 3mth, etc., interference maxima.


My attempt dsin(theta)=m[tex]\lambda[/tex] indicates the conditions for interference maxima, where d is the distance between the two slits. We know that diffraction minimum occurs when a*sin(theta)=[tex]\lambda[/tex], where a is the slit width. Divide by both equations and we can determine which interference maximum coincides with the first diffraction minimum: d/a=mI don't really understand what the question wants. Could someone please help me out? Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Please read the posting guidelines and use the template provided. We can not help you unless you first show some effort yourself.
 
My bad. It's just that this question pisses me off.
 
Okay, you've almost answered the first part of the question, but you've gone about it backwards.

Let [itex]d\cdot sin\theta = m \lambda[/itex] and [itex]d/a=m[/itex], then you can show that [itex]a \cdot sin \theta = (d/m)sin \theta =...[/itex]..which answers the first part of the question.

For the second part, how would you proceed?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K