Why is Refracted Angle > Incident Angle?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dunkaroos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angles Refraction
AI Thread Summary
When light transitions from a denser to a less dense medium, the refracted angle is greater than the incident angle due to the increase in velocity and wavelength, while frequency remains constant. This phenomenon is explained by Snell's law, which relates the angles to the indices of refraction of the two media. The bending of light can also be illustrated using Huygens' principle, which shows how the wavefronts change direction at the boundary. As the wavefronts encounter the boundary, their shape alters, leading to the observed increase in the refracted angle. Understanding these concepts clarifies why the refracted angle exceeds the incident angle in this context.
Dunkaroos
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Why is it that the refracted angle > the incident when light moves from a more dense material to a less dense?

Is there any way to explain why the angle would be greater?

I know the velocity would increase.
Wavelenght increases.
Frequency remains the same.
Correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Dunkaroos said:
Why is it that the refracted angle > the incident when light moves from a more dense material to a less dense?

Is there any way to explain why the angle would be greater?
Are you familiar with Snell's law?

I know the velocity would increase.
Wavelenght increases.
Frequency remains the same.
Correct?
Correct.
 
And as you look at the explanation of Snell's law, think about how the shape of the light wavefront changes as it hits the boundary at an angle. Make a sketch of the wavefront as it changes directions at the boundary, and be accurate in your representation of the change in wavelength near the boundary on both sides...
 
I understand it matematically but Snell's law but is there another way to explain it?
 
Berkeman was simply referring to the derivetion of Snell's law , not the final eqn.
Using Huygens constructions for wavefronts, one can clearly see why the ray bends towards the normal ( since frequenc
y is conserved in both mediums).
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
7K
Back
Top