Why is there no visible light interference from two light sources?

AI Thread Summary
Light interference from two sources, such as candles, is not visible due to the lack of a definite phase relationship between the emitted light. Regular light sources emit light with rapid phase changes, occurring about 10 billion times per second, which results in brief periods of destructive interference. These interference effects are too fleeting for the human eye to detect, rendering the light incoherent. Consequently, while interference does occur at a microscopic level, it is imperceptible to us. Thus, we do not observe visible light interference from two light sources.
bullroar_86
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
How come we don't see light interference from two light sources?

ex. two candles
 
Physics news on Phys.org
bullroar_86 said:
How come we don't see light interference from two light sources?

ex. two candles

There has to be a definite phase relationship between light from a source following different paths to produce an interference pattern. There is no definite phase relationship between light from two sources.
 
Light emitted from regular light sources such as light globes, candles, etc... undergo very rapid phase changes, about 10 every billionth of a second. So although the light from two candles do actually interfere with each other (if they didnt then the emitted light would not obey the laws of physics now would they!?), the periods of destructive interference last for about 10 billionths of second. The result is that no interference effects are observed by the human eye and the light source is termed incoherent.

So we do not see light interference from two candles because our eyes are not sensitive enough to see it (and this is a result from the fact that there is not a definite phase relationship - as Older Dan has said).
 

Thread 'Errors and significant figures'

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...
View full post »
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

Diffraction pattern from a grating
Replies
3
Views
789
Formula for maximum interference for reflected light (thin - film)
Replies
3
Views
2K
Correct statement about coherent sources and interference
Replies
18
Views
2K
HW Question regarding double-slit interference
Replies
8
Views
2K
Focussing a collimated beam using a diffraction grating
Replies
1
Views
661
A problem involving thin film interference
Replies
2
Views
2K
The Difference Between Diffraction And Interference Patterns
Replies
3
Views
2K
The maximum intensity for light transmitted through a thin film
Replies
2
Views
3K
Olympiad question on destructive interference
Replies
3
Views
1K
Interference from coherent light sources
Replies
23
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top