Young's double slit-halving amplitude?

AI Thread Summary
Halving the width of one slit in Young's double slit experiment will affect the amplitude of the light exiting that slit. The intensity of light is directly proportional to the width of the slit, and since intensity is proportional to the square of the amplitude, a reduction in slit width will lead to a decrease in amplitude. However, if the slit becomes significantly smaller than the wavelength of light, it may block the light entirely. The relationship between slit width and amplitude is crucial for understanding the experiment's outcomes. Therefore, halving the slit width does not simply halve the amplitude but has more complex implications based on the slit dimensions relative to the wavelength.
MBBphys
Gold Member
Messages
55
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Hi,
For the Young double slit experiment, say I have a plane wavefront approaching the double slit; now, if I halve the width of one of my slits, will the amplitude of the light exiting that slit be halved as well?

Homework Equations


None directly relevant I know of, but related:
Intensity directly proportional to [amplitude]2
nλ=dsinθ
λ=(ax)/D

The Attempt at a Solution


So I thought that, as the slit width is really very close to the wavelength of light itself, that halving would have a noticeable impact on the amplitude? But I also wondered whether making it much smaller than the wavelength of light as a result would completely block out the light anyway??
Thanks for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
MBBphys said:
will the amplitude of the light exiting that slit be halved as well?

The intensity of the light coming through the slits is directly proportional to the width of the slit
And intensity is proportional to the square of amplitude. So amplitude2 is proportional to width
 
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...
Back
Top