Timeline for Reflection of light on semi-infinite solid
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 14, 2016 at 23:50 | comment | added | courno | In his book QED, Feynman shows that you get the same answer for the amount of light reflected by a slab of glass whether you suppose that only the front and back surfaces reflect light (with 180° and 0° phase shifts) or you divide the slab in thin layers and add reflected light by each (with 90° phase shifts). But if you divide a semi-infinite slab in thin layers and start to add, the sum does not "converge" towards a 180° phase shift, as if there was only the front surface. | |
| Jan 14, 2016 at 22:20 | history | edited | Qmechanic♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited tags
|
| Jan 14, 2016 at 20:57 | comment | added | Floris | There are two parts to the statement: "4% reflected" and "180 degree phase shift". Which of these statements do you think is wrong? It seems to me to be true for an semi-infinite slab, and may not be true when secondary reflections (from the second surface) are introduced. Why do you think it's the other way around? | |
| Jan 14, 2016 at 20:32 | answer | added | scrx2 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jan 14, 2016 at 20:11 | comment | added | Jon Custer | You can crank through the equations for a semi-infinite slab. What is the difficulty, precisely? | |
| Jan 14, 2016 at 19:17 | comment | added | CuriousOne | The reflected light will vary with the thickness. Look at the details of interference on thin layers. | |
| Jan 14, 2016 at 19:16 | history | edited | courno | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 12 characters in body
|
| Jan 14, 2016 at 19:15 | review | First posts | |||
| Jan 14, 2016 at 19:18 | |||||
| Jan 14, 2016 at 19:11 | history | asked | courno | CC BY-SA 3.0 |