4
$\begingroup$

enter image description here

$p$ = Path difference

$r$ = Distance travelled by the rays

$x$ = Perpendicular distance between interference of the rays to the medium point of the incident rays

$a$ = Vertical distance between the incident rays

$D$ = Horizontal distance


I knew that

$r_2-r_1 = p \tag{1} $

$r_1^2 = D^2+(x-a/2)^2 \tag{2}$

$r_2^2 = D^2+(x+a/2)^2 \tag{3}$

$(3)-(2) = r_2^2-r_1^2 = (r_2-r_1)(r_2+r_1)=2ax \tag{4}$

$(4) = (r_2-r_1)(r_2+r_1) = 2pD \tag{5}$

$$(4) = (5) = 2pD = 2ax$$

Hence path difference $p =ax/D$


The question is why $(r_2+r_1) = 2D$ ?

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ That's a condition for a max or a min where the path difference is either $N\lambda$ or $ (N+\frac{1}{2})\lambda$ . If you do a little trigonometry you should be able to see where the similar triangles are. BTW "derivative" has a different meaning, which is why I changed the title. $\endgroup$ Oct 6, 2015 at 12:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Who says that $r_1+r_2=2D$? In general this is false (though it's true to leading order in $x$). Are you following a specific reference that claims this? Linking to it would help clarify the question. $\endgroup$ Oct 6, 2015 at 12:17
  • $\begingroup$ @EmilioPisanty The reference came out from my school, sorry. $\endgroup$
    – ytan11
    Oct 6, 2015 at 12:57

2 Answers 2

3
$\begingroup$

Here's how I go about it. Let's call the middle point of the 2 slits point $A$. Also, let's call the angle between the line joining $A$ to the point of the central maxima ( on the screen, horizontally infront of $A$) and $A$ to the point on the screen under observation $\theta$.

slits

Now, since the slits and the distance between $a$ them are very very small as compared to the distance $D$ between the slits and the screen, the 2 light paths $r_1$ and $r_2$ may be considered almost parallel.

path difference

In that case the path difference becomes $a sin\theta$ as is evident from the image. On the other hand, from the bigger triangle, $sin\theta \approx tan\theta = \frac{x}{D}$ because $\theta$ is very small.

So you get path difference $p = \frac{ax}{D}$.

There are a lot of approximations, but they work well under suitable conditions. (When $\theta$ is very small, that is, $x \ll D$ and $a \lll D$.)

$\endgroup$
0
-1
$\begingroup$

Here we should have to relate the slit width w,distance from the screen D ,wave length lambda Where the wave length is the path difference w/wave length=x/D

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Using a trigonometric approximation is very important, we can approximate for example $\endgroup$ Jan 18, 2017 at 4:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.