Homework Problem Solutions

Chapter 27

(1) In this problem, we are given the direction to the second-order bright fringe in a
double-slit interference pattern, we are given the slit separation distance, and we are
asked to calculate the wavelength of the light for which this occurred. This is a
straightforward exercise in rearranging the equation which gives the maxima in the
mλ
double-slit pattern: sin θ = . Solving this equation for λ, we have
d

d sin θ
λ= . The problem data tells us that θ = 2.0°, d = 3.8 x 10-5 m, and m = 2;
m
substituting these values in the above equation:

λ=
(3.8 × 10m (sin 2.0°)
-5
)
= 6.63 × 10 -7 m . Converted to nanometers, this is 663 nm (or
2
660 nm, to two significant figures).

(9) Here, we again have a double slit, and we’re asked what minimum thickness of a
plastic having a refractive index of 1.60 we would need to place over one of the slits in
order to produce destructive interference at the pattern center, where there is normally
constructive interference. The center of the pattern corresponds to the “straight-ahead”
direction (θ = 0). Since the geometric distance travelled by the waves from each slit will
be the same, the half-cycle of phase shift that we need to produce destructive interference
will have to come from the plastic, where the light slows down and the wavelength is
decreased by a factor of the refractive index. Call the plastic thickness t. As the light
from each slit travels the first distance t from the slit, the number of cycles for the light
which travels through air will be

t
N air = . For the light passing through plastic, the corresponding number is
λvac

t t tn plastic
N plastic = = = . Now, our condition for destructive interference is
λ plastic λvac λvac
n plastic
that Nair and Nplastic must differ by one-half. Algebraically,

1
N plastic − N air = . Substituting the expressions we derived above,
2
tn plastic t 1 ⎛ n plastic − 1 ⎞ 1 λvac
− = t ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ = t=
λvac λvac 2 ⎝ λvac ⎠ 2 2(n plastic − 1)

586 nm
t= = 488 nm
2(1.60 - 1)

(15) We are imagining a soap film in air. Light having a wavelength of 611 nm is
incident on it. We’re asked for the film’s minimum thickness, if the reflection of the light
experiences constructive interference as a result of the film, meaning that the film appears
bright in reflected light.

n = 1.33

t
soap
film

air ( n = 1.00 )

What happens is that when the incident ray encounters the outer surface of the film, it
splits into two rays: one that is immediately reflected back into the air, and a second ray
that travels into the film, is reflected from the second surface of the film, and comes back
out of the film. (Actually, that ray is further divided at the second surface, since part of
its energy is transmitted at the film’s second surface, but that doesn’t concern us in our
consideration of interference in the reflected light that travels back toward the left.)

First, we note that ray 1 was reflected while going from a material of lower index – air –
to a material of higher index: the soap film. This means that ray 1 experiences an
“instantaneous” one-half cycle phase shift at the point of that reflection. That means that
we must calculate a film thickness that will also cause a one-half cycle phase difference
between the phase with which ray 2 enters the soap film, and the phase with which ray 2
leaves it. The thinnest film that will serve this purpose is the one whose thickness t is
such that 2t, the total path length in the film, contains half a wavelength of the light we’re
interested in. But we must keep in mind that the wavelength is reduced, inside the film,
by a factor of the film’s index of refraction. To express this mathematically, we say that
 2t 1 λ
= . Substituting for the wavelength in the film: λ film = vac , we obtain:
λ film 2 n film

2tn film 1 λvac 611 nm

= . Solve for t: t= = = 115 nm.
λvac 2 4n film 4(1.33)

(19) We want the direction associated with the first dark fringe of a single-slit diffraction
pattern, where we know the wavelength of the light and the width of the slit (two widths,
in fact!). We will find this simply enough by making use of the equation for dark fringes:

mλ ⎛ (1)λ ⎞
sin θ = , where m is one. Solving for θ: θ = arcsin⎜ ⎟ . Substituting 675 nm for
w ⎝ w ⎠
λ (which is equivalent to 6.75 x 10-7 m), and two values for w, we obtain:

w = 1.8 × 10-4 m: θ = 0.22°

w = 1.8 × 10-6 m: θ = 22°

(23)
θ

3.5 x 10-3 m

4.0 m

The figure above depicts the angular direction of the first dark fringe of the diffraction
pattern. Doing a little right-triangle trigonometry, we see that the angle θ is given by
 ⎛ 3.5 × 10 -3 m ⎞
θ = arctan⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ = 0.050°
⎝ 4 .0 m ⎠

Give the slit width, we must calculate the wavelength of the light. This is easily done by
solving the single-slit diffraction condition of dark fringes for λ:

sin θ =
mλ
λ=
w sin θ
=
( )
5.6 × 10 -4 m (sin 0.050°)
= 4.887 × 10 −7 m , or
w m 1

λ = 490 nm, to two significant figures.

(28) The geometry of the suspect hunter and his twin prey is depicted below:

Using the small-angle approximation, the angular separation between squirrels is

1.0 × 10-1 m
θ= = 6.25 × 10-5 rad . Equation 26.2 in the text tells us that the minimum
1.6 × 10 m
3

resolvable angular separation, for an imaging system of aperture diameter D, using light
of wavelength λ, is

1.22λ 1.22λ (1.22)(4.98 × 10-7 m )

θ min = . Solving for D: D = = = 9.7 × 10-3 m = 9.7 mm .
D θ min 6.25 × 10 rad
-5

Your textbook says that the “normal” human eye’s pupil diameter can dilate to as large as
8 mm under dark conditions, which makes 9.7 mm seem rather unusual, if not actually
impossible. Your instructor will add that, since aberrations in an imaging system (such as
the eye) are always worse at larger apertures (in fact, they tend to go as the square of the
aperture diameter), the idea of someone doing some exceptionally fancy shooting in low-
light conditions with 10 mm pupil sizes seems unlikely. All in all, I think the
Mythbusters™ might be able to call this one “busted.”
(31) Lord Rayleigh’s criterion (as represented by equation 27.6 in your textbook) says
that two objects are just resolved by a system whose aperture diameter is D, using light of
wavelength λ, if their angular separation θmin is at least:

1.22λ
θ min =
D

In this case, though, we’re told the distance from the telescope’s aperture to the objects,
and we’re asked for their linear separation. The distance is x (= 3.75 × 104 m). Let’s call
the linear separation s – remember that this is what we’re looking for. Using the small-
angle approximation (well-justified ... the angle is very small), we can write θmin as:

s
θ min = . Combining the two equations by equating their right-hand sides:
x

s 1.22λ 1.22λx (1.22 )(5.65 × 10-7 m )(3.75 × 104 m )

= ⇒ s= = = 2.53 × 10- 2 m
x D D 1.02 m

Notice that we converted the wavelength (565 nm) to meters (5.65 × 10-7 m). If we had
not done so, s would have been expressed in units of nanometers.

(34) For this problem, we want a picture. If the f

two cells are just resolved, then the angular
subtense of their separation will be

1.22λ
θ min = , where we’ve substituted f for D
f
because the problem told us that the microscope
objective’s diameter is equal to its focal length.
We’re also assuming the cells are a distance f f
away from the objective, because we’re assuming min
the image is located effectively at infinity. (It’s
actually located at the mechanical tube length, but
that does not make a significant difference to the
outcome of this problem.)

Using the small-angle approximation, we can also

say that the angular subtense of the separation x is
x
x
θ min = . Equating these two expressions for
f
θmin and solving for x:

x 1.22λ
θ min = = ⇒ x = 1.22λ , which is the solution to part (a) of the problem. The
f f
(b) part answer is clear. The minimally-resolvable separation is proportional to the
wavelength. To improve the resolution (making the separation smaller), we must reduce
the wavelength.

(41) The compact disc acts as a diffraction grating. Its maxima or bright fringes are
given by

mλ ⎛ mλ ⎞
sin θ = , or θ = arcsin⎜ ⎟ , where d is the grating pitch or spacing, λ is the
d ⎝ d ⎠
wavelength, and m is any integer: the “order” of the fringe. For the first order (m = 1),
we want θ for wavelengths of 660 nm and 410 nm. Noting that the problem tells us that
d = 1.1×10-6 m, we substitute the numerical values and calculate:

λ = 660 nm = 6.6×10-7 m: θ = 37°

λ = 410 nm = 4.1×10-7 m: θ = 22°

(48) In analyzing this problem, we note that the reflection from the air-to-MgF2 interface
(lower index to higher) involves a half-cycle phase change. The reflection from the
MgF2-glass interface is also lower-index-to-higher, and also causes the phase change.
Thus, the net phase change between these two reflected paths is purely the change due to
their path difference: the thickness of the coating, traveled twice by one path. The
condition for destructive interference is

⎛ 1⎞ ⎛ 1⎞
⎜ m + ⎟λ ⎜ m + ⎟λ
⎛ 1⎞
=⎝
2⎠
. Solving for t: t = ⎝
2⎠
2t = ⎜ m + ⎟λ film
⎝ 2⎠ n film 2n film

To obtain the minimum nonzero thickness that the problem demands, we select m = 0.
Substituting also λ = 565 nm and nfilm = 1.38, we obtain: t = 102.4 nm.
(52) We want the distance between the third-order bright fringes for two wavelengths of
light in a double-slit experiment. The condition for bright fringes (maxima) is

mλ ⎛ mλ ⎞
sin θ = ⇒ θ = arcsin⎜ ⎟
d ⎝ d ⎠

where m, in this case, is 3. If a flat screen is located a distance S away from the slits, the
height of the third-order bright fringe on the screen is

⎡ ⎛ mλ ⎞⎤
h = S tan θ = S tan ⎢arcsin⎜ ⎟⎥ . The height difference between the third-order fringes
⎣ ⎝ d ⎠⎦
for two different wavelengths is

⎧ ⎡ ⎛ mλ ⎞⎤ ⎡ ⎛ mλ ⎞⎤ ⎫
Δh = h1 − h2 = S ⎨tan ⎢arcsin⎜ 1 ⎟⎥ − tan ⎢arcsin⎜ 2 ⎟⎥ ⎬
⎩ ⎣ ⎝ d ⎠⎦ ⎣ ⎝ d ⎠⎦ ⎭

Substituting, from the problem, S = 2.24 m, m = 3, d = 1.58×10-4 m, λ1 = 6.65×10-7 m,

and λ2 = 5.65×10-7 m, we obtain: Δh = 4.25×10-3 m.

(54) When the problem asks us for the width of the bright fringe that is next to the
central maximum, it is really asking us for distance between the first and second dark
fringes. Dark fringes occur in the far-field diffraction pattern of a single slit according to

mλ
sin θ = . For λ = 480 nm and W = 2.0 × 10-5 m = 2.0 × 104 nm, the directions to the
W
dark fringes corresponding to m = 1 and m = 2 are 1.375° and 2.751°, respectively.

The distance on the screen from the center of the pattern to a dark fringe are given by

x = S tan θ . For S = 0.50 m, and the two values of θ that we have calculated, the
resulting values of x are x = 0.0120 m and x = 0.0240 m, respectively. The difference
between the two is the result we’re asked for: Δx = 0.012 m.