MHB Solving for Slit Width-Wavelength Ratio at $\pm90°$ Diffraction Pattern

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on determining the ratio of slit width to wavelength for the first minima of a single-slit diffraction pattern at ±90°. The formula used is sin(θ) = nλ/a, with n set to 1 for the first minima. There is a debate about whether to use -90° for sin(θ), which would yield a negative ratio, but it is clarified that the sign can be associated with n, where positive n indicates minima to the right and negative n to the left of the central maximum. Ultimately, it is suggested to take the absolute value of the ratio, as negative values lack meaning in this context. The conversation concludes with an affirmation of understanding regarding the interpretation of the angles.
MermaidWonders
Messages
112
Reaction score
0
For what ratio of slit width to wavelength will the first minima of a single-slit diffraction pattern occur at $\pm 90°$?

The thing is, when I did it, I used the formula $sin\theta = \frac{n\lambda}{a}$, and used the fact that $m = 1$ and $\pm 90°$ to solve for $\frac{a}{\lambda}$. However, I don't know if we're supposed to plug in $-90°$ for $sin\theta$, because that would mean that our ratio of $\frac{n\lambda}{a}$ would be $-1$ as opposed to just $1$ (when $sin90°$ was plugged in)...
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
MermaidWonders said:
For what ratio of slit width to wavelength will the first minima of a single-slit diffraction pattern occur at $\pm 90°$?

The thing is, when I did it, I used the formula $sin\theta = \frac{n\lambda}{a}$, and used the fact that $m = 1$ and $\pm 90°$ to solve for $\frac{a}{\lambda}$. However, I don't know if we're supposed to plug in $-90°$ for $sin\theta$, because that would mean that our ratio of $\frac{n\lambda}{a}$ would be $-1$ as opposed to just $1$ (when $sin90°$ was plugged in)...
More or less we can take the sign of [math]sin( \theta )[/math] to be "attached" to the n. A positive n describes the nth minima to the right of the central maximum and a negative n describes the nth minima to the left of the central maximum.

-Dan
 
topsquark said:
More or less we can take the sign of [math]sin( \theta )[/math] to be "attached" to the n. A positive n describes the nth minima to the right of the central maximum and a negative n describes the nth minima to the left of the central maximum.

-Dan

OK, makes sense. So should I take the absolute value, since a negative ratio wouldn't be very meaningful in this context?
 
Last edited:
MermaidWonders said:
OK, makes sense. So should I take the absolute value, since a negative ratio wouldn't be very meaningful in this context?
Yup.

Double check the angle on the |n| = 1 interpretation I gave you. I might have screwed up left and right. But in the long run, no, it doesn't really matter.

-Dan
 
Yeah, OK, makes sense. Thanks so much!
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Back
Top