They're long questions but any help would be much appreciated
1) Light directed normally at a diffraction grating contains wavelengths of 580 and 586 nm only. Grating has 600 lines per mm. There are 2 diffracted orders.
For the highest order, calculate the angle between the two diffracted beams.
I'm not even clear on what this question is asking, the difference between the 2 angles of diffraction for the 1st and 2nd order beam? And should I just take 583 nm as the wavelength in the calculation?
2) A diffraction grating is designed with a slit width of 0.83 um. When used in a spectrometer to view light of wavelength 430 nm, diffracted beams are observed at angles of 14 degrees 55' and 50 degrees 40' to the zero order beam.
Assuming the lowangle diffracted beam is the first order beam, calculate the number of lines per mm on the grating. (Done this part)
Explain why there is no diffracted beam between the two observed beams. What is the order number for the beam at 50 degrees 40'?
Worked out the order is 3 but that means order 2 is missing and I have no idea why
x
Turn on thread page Beta

G.Y
 Follow
 1 follower
 13 badges
 Send a private message to G.Y
 Thread Starter
Offline13ReputationRep: Follow
 1

 Follow
 2
(Original post by G.Y)
They're long questions but any help would be much appreciated
1) Light directed normally at a diffraction grating contains wavelengths of 580 and 586 nm only. Grating has 600 lines per mm. There are 2 diffracted orders.
For the highest order, calculate the angle between the two diffracted beams.
I'm not even clear on what this question is asking, the difference between the 2 angles of diffraction for the 1st and 2nd order beam? And should I just take 583 nm as the wavelength in the calculation?
2) A diffraction grating is designed with a slit width of 0.83 um. When used in a spectrometer to view light of wavelength 430 nm, diffracted beams are observed at angles of 14 degrees 55' and 50 degrees 40' to the zero order beam.
Assuming the lowangle diffracted beam is the first order beam, calculate the number of lines per mm on the grating. (Done this part)
Explain why there is no diffracted beam between the two observed beams. What is the order number for the beam at 50 degrees 40'?
Worked out the order is 3 but that means order 2 is missing and I have no idea why
The question is saying work out the maximum order for each wavelength. Then find the angle between these two maxima.Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play 
 Follow
 3
(Original post by G.Y)
They're long questions but any help would be much appreciated
1) Light directed normally at a diffraction grating contains wavelengths of 580 and 586 nm only. Grating has 600 lines per mm. There are 2 diffracted orders.
For the highest order, calculate the angle between the two diffracted beams.
I'm not even clear on what this question is asking, the difference between the 2 angles of diffraction for the 1st and 2nd order beam? And should I just take 583 nm as the wavelength in the calculation?
2) A diffraction grating is designed with a slit width of 0.83 um. When used in a spectrometer to view light of wavelength 430 nm, diffracted beams are observed at angles of 14 degrees 55' and 50 degrees 40' to the zero order beam.
Assuming the lowangle diffracted beam is the first order beam, calculate the number of lines per mm on the grating. (Done this part)
Explain why there is no diffracted beam between the two observed beams. What is the order number for the beam at 50 degrees 40'?
Worked out the order is 3 but that means order 2 is missing and I have no idea why
So im not entirely sure on the second question.Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play 
G.Y
 Follow
 1 follower
 13 badges
 Send a private message to G.Y
 Thread Starter
Offline13ReputationRep: Follow
 4
(Original post by Shaanv)
Im a bit confused as to why u said the slit width in question 2 is 0.83um, from the first part of that question i get a different value for d.
So im not entirely sure on the second question.
And wow I completely misinterpreted the first question, thank you 
 Follow
 5
(Original post by G.Y)
I've just typed the question as it is. I think they included the slit width to throw you off. d is not the same as the slit width.
And wow I completely misinterpreted the first question, thank you
Im not sure what happened to the second order beam. It could have something to do with the slit width and the single slit diffraction occurring at each slit as the slit width is much greater than the wavelength. This could cause an interference pattern which destructively interferes where the second order beam should be.
Im just rambling tho. Im curious as to what the answer is let me know when and if u find out.Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play 
G.Y
 Follow
 1 follower
 13 badges
 Send a private message to G.Y
 Thread Starter
Offline13ReputationRep: Follow
 6
(Original post by Shaanv)
Ahh i missed the part that slit width is irrelevant in the question. I agree with u about the other beam being 3rd order.
Im not sure what happened to the second order beam. It could have something to do with the slit width and the single slit diffraction occurring at each slit as the slit width is much greater than the wavelength. This could cause an interference pattern which destructively interferes where the second order beam should be.
Im just rambling tho. Im curious as to what the answer is let me know when and if u find out.
Hoping a similar question will be on a past paper so I can check the mark scheme for a definitive conclusion
Thank you 
Eimmanuel
 Follow
 5 followers
 11 badges
 Send a private message to Eimmanuel
Offline11ReputationRep: Follow
 7
(Original post by G.Y)
......
2) A diffraction grating is designed with a slit width of 0.83 um. When used in a spectrometer to view light of wavelength 430 nm, diffracted beams are observed at angles of 14 degrees 55' and 50 degrees 40' to the zero order beam.
Assuming the lowangle diffracted beam is the first order beam, calculate the number of lines per mm on the grating. (Done this part)
Explain why there is no diffracted beam between the two observed beams. What is the order number for the beam at 50 degrees 40'?
Worked out the order is 3 but that means order 2 is missing and I have no idea why(Original post by Shaanv)
Ahh i missed the part that slit width is irrelevant in the question. I agree with u about the other beam being 3rd order.
Im not sure what happened to the second order beam. It could have something to do with the slit width and the single slit diffraction occurring at each slit as the slit width is much greater than the wavelength. This could cause an interference pattern which destructively interferes where the second order beam should be.
....
I would address the missing order explanation.
If you look at the doubleslit interference pattern with finite width slits, you can see that there is a diffraction pattern. See the link below which shows the combined effects of twoslit and singleslit interference.
https://books.google.com.sg/books?id...page&q&f=false
From the diagram, you can see that the first order of diffraction minimum coincides with a particular interference maximum order.
The missing order in the interference maximum order can be computed using
where d is the separation between the two slits and a is the width of the slit.
Apply the similar reasoning to the diffraction grating, you would realize the info on “a slit width of 0.83 μm” is relevant and important.
As you work out the separation between the slits in the diffraction grating to be 1.67 μm,
Which implies the second order of the interference pattern in the diffraction grating coincides with the first order of the diffraction minimum. This explains the missing second order. 
G.Y
 Follow
 1 follower
 13 badges
 Send a private message to G.Y
 Thread Starter
Offline13ReputationRep: Follow
 8
(Original post by Eimmanuel)
I would address the missing order explanation.
If you look at the doubleslit interference pattern with finite width slits, you can see that there is a diffraction pattern. See the link below which shows the combined effects of twoslit and singleslit interference.
https://books.google.com.sg/books?id...page&q&f=false
From the diagram, you can see that the first order of diffraction minimum coincides with a particular interference maximum order.
The missing order in the interference maximum order can be computed using
where d is the separation between the two slits and a is the width of the slit.
Apply the similar reasoning to the diffraction grating, you would realize the info on “a slit width of 0.83 μm” is relevant and important.
As you work out the separation between the slits in the diffraction grating to be 1.67 μm,
Which implies the second order of the interference pattern in the diffraction grating coincides with the first order of the diffraction minimum. This explains the missing second order. 
Eimmanuel
 Follow
 5 followers
 11 badges
 Send a private message to Eimmanuel
Offline11ReputationRep: Follow
 9
(Original post by G.Y)
So the second order of the diffraction grating pattern is cancelled out by the first min of single slit interference? …
(Original post by G.Y)
…But how did you work out it's the first min?
a sin θ = nλwhere a is the width of the slit.
Note that n is the order of minimum. 
G.Y
 Follow
 1 follower
 13 badges
 Send a private message to G.Y
 Thread Starter
Offline13ReputationRep: Follow
 10
(Original post by Eimmanuel)
You can say so.
Not sure why you ask this question. I thought it is pretty obvious. Just apply the slit diffraction pattern formula
where a is the width of the slit.
a sin θ = nλ
Note that n is the order of minimum.
Wasn't obvious to me thanks 
G.Y
 Follow
 1 follower
 13 badges
 Send a private message to G.Y
 Thread Starter
Offline13ReputationRep: Follow
 11
(Original post by Eimmanuel)
I would address the missing order explanation.
If you look at the doubleslit interference pattern with finite width slits, you can see that there is a diffraction pattern. See the link below which shows the combined effects of twoslit and singleslit interference.
https://books.google.com.sg/books?id...page&q&f=false
From the diagram, you can see that the first order of diffraction minimum coincides with a particular interference maximum order.
The missing order in the interference maximum order can be computed using
where d is the separation between the two slits and a is the width of the slit.
Apply the similar reasoning to the diffraction grating, you would realize the info on “a slit width of 0.83 μm” is relevant and important.
As you work out the separation between the slits in the diffraction grating to be 1.67 μm,
Which implies the second order of the interference pattern in the diffraction grating coincides with the first order of the diffraction minimum. This explains the missing second order. 
Eimmanuel
 Follow
 5 followers
 11 badges
 Send a private message to Eimmanuel
Offline11ReputationRep: Follow
 12
(Original post by G.Y)
So the second order of the diffraction grating pattern is cancelled out by the first min of single slit interference? …(Original post by G.Y)
What do you mean you can say so? Is that not exactly what's happening? …
I would prefer to say “The interference pattern is modulated by the diffraction pattern. At the place of the diffraction minimum, the intensity is zero.”
A better version (IMO) would be the following: (I cannot remember where this is from)
Sharp maxima occur due to constructive interference of light emerging from the two slits.
Their intensity is modulated by the envelope due to diffraction by each individual slit. 
Eimmanuel
 Follow
 5 followers
 11 badges
 Send a private message to Eimmanuel
Offline11ReputationRep: Follow
 13
(Original post by G.Y)
Also, does this graph show that single slit interference combined with double slit diffraction causes maxima to be split up into smaller fringes?
NO.
The intensity curve formula is given as equation 38.3. If you look at the formula, the square bracket term is due to the single slit diffraction while the cosine squared term is the doubleslit interference pattern.
So the “complicated pattern” of the two slits of width a that has a separation of d is the interference pattern of two point sources separated by d modulated by the diffraction pattern of singleslit of width a.
To make thing simple. Think in this way in the “ideal” situation separately. (Take the following as a way to see the result.)
Singleslit gives rise to a diffraction pattern.
Twoslits gives rise to an interference pattern.
But we are not living in the ideal world, so we need to combine (or superimpose) them together and this gives a complicated pattern.Last edited by Eimmanuel; 1 week ago at 17:31. 
G.Y
 Follow
 1 follower
 13 badges
 Send a private message to G.Y
 Thread Starter
Offline13ReputationRep: Follow
 14
(Original post by Eimmanuel)
NO.
The intensity curve formula is given as equation 38.3. If you look at the formula, the square bracket term is due to the single slit diffraction while the cosine squared term is the doubleslit interference pattern.
So the “complicated pattern” of the two slits of width a that has a separation of d is the interference pattern of two point sources separated by d modulated by the diffraction pattern of singleslit of width a.
To make thing simple. Think in this way in the “ideal” situation separately. (Take the following as a way to see the result.)
Singleslit gives rise to a diffraction pattern.
Twoslits gives rise to an interference pattern.
But we are not living in the ideal world, so we need to combine (or superimpose) them together and this gives a complicated pattern. 
Eimmanuel
 Follow
 5 followers
 11 badges
 Send a private message to Eimmanuel
Offline11ReputationRep: Follow
 15
(Original post by G.Y)
So, whenever double slit interference occurs, realistically single slit diffraction is also occurring? 
G.Y
 Follow
 1 follower
 13 badges
 Send a private message to G.Y
 Thread Starter
Offline13ReputationRep: Follow
 16
(Original post by Eimmanuel)
Yes.
Thank you 
Eimmanuel
 Follow
 5 followers
 11 badges
 Send a private message to Eimmanuel
Offline11ReputationRep: Follow
 17
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Related discussions:
 Diffraction grating experiment question
 Physics youngslits question.
 Calculating percentage uncertainty of diffraction grating?
 Question on diffraction /light
 Physics A level  Double slit and diffraction grating
 Diffraction Grating Help
 very stuck on a question  please help.
 Explain this Young's modulus question please?
 Diffraction Grating Confusion
 Help with diffraction grating
TSR Support Team
We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.
This forum is supported by:
 charco
 Mr M
 TSR Moderator
 Nirgilis
 usycool1
 Changing Skies
 James A
 rayquaza17
 Notnek
 RDKGames
 randdom
 davros
 Gingerbread101
 Kvothe the Arcane
 TeeEff
 The Empire Odyssey
 Protostar
 TheConfusedMedic
 nisha.sri
 Reality Check
 claireestelle
 Doonesbury
 furryface12
 Amefish
 harryleavey
 Lemur14
 brainzistheword
 Rexar
 Sonechka
 LeCroissant
 EstelOfTheEyrie
 CoffeeAndPolitics
 an_atheist
 Moltenmo
 Labrador99
Updated: March 9, 2018
Share this discussion:
Tweet