Interference and Diffraction

Dave Belacha,*​1​ Kenneth Borcina,​1 ​Regin Louis Patulot,​1 ​and Bryce Temew​1
1​
​National Institute of Physics, University of the Philippines Diliman, Philippines
*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract
The objective of the experiment is to observe the properties of light as a wave through
interference and diffraction. The experiment included letting light pass through various slit
plates with various slit widths and slit numbers. Through this, the conductors of the
experiment were able to measure parts of diffraction patterns, as well as calculate for the
wavelength of the light source. Based on the results, light behaved as how it should be.

Keywords: Interference, diffraction, light, wace, wavelength

1 Introduction
Light remains one of the most researched topics in Physics not just because of its prevalence in daily
life, but also due to its intricacies about how it travels and interacts with other rays of light. This nature
manifests itself more clearly when allowing only limited amounts of light to pass through slits, which let light
waves bounce and interact with each other. This concept is known as interference and can either make the
waves add or subtract itself, creating patterns of light and dark fringes (called diffraction) even if it comes from
a single source.

Figure 1. Intensity plot of a single slit interference pattern when using a monochromatic light​.

In the figure above, a represents the width of the slit, y1 is the width of half of the central maximum
and m are the different minima, such as 1st minimum, 2nd minimum, etc. The figure pertains to the expected
reaction of a monochromatic light as it passes through a single slit. Generally, as the angle between the origin
to the screen increases, the light gets darker and also creates very small dark fringes in between; a result from
light rays interfering with each other.
To find the mth minimum, the equation below must be used:

Distance from mth minimum to center fringe = mλL/a [1]

1
 where m is mth minimum desired (e.g. 1st minimum implies m=1), λ is the wavelength of the light
used, L is the slit-to-screen distance, and a is the slit width.

Figure 2. Intensity plot of a double slit interference pattern when using a monochromatic light

Figure 2’s setup is similar to Figure 1’s with the only difference being an additional slit with a width
of length d. Based on the figure, it can be seen that the diffraction pattern projected onto the screen has a wave
within a wave. This represents a dark and light fringe pattern resulting from multiple interferences between the
light rays as it passes through the slit. Each bright fringe from the center represents an intensity
peak/maximum, with the centermost fringe as the central maximum then moving on to the 1st maximum, 2nd
maximum, etc.
Similarly, to find the mth maximum, the equation below must be used:

Distance from mth maximum to center fringe = mλL/d [2]

where m is mth minimum desired (e.g. 1st maximum implies m=1), λ is the wavelength of the light
used, L is the slit-to-screen distance, and d is the separation between the two slits.

2 Methodology

Figure 3. Experimental Set-up

The materials that were used in the experimental set-up include a laser diode, optical bench, white
paper, pencil, ruler, desk lamp and two kinds of slit disks specifically, the single-slit disk and double slit-disk.
In assembling the set-up, the laser diode was placed first on the top of optical bench. Then, a white paper that

2
served as the screen was placed at the end of the optical bench wherein the laser beam of the diode can hit.
After that, a slit disk was placed in the middle of the optical bench to complete the set-up. The type of slit disk
that were used depended on the different parts of the experiment.

Figure 4. Locations of intensity minima

The first part of the experiment is about the single slit-diffraction. In this part, the experimental set-up
was used and it required the single-slit disk placed 3 cm from the laser diode. In addition, the 0.04 mm slit
width was selected from the slit disk. The laser was then adjusted vertically and horizontally in order to make
it pass through the slit and hit the white screen resulting to formation of a pattern. Then, the distance between
the slit disk and the white screen was measured. The measure was recorded as the slit-to-screen distance, L.
The next step in this part is to turn off the lights and mark the boundaries of the dark fringes. A ruler was then
used to mark the location of the intensity minima which are the middle of the boundaries of the dark fringes.
The distance between the first-order minimas (m=±1) was then measure and recorded as ∆y​1​. After that, the
distance of the second order minimas (m=±2) were also obtained and it was recorded as ∆y​2​. After that, divide
∆y​1 and ∆y​2 by two in order to get the distance from center. The pattern that were produced in the white screen
was then sketched to scale. After that, the slit width in the slit disk was then changed to 0.02 mm and the
previous steps were repeated for the new slit width. The last step in this part is to change again the slit width to
0.08 mm but the only thing that was done was to sketch the produced pattern after the laser hit the 0.08 mm slit
width. The data that were obtained in this part was then used to calculate the experimental wavelength, slit
width, and percent differences of the experimental value from the theoretical values.

Figure 5. Location of intensity minima in double slit patterns

The next part of the experiment is about double-slit diffraction. In this part, the same set-up will be
used but instead of using single slit disk, the multiple slit disk is going to be placed 3 cm in front of the laser
diode. The first step is only a qualitative analysis of double-slit interference. The 0.04 mm variable double slit

3
with slit separation varying from 0.125 mm to 0.75 mm in the slit disk was selected. The produced patterns of
these slits are then observed to identify how does the pattern change as the slit separation change. After the
qualitative analysis, the slit width was then changed to 0.04 mm with 0.25mm slit separation. The next step
was to measure the distance from the slit disk up to the white screen and this distance was again recorded as
the slit-to-screen distance, L. The lights were then turned off and just like in the first part, the boundaries of the
dark fringes were marked and the location of the intensity minimas were located. In addition, the distances
between the first order minimas and second order minimas are then obtained and recorded as ∆y​1 for distance
if first order minimas and ∆y​2 for the second order minimas. After that, divide ∆y​1 and ∆y​2 by two in order to
get the distance from center. The obtained data was then used to calculate the slit width and its percent
difference from the theoretical value.

The last part of the experiment is still about the double-slit diffraction but in this part the width of each
interference fringe in the pattern was the only data that was obtained. In order to get the width if each
interference fringe, the number of fringes inside the central maximum, the pattern between the first order
minimas, was counted. Then, the length of the central maximum was divided by the counter number of fringes
to obtain the width a fringe. After getting the fringe the patterns that we produced were sketched to scale. This
last part was done by using four types of double-slits. These slits are 0.04 mm with 0.25 separation, 0.04 mm
with 0.50 separation, 0.08 mm with 0.25 separation and 0.08 mm with 0.50 separation.

3 Results and Discussion

Data gathered from the experiment are summarized in Tables W1, W2, W3, and W4. Percent errors
were calculated using the equation

%error = (|experimental value - theoretical value|/theoretical value) [3]

Table W1. Wavelength of Laser Diode

a = 0​ .02 mm, ​m = ​1 a = 0​ .04 mm, ​ m =

​ 1

Distance between side orders 4.7 cm 2.3 cm

Distance from center to side 2.35 cm 1.15 cm

Calculated wavelength 734.375 nm 718.75 nm

Percent difference 12.98 % 10.58 %

Average Wavelength 726.56 nm

Slit-to-screen distance (​L) 64 cm

4
 Table W2. Data and Results for the 0.04 mm Single-Slit

m = ​1 ​ 2
m=

Distance between side orders 2.3 cm 4 cm

Distance from center to side 1.15 cm 2 cm

Calculated wavelength 718.75 nm 624 nm

Percent difference 10.58 % 3.85 %

Figure W1. Photos (to scale) of diffraction pattern for various slit widths and fixed slit-to-screen distance

(a) (b)

Figure W1. Photos of diffraction pattern for various slit widths: (a). 0.02 mm slit
width, (b) 0.04 mm slit width, (c). 0.08 mm. Each photo has a scale of 1:1 to the
actual size.

(c)

Table W3. Data and Results for the ​a ​= 0.04 mm, ​d =

​ 0.25 mm Double Slit

m = ​1 ​ 2
m=

Distance between side orders 2.7 cm 5.3 cm

Distance from center to side 1.35 cm 2.65 cm

Calculated slit width 0.0308 mm 0.031 mm

Percent difference 23 % 22.5 %

Slit-to-screen distance (​L)​ 64 cm

5
 Table W4. Data and Results for Double Slit Interference II

a ​= 0.04 mm a = 0​ .08 mm

d = 0​ .25 mm d = 0​ .50 mm d = 0​ .25 mm d =​ 0.50 mm

Number of fringes 13 26 6 12

Width of central maximum 2.8 cm 2.8 cm 1.6 cm 1.6 cm

Fringe width 0.215 cm 0.107 cm 0.267 cm 0.133 cm

Calculations carried out for Tables W1 and W2 involved equation 1 and Table W3 involved equation
2. The calculations were vital to prove that such equations are truly applicable to this phenomenon of
interference and diffraction. The first part was to compare to theoretical and experimental wavelength of the
laser used. Note that upon carrying out the calculations to yield experimental value of wavelength, there was a
12.98% and 10.58% deviation for m=1 (for a=0.02 mm and 0.04 mm respectively). Also, there was a 3.85%
deviation for m=2 (a=0.04 mm). To explain why such deviations exist, note that equations 1 and 2 are for ideal
set-ups (e.g. everything is aligned) and that there should be a flawless way to measure distance between
fringes, which of course can’t be done normally by anybody. With respect to the calculations, every single
error however little it may be could be magnified easily because the numbers here for wavelength are multiples
of 10^-9. As a result, after one had calculated the experimental value (wavelength/slit width), there should be
an inconsistency to what the theoretical value says.

4 Conclusion
Based on the results of the experiment performed by the experimenters, resulting light rays passing
through single and double slit plates were analyzed. Also, the wavelength of the light source was also
calculated based on the gathered data. The light rays passing through the slit (which produce an interference
and a diffraction process) serves as a proof that light also behaves as a wave. The different intensities of light
which resulted from the interference of diffraction of light through different slits show that light does not
behave fully as a wave (which, under the same circumstances, would produce light rays of constant intensity
and size.
As a recommendation for future researchers who will be replicating the experiment, it is advised to
use a number of light sources with different wavelength to observe more how diffraction patterns will vary
with the wavelength of the light source.