Deriving Snell's law

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 20 сер 2024
  • Deriving Snell's law using Fermat's principle. For more content visit schoolyourself.org.

КОМЕНТАРІ • 89

  • @SimulatingPhysics
    @SimulatingPhysics 3 роки тому +53

    Here there is an alternative derivation of Snell Law (very simple), using the conservation of momentum of photons:
    If in medium 1 the index of refraction is n1 and in medium 2 the index of refraction is n2 and for the definition of index of refractions and wavelength we have:
    n1 = c / v1 , v1 = λ1 * f
    n2 = c / v2 , v2 = λ2 * f
    Dividing the above equations we obtain: n2 / n1 = λ1 /λ2
    So if n2 is higher than n1, the wavelength in medium 2 is smaller than in medium 1.
    Now because the photon momentum is: p = h / λ
    Applying the conservation of momentum of the incident and transmitted photon along the parallel line of medium separation:
    p1 = p2 → h/λ1 *sin(θ1) = h/λ2 *sin(θ2) → n1 *sin(θ1) = n2 *sin(θ2)
    This is the Snell Law!!
    So the refraction is just a consequence of the conservation of momentum of photons!

    • @parthpariwandh
      @parthpariwandh 2 роки тому

      briilient thought process bros

    • @davidbrisbane7206
      @davidbrisbane7206 Рік тому +1

      How do you know the frequency, f, of the light doesn't change as the light move from the first medium to the second medium?

    • @duzhongsheng
      @duzhongsheng Рік тому +2

      @@davidbrisbane7206 frequency would not change even though penetrating through mediums

    • @hrperformance
      @hrperformance 4 місяці тому

      awesome derivation

    • @dosomestuff1949
      @dosomestuff1949 2 місяці тому

      holy fucking shit.....

  • @stevsam9149
    @stevsam9149 7 років тому +26

    This derivation is simple and straightforward. Thanks.

  • @mr.condekua6141
    @mr.condekua6141 5 років тому +14

    Thank you!
    For thse who didnt know what he did in the derivative:
    He uses the expression as a function in which z is the main unknown. He derivates z because times depends on z and if you could see the graphic function the lowest point would be whose derivative is equal to zero.
    I hope you enjoy the video :)

    • @celeste1129
      @celeste1129 10 місяців тому +1

      It’s been 4 years, but I’d still like to thank you for writing this explanation.

  • @ruohonleikkaaja
    @ruohonleikkaaja 8 місяців тому +1

    This is one of the best educational videos i've seen. Clear and straight to the point.

    • @kr-sd3ni
      @kr-sd3ni 5 місяців тому

      just like the path of the light ray

  • @donghaox212
    @donghaox212 12 років тому +3

    I think it is the best explanation about Fermat principle! Think you !

  • @charleshudson5330
    @charleshudson5330 4 роки тому +1

    Nice. Simple. Straightforward. Out falls the laws of reflection and refraction.

  • @wissnergross
    @wissnergross  10 років тому +10

    Hmmm...you'll need to know calculus first. The best online resource for learning calculus (where I also happen to work) is the School Yourself website (mentioned in the video's description).

    • @shwetadas3335
      @shwetadas3335 3 роки тому

      Sir please give this link ...I'm not able to find it .

  • @Gbjujo
    @Gbjujo 11 років тому +7

    Wow! This was explained so well, thankyou!

  • @ripon1947
    @ripon1947 Рік тому +1

    This was so nicely explained! Thanks!

  • @hirrasajid1401
    @hirrasajid1401 2 роки тому +1

    Jazakallah sir

  • @lostcaze
    @lostcaze 10 років тому +3

    fantastic. quick and exact! thanks

  • @CS_cat-eb5xr
    @CS_cat-eb5xr 4 роки тому +1

    Beautifully done

  • @shotono3286
    @shotono3286 3 роки тому

    This is exactly what I needed !! Thank you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • @shwetautekar1218
    @shwetautekar1218 6 років тому +2

    Thanks man it helped me too much

  • @mramzuk8
    @mramzuk8 Рік тому

    This is a very nice derivation. A similar derivation was used recently by S.H. on youtube.

  • @HelloWorld-dq5pn
    @HelloWorld-dq5pn 3 роки тому

    Easy and straightforward, thank you.

  • @ayushagrawal8198
    @ayushagrawal8198 3 роки тому

    this helped a lot....it was useful that i knew calculus :)

  • @ishaan854
    @ishaan854 Рік тому +1

    Great ❤🧡💛💚💙💜

  • @MatheusRamos-jc7zy
    @MatheusRamos-jc7zy 3 роки тому

    This video is very good, it helped me a lot

  • @carmenkerr1237
    @carmenkerr1237 6 місяців тому +1

    thank you

  • @nicholasgonzalez
    @nicholasgonzalez 11 років тому +1

    Wow this is a beautiful explanation.

  • @anoirtrabelsi8645
    @anoirtrabelsi8645 10 років тому +2

    Wonderful !!!!!

  • @muhammadriasat8820
    @muhammadriasat8820 4 роки тому

    Thanks dear Sir, I am from Pakistan

  • @434mp
    @434mp Рік тому

    6:05 why can we use the alternate interior angle, if it's value differs from the actual angle we want? Why does it still give us a valid equation? That's the only part I don't seem to understand

  • @gabrielab5453
    @gabrielab5453 2 роки тому

    Beautiful! Thank you!

  • @varshinilolla3090
    @varshinilolla3090 2 роки тому

    Here is the video deriving snell's law using simple calculus!

  • @JLWEBBGAMING
    @JLWEBBGAMING 5 років тому +1

    Thank you!

  • @omkarchavan5940
    @omkarchavan5940 8 років тому +6

    how did you deferential time with respect to z? I understood how you did differentiation. my question is why? how did we get to know that we have to differentiate time wrt z?

    • @andreaorozco9660
      @andreaorozco9660 7 років тому +1

      Omkar Chavan It's easier to work from where the yellow and blue meet because they share the same horizontal distance, z. When you differentiate you'll only be working with one variable making everyone's life easier lol

    • @randyrichardson6953
      @randyrichardson6953 7 років тому +2

      Because time, t, is a function of distance, z. As z increases, the time taken to travel that distance also increases. Remember that the goal here is to find the horizontal distance that will minimise time.

    • @curiousbit9228
      @curiousbit9228 7 років тому +1

      The Time light takes to reach point B is a function of Z. and everything else is pretty much a constant

    • @rickandelon9374
      @rickandelon9374 5 років тому

      if you ever so slightly increase or decrease z then the time increases so the question reduces to what z makes the time stationary or least

  • @ketoabigail3306
    @ketoabigail3306 11 років тому +1

    Awesome! Thanks for this proof!

  • @misssweethearted
    @misssweethearted 10 років тому +1

    sooooo amazing!!! THANKS!!!!

  • @gunertatar597
    @gunertatar597 10 років тому +2

    how can ı understand this derivation

  • @lole6424
    @lole6424 Рік тому

    thank you this helped

  • @denni4941
    @denni4941 2 роки тому

    Fantastic video 👍 Thanks a lot :)

  • @nikitamaxwell346
    @nikitamaxwell346 2 роки тому

    Excellent

  • @saumyashukla6205
    @saumyashukla6205 3 роки тому

    Thank you so much

  • @71sephiroth
    @71sephiroth 8 років тому +1

    thank you!

  • @paradox6647
    @paradox6647 8 місяців тому

    I don’t understand, why do we differentiate with respect to z and not x, d or y? What’s so special about z?

  • @olivetree7430
    @olivetree7430 Рік тому

    Thanks man

  • @davidorr947
    @davidorr947 2 роки тому

    Well done!

  • @hrperformance
    @hrperformance 4 місяці тому

    super video

  • @prahladprajapat8050
    @prahladprajapat8050 6 років тому

    Excellent presention

  • @jalashukurova5395
    @jalashukurova5395 4 роки тому

    Perfect😍💫

  • @jaberab1277
    @jaberab1277 5 років тому +1

    thx a lot

  • @manicmath3557
    @manicmath3557 3 роки тому

    Wow this makes a lot of sense
    All i dont get is why is z a variable and d is a constant. Why

    • @Parth_Wasnik
      @Parth_Wasnik Рік тому

      to understant imagine total time to be a function of z this means z is changing and is a variable whereas the length x, length y and d are constant value which don't change with respect to time

    • @paradox6647
      @paradox6647 8 місяців тому

      @@Parth_Wasnikyeah but couldn’t you just say the total time is a function of x and that z, d and y are set constants and then by that logic set the derivative with respect to x to 0?

  • @h1a8
    @h1a8 2 роки тому

    illogical conclusion at 1:17. v1 > v2 doesn't mean most of the path should be in the blue region. Here is a counterexample.
    Assume v1 = v2 + 0.0000000000000001, points A and B are 0.00000001 and 1 unit away from interface plane, respectively, and points A and B lie on a line that makes a 45 degree angle with the interface plane. Then giving A a longer path than B in its medium would result in a longer time than a straight line path between both points.

    • @devd_rx
      @devd_rx Рік тому

      longer path doesn't mean longer than what it took in 2nd medium, it means relatively longer than the straight-line path taken by light in first medium itself, try calculating the times in both cases, your logical conclusion will fail

    • @h1a8
      @h1a8 Рік тому

      @@devd_rx ​
      Duh
      My counterexample gives a situation where allowing the path to be longer in the region where light is faster gives a longer time than a straight line path. Just draw diagram
      Let A and B lie on a line that makes a 45 degree angle with interface.
      Let A be 1 unit above interface and B 10 units below. Let v1 be marginally greater than v2 (v1 = v2 + 0.0000000000001).
      Now if v1=v2 then the straight line path would give shortest time. Buy since v1 is sufficiently close to v2 then the kink wouldn't be noticeable and would appear to be a straight line path. Also the fact that A is extremely close to the interface where B is significantly distant gives the contradiction in his statement. Snell's law still holds of course. His rational at 1.:17 is wrong though

  • @gamingguys6571
    @gamingguys6571 5 років тому

    Very very nice!

  • @casa1420
    @casa1420 5 років тому

    Very good!

  • @ayangakefawanyama4720
    @ayangakefawanyama4720 6 років тому +1

    ha ha ha!!! Goood work!!!

  • @ujalapatel8731
    @ujalapatel8731 3 роки тому

    Thank you sirr

  • @mwilamwamba1787
    @mwilamwamba1787 29 днів тому

    Why is dt/dz =0?

  • @MinhazsVideos
    @MinhazsVideos 4 роки тому

    Why do you subtract the equestion, you add it first so taking the derivative shouldn’t make you subtract right?

  • @subhadipbardhan9711
    @subhadipbardhan9711 5 років тому

    Brilliant

  • @TheHolycrack
    @TheHolycrack 11 років тому

    how did you differentiate with respect to z with x and y in the equations? are x and y constants?

  • @maxtan4471
    @maxtan4471 4 роки тому +1

    4:30 why d over dz

    • @MusicalInquisit
      @MusicalInquisit 4 роки тому

      the derivative of time with respect to the distance along z.

  • @Saikumar_vgs
    @Saikumar_vgs 8 років тому

    there is any other method for deriving snell's law

  • @GrimReaper-gt2xs
    @GrimReaper-gt2xs 5 років тому

    good

  • @davidbrisbane7206
    @davidbrisbane7206 Рік тому

    All good, except it doesn't explain why Fermat's principle is correct.

  • @amora_uste
    @amora_uste 4 роки тому

    yezz ...

  • @h.p.734
    @h.p.734 5 років тому

    could you also explain why V = C/n please?

    • @reduser3731
      @reduser3731 4 роки тому

      Index of refraction is by definition n = c/v, where c is the speed of light in vacuum and v is the speed of light in the medium.

    • @edwincuevas9965
      @edwincuevas9965 4 роки тому

      The speed of light changes as it goes through different forms of matter.
      It goes fastest in vacuum.
      v=c/n or n=c/v is the ratio of the speed light as it travels through a specified medium compared to
      how it travels in vacuum.

  • @nirala108yadav7
    @nirala108yadav7 5 років тому +1

    You have to improve somethings.
    Like: you have written d( t1+t2)/dz from where you had bring this

  • @TheHolycrack
    @TheHolycrack 11 років тому

    oh and d

  • @canaytekin7734
    @canaytekin7734 9 місяців тому

    itü optik eef227e tayfaya selam

  • @sharmilaanne7997
    @sharmilaanne7997 5 років тому

    If u r meant to derive shell's law derive it with proper explanation or dont derive it

    • @MrLethalShots
      @MrLethalShots 5 років тому +4

      If you're trying to spell Snell, spell it properly or don't spell it.

  • @rosykapoor427
    @rosykapoor427 6 років тому

    .