Excellent explanation. It's like going through Newton's head. I wish all professors taught in this manner, following the logic of the founder/discoverer.
Bc Newton didn't do experiments with prisms, it was Göethe, in fact Göethe's color wheel is the right one, Newton's color wheel is based on mathematical gibberish.
Many NCERT books of Class 10 claim a very wrong diagram on page 193(Figure 11.6- recombination of the spectrum of white light) to be right. Many websites too claim the same. This proves them wrong. Thank you MIT
is there any artificial source of white light that you know of that can be used to accomplish this experiment well? If so, what is it, and how would you set it up? I have not found a good way to adequately collimate light from an incandescent source. Thank you.
Excellent video and kudos for the great effort. You nicely explained what is happening. But please explain WHY at all the white light splits into various colors in a prism ? What happens to the white light inside a prism ? Because the same light passing through a glass slab will not split into spectrum. If you could explain it , your video will be 100 % perfect and 100 % appreciable.
its because the white light passing through is just an overlap of all the colors, and each individual color experiences a different refractive index, therefore spreading out the colors
I refer you to the ultraviolet catastrophe. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet_catastrophe As far as the actual construction of a light bulb, you sound sorta Indian, Pakistani, or Bangladeshi. Ask your countrymen how to build a lightbulb by hand. It involves tungsten, SiO2, a vacuum pump, and a soul-crushing hand-eye coordination.
Ruma Bhattacharya I am read in my physics combination of 7 colour is known as white light.In this vedio material used glass prism which can we use to artificial rainbow through the light
@@danwigersma1239 There is more than one source of light beyond the typical incandescent bulb. It could be from one of those, but it could also be from a fiber-optic strand or an LED, all of which have different projection and lighting properties. There are also different kinds of prisms made of different kinds of glass, including BAK prisms, which are typically necessary for these experiments. No need to insult people.
How did you get that focussed white light source? I am looking to decorate my bedroom wall with something like this. Rather than putting a poster of a prism on the wall I am thinking of putting up the real deal. Sourced the prism. I’m struggling with the light source and getting it to be a narrow white beam. Pin holes on shoe boxes work well but the intensity of the light is terrible.
White As Alien X because Alien X have white ( Ben 10 Omniverse ). Black skin is also beautiful. Prism As Contumelia because Contumelia can appear in any shape ( Ben 10 Omniverse ). Red As Arishem because Arishem is red ( Disney's Eternals film ). Orange As The Real Creator Of Galaxies because there doesn't have to be only cartoons. Yellow As The One Above All because The One Above All is yellow ( By Jack Kirby ). Green As Drago because Drago have green eyes ( Bakugan Battle Brawlers ). Blue As Mr Litwak because Mr Litwak have blue eyes ( Disney's Wreck-It-Ralph film ). Indigo As Rick because Rick have blue hair ( Rick And Morty ). Violet As Ultimate Zeno because Ultimate Zeno have purple skin ( Dragon Ball Super ).
I couldnt understand the last experiment. Why does the second prism dont separate light rays again, like the first one, once the rays were converged by the lens?
When light exits prism why are we again seeing the white light if it's separated? I mean shouldn't we see the VIBGYOR colours as we do on screen directly when it exits the prism? Why is it again appearing white?
Can you do an experiment where you take red green and blue (LEDs or lasers) combine them with a prism, then separate then to a full color spectrum? In short: RGB input, ROYGBIV output.
+John Smith It doesn't work like that. You can't get out light that isn't in the source. You can split sunlight into the full spectrum because all of the colours are already in the white light. But if you start with monochromatic red, green, and blue lasers, while you *can* mix them to form white light (this is called metamerism), splitting a beam of white light formed in this way will just reveal the same beams of red, green, and blue that went in.
At 0:56 there are arrowheads drawn onto the "beam of light", but the light itself can not observed to be moving, so the arrowheads are misleading (that is a very common error). The only thing we can say is that the time until there is an effect of light interacting with a certain measuring instrument (made out of matter) and the time it takes for that interaction to occur is proportional. You can never see the light itself moving.
You can't see whether it moves or not, but it does move, and does have a direction. So, for logical purposes, it's okay to draw arrows to indicate the direction
Pascal Fabig Not that there necessarily is anything material that is moving, but the fact that light has a speed. It takes time for it to get from one place to another. Therefore the phenomenon of light, or the the occurrence of it, moves. Going back to the start of this, I don't see anything wrong or inaccurate about the arrowheads on the vectors of the light beam, because the 'occurrence' of light does travel in that direction. Now, please stop questioning obvious and necessary things for no reason.
Pascal Fabig You're clearly missing the point here. Even though, as I agreed with you on, light is not 'moving', those arrows still have a function and, simply speaking, light does move, so for the purpose of this experiment and for the understanding of viewers, it is good to assume it does. How else would you be able to show which side there would be a shadow on if you blocked the light. It just doesn't make any sense to say that this is wrong. I agree, light does not actually move, but even with that, why do you assume the arrowhead depicts movement? For example, arrows are used to depict forces, even on objects that aren't moving, and of course the force can't 'move' either. So please end this discussion and stop whining about something purely functional, which is aimed at increasing the legibility of a diagram.
is the prism dispersing the light and if so how? is this anything to do with refraction but not diffraction? is diffraction more about interference of the light with itself?
i could follow up to the last prism with last prism i mean the prism being at the focal point for the light sure the ray has a different entrace angle and i know that effects the outgoing angle as snails law describe but still the last prism has 2 area´s that are bend (out and in) why the result is still white ?
I wonder what I’m doing wrong. I have a similar apparatus and I can sort of reproduce the visible color spectrum but it would make for a poor demo for my students.
If the prism diffracts the white light into its component seven colours then why is the beam of light coming out of the prism still white in colour? And why do we see the colours/spectrum only on the screen?
Wow. I hate that I didn't understand this stuff better as a kid. Then again, we didn't have the resources available now to learn this stuff so easily. You had a book to read it in, and if you were lucky, a science teacher to show you in class one day. 🤷♂️
I still don't understand why the triangle shape (section of the prism) separate the colors and the rectangle or square don't, we can see only a refraction? In another words, how the photon knows the glass has different shapes and decide to take different directions?
***** the dispersion starts while photon enters the prism so, how the photon knows the shape of the glass? I think the shape stretchs space time, there's no other possibility to explain this phenomenon.
Aahana Agarwal I know, I am talking about the section of the prism. The dispersion occurs right after the photons enter the prism, while in a square section just refract, do you understand what I am trying to explain?
