16
answers
|
Answer it!
|
sort by:
active |
newest |
oldest
No, a diffraction grating and a prism use completely different operating principles. This BA is wrong.
A diffraction grating works with constructive and destructive interference of light wavesm by ordering the "steps" in quite a small multiple of the wavelength. A prism works by the properties of the material through which light passes - dispersion - to "bend" waves of light through diffferent angles depending on their wavelength.
A difraction grading is a piece of glass that acts like a prism. The reason it acts like a prism is that there are tiny, almost microscopic lines etched into its surface. These lines give ti angles like a prism. So just like a prism it splits white light into all of its colors.
Hope this helps.
Hope this helps.
Errr I think Wikipedia is made from the accumulated knowledge of 1000's of people many of whom are professionals in their area.
If it was full of S**T it would not have prospered.
The page on diffraction gratings is, at least to me, clear and informative on several levels both basic and high level maths (which you may not need)
I have no idea why your asking the question, you don't say, I have no clear idea what you actually want or need to know, you don't say.
BUT I do know that if your not prepared to read the link I offered and make some sensible alteration to your question then I am not prepared to re-write the information.
Sorry.
If it was full of S**T it would not have prospered.
The page on diffraction gratings is, at least to me, clear and informative on several levels both basic and high level maths (which you may not need)
I have no idea why your asking the question, you don't say, I have no clear idea what you actually want or need to know, you don't say.
BUT I do know that if your not prepared to read the link I offered and make some sensible alteration to your question then I am not prepared to re-write the information.
Sorry.
Nov 25, 2011. 7:14 AMankur2893 (author)
says:
Well if it says something like earth is square and if u go to one end you will fall down, i don't think it is appropriate to rely on at all. And yeah i did read that para hundred times, it was not under the title history, or was followed by sentence like "was believed earlier by humans". I don't think this was a comment by a professional at all. :| Sure, it does help you a lot, but it's quite sad when u see these kinda things in an 'encyclopedia'.
Nov 24, 2011. 3:51 AMankur2893 (author)
says:
it is sad we all refer wikipedia, do u know it is we who make it? get a bunch of 10 guys and u can literally make a page full of s**t. sorry man. can u answer it instead of pasting a link?
Nov 24, 2011. 3:42 PMRe-design
says:
No! I and others have spent time writing and editing those pages and for the most part it's good information. At least as good as any that you'll get on the average answer forum. You should'nt take Wiki as a final answer but as a source/guide on what/where to search for more.
Most of the time, Wikipedia is right, especially in the high level physics area.
Steve
Steve
Yes, but often it say nothing or barely nothing more than a few general words...
My experience is different. I find a lot of useful introduction to a topic on Wikipedia.
Steve
Steve
 |
