(a) What is meant by plane polarised light ? An unpolarised light is incident at an angle θ on the surface of

Question

\theta

(b) Two polaroids

P_1

and

P_2

are placed in a crossed position. Unpolarised light of intensity

I_0

is incident on

P_1

. If

P_2

is rotated through an angle

\theta

about the direction of propagation of light, keeping

P_1

fixed, plot the graph of intensity of light for

0 < \theta < 360°

which is

(i) transmitted by

P_1

, and

(ii) transmitted by

P_2

(OR)

(a) Briefly describe the Young's double slit experiment of interference of light. Derive the expression for fringe width in the pattern.

(b) Monochromatic light of wavelength 588 nm is incident from air to water interface. Find the wavelength and speed of the refracted light. The refractive index of water is

\dfrac{4}{3}

CBSECBSE Class XII Board 2020Subjective· 5mImportance★★★★★

🔒 Locked · start free trial →

You're viewing a preview — the full solution, concept, methods & PYQ mapping are locked.

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Part (a)Concept understanding — Brewster's Angle

When unpolarised light hits a transparent surface — say, a glass window or a still water surface — the reflected light is usually a messy mixture of vibrations. But at one very particular angle of incidence, something clean happens: the reflected light becomes perfectly polarised, with its electric field vibrating in only one direction. That angle is Brewster's angle.

The intuition: why does this happen?

Think of light as a transverse wave — its electric field oscillates perpendicular to the direction it travels. When light strikes a surface, the electrons in the material are forced to oscillate by the incoming wave. These oscillating electrons then re-radiate light, which is what we see as the reflected and transmitted (refracted) beams.

Now, an oscillating electron cannot radiate energy along the direction of its own oscillation. If the electron is jiggling up and down, it sends no light straight along the up-down axis. This is the key.

At a certain angle, the reflected ray and the refracted ray become perpendicular. At that exact geometry, the direction of the reflected ray coincides with the direction in which the electrons in the material would be oscillating (for one particular polarisation). Those electrons therefore cannot radiate in that direction — so that polarisation component is completely absent from the reflected beam. The reflected light then contains only the other polarisation component, making it perfectly plane-polarised.

The precise statement

Brewster's angle $\theta_B$ is the angle of incidence at which light reflected from a transparent medium is completely plane-polarised. It satisfies

\tan \theta_B = n

where $n$ is the refractive index of the medium (relative to the incident medium, usually air with $n \approx 1$ ).

\tan \theta_B = n

At this angle, two conditions hold simultaneously:

The reflected light is completely plane-polarised with its electric field perpendicular to the plane of incidence (i.e., parallel to the surface).
The reflected ray and the refracted ray are perpendicular to each other.

Tip

The perpendicular-ray condition is a quick check: if you draw the reflected ray and the refracted ray, they form a right angle. This is equivalent to $\theta_B + \theta_r = 90^\circ$ , where $\theta_r$ is the angle of refraction. Using Snell's law $n_1 \sin \theta_B = n_2 \sin \theta_r$ and $\theta_r = 90^\circ - \theta_B$ , you get $\tan \theta_B = n_2/n_1$ .

Why the perpendicular condition is not a separate fact

The two results — polarisation and perpendicular rays — are actually the same physics. When the reflected and refracted rays are perpendicular, the reflected ray points exactly along the direction of the dipole oscillation that would be caused by the refracted ray's electric field. That oscillation cannot radiate along its own axis, so that polarisation is missing from the reflection. The perpendicular condition is the geometric expression of the polarisation condition.

A concrete example

For glass with $n = 1.5$ , Brewster's angle is …

Part (b)Concept understanding — Double Slit Interference

Double Slit Interference: From Ripples to Light

Imagine dropping two stones into a still pond at the same time, a short distance apart. Watch the ripples spread. Where a crest from one stone meets a crest from the other, the water rises higher. Where a crest meets a trough, the water flattens out. That is interference — waves adding or cancelling.

Now replace the water with light. Replace the stones with two narrow slits cut into a barrier. Shine a single colour of light (say, red laser light) onto the slits. On a screen behind the barrier, you do not see two bright spots. Instead, you see a pattern of alternating bright and dark bands — like a striped zebra crossing made of light.

That pattern is double slit interference. It is the single most convincing proof that light behaves as a wave.

The Core Idea

Light from a single source passes through two narrow slits. Each slit acts as a new source of waves. These two sets of waves spread out and overlap. At any point on the screen, the light you see is the sum of the waves from slit 1 and slit 2.

Whether they add (bright) or cancel (dark) depends on one thing: the path difference — how much farther one wave has travelled compared to the other.

Note

For constructive interference (bright band): path difference = $n\lambda$ (whole number of wavelengths)

For destructive interference (dark band): path difference = $(n + \frac12)\lambda$ (half-integer number of wavelengths)

Here $\lambda$ is the wavelength of the light, and $n = 0, 1, 2, \dots$

The Geometry

Let the slits be separated by distance $d$ . The screen is far away at distance $D$ ( $D \gg d$ ). For a point on the screen at angle $\theta$ from the centre:

The path difference $\Delta x = d \sin\theta$
Bright bands occur when $d \sin\theta = n\lambda$
Dark bands occur when $d \sin\theta = (n + \frac12)\lambda$

The position $y$ of the $n$ -th bright band on the screen (measured from the centre) is:

y_n = \frac{n\lambda D}{d}

The spacing between consecutive bright bands (fringe width) is:

\beta = \frac{\lambda D}{d}

\text{Fringe width } \beta = \frac{\lambda D}{d}

What This Tells You

Larger $\lambda$ → wider fringes (red light spreads more than blue)
Larger $D$ → wider fringes (screen further away spreads the pattern)
Smaller $d$ → wider fringes (slits closer together spread the pattern more)

If you cover one slit, the pattern vanishes — you get a single blurry blob. The stripes only appear when both slits are open, proving that the light from the two slits is interfering.

Why It Matters

Double slit interference is not a classroom toy. It is the foundation of:

Young's experiment (1801) — which settled the debate: light is a wave
Diffraction gratings — used in spectrometers to identify elements by their light …

Why this formula?

Double Slit Interference: Why the Formula Holds

Let's build the understanding from first principles — not just memorise the formula, but see why it must be true.

1. The Core Idea: Path Difference Creates Phase Difference

Imagine two narrow slits $S_1$ and $S_2$ , separated by distance $d$ , illuminated by a single coherent source. Light from each slit travels to a point $P$ on a screen at distance $D$ (where $D \gg d$ ).

The two waves start in phase at the slits (same source).
They travel different distances to reach $P$ .
This path difference $\Delta x$ causes a phase difference $\Delta \phi$ .

Key relation:

\Delta \phi = \frac{2\pi}{\lambda} \cdot \Delta x

Why? Because one full wavelength $\lambda$ corresponds to a phase change of $2\pi$ radians.

2. Finding the Path Difference

From the geometry (see diagram in any textbook):

For a point $P$ at angle $\theta$ from the central axis, the extra distance travelled by the wave from the farther slit is approximately:

\Delta x = d \sin\theta

Why approximate? Because we assume $D \gg d$ , so the two paths are nearly parallel. This is the Fraunhofer (far-field) approximation — valid for most exam setups.

3. Condition for Constructive Interference (Bright Fringes)

Waves interfere constructively when they arrive in phase:

\Delta \phi = 2\pi m \quad (m = 0, \pm1, \pm2, \dots)

Using $\Delta \phi = \frac{2\pi}{\lambda} \cdot d\sin\theta$ , we get:

\frac{2\pi}{\lambda} \cdot d\sin\theta = 2\pi m

Cancel $2\pi$ to obtain the bright fringe condition:

\boxed{d \sin\theta = m\lambda}

$m$ is called the order of the fringe.
$m=0$ gives the central bright fringe (straight ahead).

4. Condition for Destructive Interference (Dark Fringes)

Waves interfere destructively when they arrive out of phase by $\pi$ (half a cycle):

\Delta \phi = (2m+1)\pi

Substitute again:

\frac{2\pi}{\lambda} \cdot d\sin\theta = (2m+1)\pi

Cancel $\pi$ to get the dark fringe condition:

\boxed{d \sin\theta = \left(m + \frac12\right)\lambda}

5. From Angle to Position on Screen

For small angles (typical in exam problems), $\sin\theta \approx \tan\theta = \frac{y}{D}$ , where $y$ is the distance from the central maximum on the screen.

Bright fringe position:

y_m = \frac{m\lambda D}{d}

Dark fringe position:

$y_m = \frac{(m + \frac12)\lambda D}{d}$ …

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Part (a): plane-polarised light has $\vec E$ in one plane; Brewster's law $\mu=\tan\theta$ ; through $P_1$ intensity is constant $I_0/2$ , through $P_2$ it is $\frac{I_0}{2}\sin^2\theta$ (zero at $0^\circ,180^\circ,360^\circ$ , maxima at $90^\circ,270^\circ$ ).

Part (b): fringe width $\beta=\lambda D/d$ ; light entering water has $\lambda=441$ nm and speed $2.25\times10^8$ m/s.

Part (a): Brewster's Law and Crossed Polaroids

Plane polarised light is light in which the electric-field vibrations are confined to a single plane containing the direction of propagation (unpolarised light vibrates in all transverse directions).

Brewster's law. At the polarising angle the reflected and refracted rays are perpendicular.

Perpendicularity: $\theta+r=90^\circ\Rightarrow r=90^\circ-\theta$ .
Snell's law: $\sin\theta=\mu\sin r=\mu\sin(90^\circ-\theta)=\mu\cos\theta$ .
Therefore $\tan\theta=\mu$ , i.e. $\boxed{\mu=\tan\theta}$ ; the reflected ray is completely plane polarised.

Crossed polaroids (intensity graphs).

Through $P_1$ : unpolarised $I_0$ gives $I_1=\dfrac{I_0}{2}$ , independent of $\theta$ — a horizontal line.
Through $P_2$ : $P_1$ and $P_2$ start crossed (axes $90^\circ$ apart). Rotating $P_2$ by $\theta$ makes the angle between the axes $(90^\circ-\theta)$ , so Malus' law gives

I_2=I_1\cos^2(90^\circ-\theta)=\frac{I_0}{2}\sin^2\theta

$\theta$	$0^\circ$	$90^\circ$	$180^\circ$	$270^\circ$	$360^\circ$
Through $P_1$	$I_0/2$	$I_0/2$	$I_0/2$	$I_0/2$	$I_0/2$
Through $P_2$	$0$	$I_0/2$	$0$	$I_0/2$	$0$

Start your 14-day free trial to unlock the full solution →

Same / Similar Concept — real previous-year questions on the same or a closely similar concept, not this exact question.

Showing the 12 most recent of 41 on this concept.

CBSE 2026Set 55/1/11 markMCQ
$Q. The shape of the interference fringes in Young's double-slit experiment, when the distance between the slit and the screen is very large as compared to the slit-separation, is nearly (A) straight (B) parabolic (C) circular (D) hyperbolic$
›Reveal solutionSolution

When the screen is very far from the slits compared to their separation, points of constant path difference lie on nearly straight lines parallel to the slits, making the fringes straight.

The key to understanding fringe shape lies in recognizing what an interference fringe actually represents: it is the locus of all points on the screen where the path difference from the two slits is constant.

In Young's double-slit experiment, we have two coherent sources $S_1$ and $S_2$ separated by distance $d$ . A point $P$ on the screen at distance $D$ from the slits will show constructive or destructive interference depending on the path difference $\Delta = |S_2P - S_1P|$ .

For a bright fringe of order $n$ , we need $\Delta = n\lambda$ . The question is: what is the shape of the curve connecting all points $P$ that satisfy this condition?

Geometry of path difference

Consider a point $P$ on the screen at coordinates $(x, y)$ if we place the origin midway between the slits. The two slits are at positions roughly $(0, \pm d/2, 0)$ in 3D space, and the screen is at distance $D$ along the perpendicular.

The exact path difference is:
$\Delta = \sqrt{D^2 + (y - d/2)^2 + x^2} - \sqrt{D^2 + (y + d/2)^2 + x^2}$
This is the general equation for a hyperbola in the $xy$ -plane. So strictly speaking, fringes are hyperbolic curves.

The far-field approximation

Now comes the crucial condition: $D \gg d$ (screen distance much larger than slit separation).

When $D$ is very large, we can use the binomial approximation. For the path from $S_2$ to $P$ :
$S_2P = D\sqrt{1 + \frac{(y-d/2)^2 + x^2}{D^2}} \approx D + \frac{(y-d/2)^2 + x^2}{2D}$
Similarly for $S_1P$ . The path difference becomes:
$\Delta \approx \frac{(y-d/2)^2 - (y+d/2)^2}{2D} = \frac{-2yd}{2D} = -\frac{yd}{D}$
(The $x^2$ terms cancel out.)

For constant path difference $\Delta = n\lambda$ , we get:

$y = -\frac{n\lambda D}{d} = \text{constant}$ …
Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2026Set 55/2/11 markMCQ
$Q. Two statements are given - one labelled Assertion (A) and the other Reason (R). Select the correct answer from the codes below: (A) Both (A) and (R) are true and (R) is the correct explanation of (A). (B) Both (A) and (R) are true, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A). (C) (A) is true, but (R) is false. (D) (A) is false and (R) is also false. Assertion (A) : Light added to light can produce darkness. Reason (R) : When two coherent light waves interfere, there is darkness at the position of destructive interference.$
›Reveal solutionSolution
Interference of coherent light waves can indeed produce darkness at points of destructive interference; both statements are true and the reason correctly explains the assertion. The answer is (A).

Why light can produce darkness

The assertion sounds paradoxical at first—how can adding light to light create darkness? The resolution lies in understanding that light is a wave phenomenon, and waves don't simply add arithmetically in intensity. Instead, they superpose according to their phase relationship.

When two coherent light waves (waves with a constant phase relationship) meet, their electric field amplitudes add vectorially. If they arrive in phase, the amplitudes reinforce (constructive interference, brighter light). If they arrive exactly out of phase—crest meeting trough—the amplitudes cancel (destructive interference), and the resultant intensity becomes zero or near-zero. This is darkness produced by adding light to light.

The reason statement captures precisely this mechanism: destructive interference between coherent waves creates regions of darkness.

Examining the statements

Assertion (A): "Light added to light can produce darkness"

This is experimentally verified in phenomena like Young's double-slit experiment, thin-film interference, and Newton's rings. At certain positions on the screen or observation plane, the intensity drops to zero despite light arriving from two sources. The statement is true.

Reason (R): "When two coherent light waves interfere, there is darkness at the position of destructive interference"

Destructive interference occurs when the path difference between two coherent waves is an odd multiple of half-wavelengths:

$\Delta = \left(m + \frac{1}{2}\right)\lambda, \quad m = 0, 1, 2, \ldots$ …
Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2026Set A1 markMCQ
$Q. The phase difference φ is related to path difference λ by (A) (λ/π)φ (B) (π/λ)φ (C) (λ/2π)φ (D) (2π/λ)φ$
›Reveal solutionSolution

Phase difference = (2π/λ) × path difference.

The fundamental relation between phase difference (Δϕ) and path difference (Δx) is

$\Delta\phi = \frac{2\pi}{\lambda}\,\Delta x.$

…

Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2026Set A1 markMCQ
$Q. For destructive interference, the path difference should be equal to (A) nλ (B) (2n+1)λ/2 (C) zero (D) infinity$
›Reveal solutionSolution

Destructive interference occurs when the path difference is an odd multiple of λ/2.

Two waves interfere destructively (cancel) when they arrive exactly out of phase, i.e. a phase difference of $\pi,3\pi,5\pi,\dots$ . In terms of path difference this means an odd multiple of half a wavelength:

…

Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2026Set ANNUAL1 mark
$Q. The displacement of water molecules at any instant on the surface of water at nodal lines is ______.$
›Reveal solutionSolution

Nodal lines are where two overlapping waves are always exactly out of phase, so their displacements cancel completely at every instant, leaving zero net displacement.

When two coherent water-wave sources produce overlapping ripples, at points on a nodal line the crest of one wave always coincides with the trough of the other (path difference = odd multiple of half wavelength), so d …

Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2025Set 55/5/11 markMCQ
$a$
›Reveal solutionSolution
When two coherent waves of equal amplitude $a$ interfere, the resultant amplitude varies from $0$ (destructive) to $2a$ (constructive); since intensity is proportional to the square of amplitude, the intensity range is 0 to $4a^2$ .

The heart of this problem lies in understanding how wave superposition affects intensity. When two coherent waves meet, they don't simply add their intensities — instead, their amplitudes add vectorially, and the resulting intensity depends on the square of this net amplitude.

For light waves, intensity $I$ is proportional to the square of the amplitude: $I \propto A^2$ . If we set the proportionality constant to unity for simplicity (which is standard when comparing relative intensities), then $I = A^2$ .

Now let's trace what happens when two coherent waves, each with amplitude $a$ , interfere.

The amplitude addition principle

At any point on the screen, the two waves arrive with some phase difference $\delta$ (which depends on the path difference). The resultant amplitude is found by vector addition:
$A_{\text{net}} = a_1 + a_2$
where $a_1$ and $a_2$ are the individual wave amplitudes treated as phasors. For two waves of equal amplitude $a$ with phase difference $\delta$ :
$A_{\text{net}} = \sqrt{a^2 + a^2 + 2a \cdot a \cos\delta} = a\sqrt{2(1 + \cos\delta)}$
Using the identity $1 + \cos\delta = 2\cos^2(\delta/2)$ :
$A_{\text{net}} = 2a\left|\cos\frac{\delta}{2}\right|$
Finding the intensity extremes

Maximum amplitude (constructive interference): When $\delta = 0, 2\pi, 4\pi, \ldots$ (waves in phase), we have $\cos(\delta/2) = 1$ , so:

$A_{\max} = 2a$
The maximum intensity is:

$I_{\max} = A_{\max}^2 = (2a)^2 = 4a^2$ …
Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2025Set 55/6/11 markMCQ
$I_0$
›Reveal solutionSolution
Interference redistributes light energy across the screen but cannot create or destroy it, so the average intensity equals the sum of the two individual intensities: $I_0 + I_0 = 2I_0$ . The correct option is (C).

When two coherent waves meet, they produce bright and dark fringes. At some points they add constructively (bright), at others destructively (dark). The question asks for the average intensity over the whole screen — not the maximum or minimum at any particular point.

The key insight is energy conservation. The two sources together deliver a fixed amount of energy to the screen. Interference only redistributes this energy — concentrating it in bright fringes and depleting it in dark ones — it cannot create or destroy energy. So the average over the pattern must equal what the two waves would deliver independently.

Let's confirm this with the intensity formula.

Write the resultant intensity at a point. For two coherent waves of intensity $I_0$ each, meeting with phase difference $\delta$ :

$I = I_0 + I_0 + 2\sqrt{I_0 \cdot I_0}\,\cos\delta = 2I_0(1 + \cos\delta)$
This varies from $I_{\text{max}} = 4I_0$ (at $\delta = 0, 2\pi, \ldots$ ) down to $I_{\text{min}} = 0$ (at $\delta = \pi, 3\pi, \ldots$ ).

Average over the pattern. As you move across the screen, the phase difference $\delta$ sweeps uniformly through all values from $0$ to $2\pi$ :

$\langle I \rangle = 2I_0\left(1 + \langle\cos\delta\rangle\right)$

Evaluate the average of cosine.

Over a complete cycle, $\langle\cos\delta\rangle = 0$ .

Conclude.

$\langle I \rangle = 2I_0(1 + 0) = 2I_0$ …
Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2025Set X11 markMCQ
$Q. Which one of the following statements is WRONG about interference of light?$
(a) Light waves of same wavelength coming from two independent sources can be coherent and can produce interference
(b) When the path difference between two interfering waves in $n\lambda$ , bright fringe is produced (Here $n = 0, 1, 2, \ldots$ and $\lambda$ is the wavelength of light)
(c) When the phase difference between two interfering waves is $(2n+1)\pi$ , dark fringe is produced (Here $n = 0, 1, 2, \ldots$ )
(d) In Young's double slit experiment, dark and bright fringes are equally spaced
›Reveal solutionSolution

(a) — this is the WRONG statement. Two independent sources cannot maintain a constant phase relationship, so they are not coherent and cannot produce a stable interference pattern; coherent sour …

Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2025Set D1 markMCQ
$Q. Two light waves of equal amplitude and equal wavelengths are superimposed. The amplitude of the resultant wave will be maximum when phase difference between them is (A) zero (B) π/4 (C) π/2 (D) π$
›Reveal solutionSolution

Two equal-amplitude waves add to a maximum when they are in phase, i.e. phase difference = 0.

For two waves of amplitude a with phase difference φ, the resultant amplitude is

A = √(a² + a² + 2a·a·cosφ) = 2a·cos(φ/2)

…

Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2025Set D1 markMCQ
$Q.The bubble of soap appears coloured due to (A) diffraction (B) polarization (C) interference (D) reflection$
›Reveal solutionSolution

Thin-film interference between the two reflected rays gives colour, since which wavelength interferes constructively depends on the film thickness.

A soap film is a very thin layer of liquid. Light reflected from its front surface interferes with light reflected from its back surface (thin-film interference).

…

Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2025Set A1 mark
$Q. Fill in the blank with appropriate word: ______ of light shows redistribution of energy.$
›Reveal solutionSolution

Interference of light merely redistributes energy between bright and dark regions; it does not create or destroy energy.

When two coherent light waves superpose, they produce a pattern of alternating bright and dark fringes. At points of constructive interference, the resultant intensity is greater than the sum of individual intensities (extra brightness), while at points of destructive interference the resultant intensity is less (often close to zero). Averaged over the whole pattern, however, the total energy is exactly conserved — …

Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →
CBSE 2025Set ANNUAL1 markMCQ
$Q. Two waves whose intensity ratio is 9:1 produce interference. The ratio of maximum and minimum intensities will be$
(a) 10:8
(b) 9:1
(c) 4:1
(d) 2:1
›Reveal solutionSolution

In interference, I_max and I_min depend on the square root of the individual intensities, so a 9:1 intensity ratio does NOT give a 9:1 max:min ratio - it gives 4:1.

For two coherent sources of intensities I1 and I2, the resultant intensity varies between:

I_max = (sqrt(I1) + sqrt(I2))^2

I_min = (sqrt(I1) - sqrt(I2))^2

…

Start your 14-day free trial to see the full solution →

Q.(a) What is meant by plane polarised light ? An unpolarised light is incident at an angle θ\thetaθ on the surface of glass of refractive index μ\muμ. If the reflected and refracted rays are perpendicular to each other, then obtain the relationship between μ\muμ and θ\thetaθ.

Part (a): Brewster's Law and Crossed Polaroids

🎓Unlock everything free for 14 days

Q.(a) What is meant by plane polarised light ? An unpolarised light is incident at an angle $\theta$ on the surface of glass of refractive index $\mu$ . If the reflected and refracted rays are perpendicular to each other, then obtain the relationship between $\mu$ and $\theta$ .

Unlock everything free for 14 days