either side. The corresponding intensity curve is shown in Fig. 96.[1]
If we had two such apertures instead of one, the appearance would be all the more
FIG. 96 definite; but the two apertures together produce, in addition, interference fringes very much finer than the others, but very sharp and clear. The intensity curve corresponding to these two slits is shown in Fig. 97. In this case it is easy to distinguish the successive maxima, and the atmospheric disturbances are very much less harmful than in the case of the more indefinite phenomenon.
Fig. 98 represents the appearance of the diffraction pattern due to two slits when a slit, instead of a point, is used as the source of light. The appearance of the two patterns is not essentially different, that due to the slit being very much brighter. In the case of a point source there is so little light that it is more difficult to see the fringes. Here the same large fringes are visible as before, but over the central bright space there is a number of very fine fringes. The two central ones are particularly sharp, so that it is easy to locate their position if necessary, but still easier to determine their visibility. This clearness
FIG. 97 is the essential point we have to consider, because the size of the object determines the clearness of the fringes. We find that if we gradually increase the width of the source, the fringes grow less and less distinct, and finally disappear entirely. If we note the instant when the fringes disappear, we can calculate from the dimensions of the apparatus the width of the
- ↑ This ignores the diffraction bands parallel to the shorter sides of the rectangle, which are usually inconspicuous.
