Assertion (A): Distance between two coherent sources \(S_1\) and \(S_2\) is \(4\lambda\). A large circle is drawn around these sources with centre of circle lying on centre of \(S_1\) and \(S_2\). there are total 16 maxima on the circle.
Reason (R): Total number of minima on this circle are less compare to total number of maximas.
1. (1) Both (A) & (R) are true and the (R) is the correct explanation of the (A)
2. (2) Both (A) & (R) are true but the (R) is not the correct explanation of the (A)
3. (3) (A) is true but (R) is false
4. (4) Both (A) and (R) are false
View Answer
Given distance \(d=4lambda\). Path difference \(\Delta x = dcos\theta = 4\lambdacos\theta\). The range for \(\Delta x\) is \(-4\lambda \le \Delta x \le 4\lambda\). For maxima, \(\Delta x = n\lambda\), so \(-4 \le n \le 4\). This gives 9 integer values for \(n\). \(n=pm 4\) correspond to \(cos\theta = pm 1\) (2 points). The other 7 values \(n=pm 3, pm 2, pm 1, 0\) correspond to \(|costheta|<1\) (giving \(2times 7 = 14\) points). Total maxima = \(2+14=16\). So (A) is true. For minima, \(\Delta x = (n+1/2)\lambda\), so \(-4.5 \le n \le 3.5\). This gives 8 integer values for \(n\) (from -4 to 3). For all these values, \(|(n+1/2)/4|<1\), so each gives 2 points. Total minima = \(8\times 2 = 16\). Thus, there are 16 maxima and 16 minima. Reason (R) is false.
Assertion (A): In case of single slit diffraction intensity of higher order maxima decreases.
Reason (R): Higher order maxima are at larger distance.
1. (1) Both (A) & (R) are true and the (R) is the correct explanation of the (A)
2. (2) Both (A) & (R) are true but the (R) is not the correct explanation of the (A)
3. (3) (A) is true but (R) is false
4. (4) Both (A) and (R) are false
View Answer
Assertion (A) is true; the intensity of higher order maxima in single slit diffraction decreases rapidly. Reason (R) is also true; higher order maxima occur at larger distances from the central maximum. However, R is not the correct explanation for A, as the decrease in intensity is due to the smaller effective aperture contributing to these maxima, not their distance.
Assertion (A): If black strips of width \(w\) are separated by white strips of width \(d \left(d < w\right)\) are just distinguishable from a distance \(D\). Then resolving power of eye will be higher for smaller \(d\).
Reason (R): Resolution of eye is \(d/D\) and resolving power inversely proportional to resolution.
1. (1) Both (A) & (R) are true and the (R) is the correct explanation of the (A)
2. (2) Both (A) & (R) are true but the (R) is not the correct explanation of the (A)
3. (3) (A) is true but (R) is false
4. (4) Both (A) and (R) are false
View Answer
Assertion (A) is true. The resolving power of the eye is \(RP = D/d\). Thus, for smaller \(d\), the resolving power \(RP\) will be higher. Reason (R) is false. While \(d/D\) represents the angular separation in this specific scenario when the strips are just distinguishable, it is not the general definition of the 'Resolution of eye'. Resolution of the eye is an intrinsic property (minimum angle it can resolve), not a variable specific to an observation.
Assertion (A): If light incident on surface of two different media. The refracted beam may be partially polarized.
Reason (R): If sum of angle of incidence and angle of refraction is \(\pi/2\) then a reflected light is totally polarised.
1. (1) Both (A) & (R) are true and the (R) is the correct explanation of the (A)
2. (2) Both (A) & (R) are true but the (R) is not the correct explanation of the (A)
3. (3) (A) is true but (R) is false
4. (4) Both (A) and (R) are false
View Answer
Assertion (A) is true. When unpolarized light is incident on the interface of two dielectric media, the refracted light is always partially polarized. Reason (R) is also true by Brewster's law; if the sum of the angle of incidence and refraction is \(90^circ\) (i.e., \(tan i_p = n\)), the reflected light is totally polarized. However, Reason (R) explains the total polarization of reflected light, not the partial polarization of refracted light, so R is not the correct explanation for A.
Assertion (A): On increasing wavelength of light used, resolving power increases.
Reason (R): On increasing wavelength, width of central maxima decreases.
1. (1) Both (A) & (R) are true and the (R) is the correct explanation of the (A)
2. (2) Both (A) & (R) are true but the (R) is not the correct explanation of the (A)
3. (3) (A) is true but (R) is false
4. (4) Both (A) and (R) are false
View Answer
Assertion (A) is false. Resolving power of optical instruments (e.g., telescope, microscope) is inversely proportional to the wavelength (\(RP \propto 1/\lambda\)). So, increasing wavelength decreases resolving power. Reason (R) is also false. In diffraction, the width of the central maximum is directly proportional to the wavelength (\(w \propto \lambda\)). Thus, increasing wavelength increases the width of the central maximum.
Assertion (A): If three polarisers are arranged such that the axis of any two successive polarisers make equal angle with each other. If unpolarised light of intensity \(I_0\) incident on first polariser then intensity of emergent light after 3rd polariser is \(\frac{I_0}{8}\). If angle between them is \(45^\circ\).
Reason (R): Each time intensity becomes \(50%\) by Malus law.
1. (1) Both (A) & (R) are true and the (R) is the correct explanation of the (A)
2. (2) Both (A) & (R) are true but the (R) is not the correct explanation of the (A)
3. (3) (A) is true but (R) is false
4. (4) Both (A) and (R) are false
View Answer
Assertion (A) is true. Intensity after 1st polariser is \(I_1 = I_0/2\). Given angle between successive polarisers is \(\theta = 45^\circ\). By Malus' Law, \(I_2 = I_1 \cos^2(45^\circ) = (I_0/2)(1/2) = I_0/4\). \(I_3 = I_2 \cos^2(45^\circ) = (I_0/4)(1/2) = I_0/8\). Reason (R) is false. Intensity becomes 50% only when \(cos^2\theta = 0.5\) (i.e., \(\theta = 45^\circ\)) and only for polarized light. The first polarizer reduces unpolarized light to 50% without \(cos^2\theta\) dependence. So, the general statement 'each time intensity becomes 50%' is false.
Assertion (A): As the separation between the two slits is increased width of fringes decreases.
Reason (R): On increasing separation between two slits, angular separation of fringes decreases.
1. (1) Both (A) & (R) are true and the (R) is the correct explanation of the (A)
2. (2) Both (A) & (R) are true but the (R) is not the correct explanation of the (A)
3. (3) (A) is true but (R) is false
4. (4) Both (A) and (R) are false
View Answer
Fringe width \(beta = \frac{\lambda D}{d}\). As slit separation \(d\) increases, fringe width \(beta\) decreases. Angular fringe width \(theta = \frac{\lambda}{d}\). As \(d\) increases, angular separation \(\theta\) decreases. Thus, R is the correct explanation of A.
Assertion (A): In case of Young double slit experiment width of all fringes were equal.
Reason (R): Angular width of fringes were equal.
1. (1) Both (A) & (R) are true and the (R) is the correct explanation of the (A)
2. (2) Both (A) & (R) are true but the (R) is not the correct explanation of the (A)
3. (3) (A) is true but (R) is false
4. (4) Both (A) and (R) are false
View Answer
In Young's Double Slit Experiment (YDSE), the fringe width \(beta = \frac{\lambda D}{d}\) is constant for all fringes, hence they are of equal width. The angular fringe width \(\theta = \frac{\lambda}{d}\) is also constant. Reason (R) correctly explains Assertion (A).
Assertion (A): The stars which are not resolved in the image produced by the objective of a telescope can’t be further resolved by its eye piece.
Reason (R): The primary purpose of eyepiece of telescope is to provide the magnification of image produced by the objective.
1. Both (A) & (R) are true and the (R) is the correct explanation of the (A)
2. Both (A) & (R) are true but the (R) is not the correct explanation of the (A)
3. (A) is true but (R) is false
4. Both (A) and (R) are false
View Answer
The resolving power of a telescope is determined by the objective lens's diameter. The eyepiece's function is to magnify the image formed by the objective, not to enhance its resolution. Thus, details not resolved by the objective cannot be resolved by the eyepiece. Both Assertion and Reason are true, and Reason is the correct explanation of Assertion.
Assertion (A): If in YDSE, wavelength of light used is increased, angular width remain unchanged only linear width of fringes increases.
Reason (R): Only linear fringe width proportional to wavelength and angular fringe width does not depends on wavelength.
1. (1) Both (A) & (R) are true and the (R) is the correct explanation of the (A)
2. (2) Both (A) & (R) are true but the (R) is not the correct explanation of the (A)
3. (3) (A) is true but (R) is false
4. (4) Both (A) and (R) are false
View Answer
In YDSE, angular fringe width is \(\beta_\theta = \frac{\lambda}{\text{d}}\) and linear fringe width is \(\beta = \frac{\lambda \text{D}}{\text{d}}\). Both are directly proportional to the wavelength \(lambda\). Thus, Assertion (A) is false as angular width also changes. Reason (R) is false as angular width does depend on wavelength.