by Dinesh » Fri May 23, 2014 6:08 pm
Joy and I are discussing this now. She thinks that the reason you have all those beams is because of internal reflections and secondary transmissions. That is, beam hits the (mirrored) surface, beam partially reflects and partially transmits, the transmitted beam hits the back (unmirrored) surface and partially reflects and partially transmits. Now you have two reflected beams and one transmitted. If you continue this process, the various transmitted and reflected beams will get weaker and weaker (depending on where you are on the splitter) and so this will limit the actual number of transmitted and reflected beams you see. Apparently she has this problem quite a lot (as you know, she sets up the table) and the way she overcomes this is with irises (irii?) strategically placed. It may not always be possible to strategically place the iris, in which case, if you can increase the beam angle at the splitter, you'll separate out the "false beams" more.
Joy and I are discussing this now. She thinks that the reason you have all those beams is because of internal reflections and secondary transmissions. That is, beam hits the (mirrored) surface, beam partially reflects and partially transmits, the transmitted beam hits the back (unmirrored) surface and partially reflects and partially transmits. Now you have two reflected beams and one transmitted. If you continue this process, the various transmitted and reflected beams will get weaker and weaker (depending on where you are on the splitter) and so this will limit the actual number of transmitted and reflected beams you see. Apparently she has this problem quite a lot (as you know, she sets up the table) and the way she overcomes this is with irises (irii?) strategically placed. It may not always be possible to strategically place the iris, in which case, if you can increase the beam angle at the splitter, you'll separate out the "false beams" more.