Graphically determining the speed of light

utilising an oscilloscope and the reflective

property of a mirror
A lab report for the University of Groningen

Authors Ishanvi Roy, Tejaswi Varma

Student numbers S5166322, S5302218
Teaching assistant Ruxandra Nastasa
Experiment Determination of the speed of light (c)
Course Physics Laboratory 1

Abstract
There has been extensive research in the field of science that has led to values of
speed of light ‘c’ to immense accuracy [1]. This research paper uses the reflective
property of a mirror and the time-distance relation to calculate the speed ‘c’. Here we
analyse the phase shift of two sine waves generated on the oscilloscope; one formed
by the function generator and the other from the light when reflected by a mirror. This
shift represents the time taken for light to travel from the laser to the mirror and back
to the receiver, which converts this into an electric signal. These measurements were
plotted as a linear graph, which should give the known speed of light,
299,792,458m/s. We found out that the value of ‘c’ we obtained was 1.12 multiple of
the known value. This report further discusses the errors that contributed to this value.

1
Table of Contents
Introduction 3
Theory 3
Experimental methods 5
Results 7
Discussion 7
Conclusion 8
References 9
Appendix 10
A. Raw and Processed data 10
B. Calculation Required 12
C. Derivations of error analysis 12

2
Introduction
The speed of light is a known universal limit, and this fact has led us to major
discoveries in relativistic physics. After the Newtonian/Galilean world model was
proven flawed, the definition of the speed limit seemed key to understanding what we
now know as space-time. The now accepted speed, as defined by the CGPM is
2.99792458 x 108 m/s.
In this experiment, we use a laser that is modulated through a function generator that
sets the intensity, and a mirror at a distance is used to reflect this beam. A receiver
converts this to an electrical signal. An oscilloscope, as the name suggests, uses the
signals from the function generator and the receiver to display the oscillations of both
on a screen. The results obtained through this method have shown a large error,
resulting in speed derived faster than the known value. This method shows large room
for human error and can be improved further to be made more reliable.

Theory
The well-known kinematics distance-speed equation is used in this experiment:
𝐷𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑑
𝑐= 𝑇𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑛
(equation 1.1)

The distance travelled is obtained from the scale measure, and its error is obtained
from the minimum measurement on a metre ruler, ± 0. 1 𝑐𝑚. This error is propagated
and converted to the metre using the following formula [further shown in Calculation
1.1 in Appendix]:
𝑑 𝑥𝑚
∆𝑥𝑚 = 𝑑𝑥𝑐𝑚
· ∆𝑥𝑐𝑚 (equation 1.2)

The mean values for all sets measuring time are used and plotted on the graph against
total distance travelled [Appendix Table 2]. As time is plotted on the y-axis, the
1
gradient for this shows the slope ‘m’ of 𝑐
[derivation shown in Appendix equation
1.5], we find speed by,
1
𝑐= 𝑚
(equation 1.3)

This gradient is calculated using two points from the best fit line and the following
formula:
𝑦2−𝑦1
𝑚= 𝑥2−𝑥1
(equation 1.4)

The error bar values are taken as the largest deviations from the standard value and the
measured value [Appendix Table 2]. Two lines through the origin and error bars are
drawn such that they give the highest and lowest slopes.

3
Equation 1.4 is also used to calculate the gradients of these two lines. The difference
between the highest/lowest and the best-fit slope is found. The largest of the two
values is taken and this gives us the error of our final value.

4
Experimental methods

Materials required

1. Laser 6. Mirror

2. Detector/receiver 7. Measuring Tape

3. Function generator 8. Marking Tape

4. Digital Oscilloscope 9. Sheet of paper

5. 3 Connectors and a T-Connector

Table 1.1: Materials required for experiment

Figure 1.1: Top Left: Function generator and oscilloscope connected. Top Right:
Oscilloscope close-up. Bottom left: Function generator with t-connector connections.
Bottom right: Laser, Receiver, and Mirror set up in position.

5
The experiment was set up as shown in [figure 1.1]. The connectors were plugged in,
connecting the function generator, oscilloscope, laser, and receiver. The function
generator is connected to CH1, the receiver to CH2, and the laser is connected to the
function generator.
The setup was then approved by the Lab Teaching Assistant and permission was given
to switch the power supply on. Upon turning on the laser button, the laser did not
seem to work. The offset voltage had to be matched to that of the laser for it to work
(that is: 5V). Once the laser was turned on, the positioning of the mirror and the laser
were altered so that the laser hits the centre of the mirror and reflects it directly to the
receiver. This was done with the help of a paper. The laser beam was traced onto the
paper to guide it back to the mirror. It is important to note that directly looking at the
laser source and long-term exposure can cause retinal injuries and damage to the skin.
Using the measuring tape and the marking tape, markings were made for every 50cm
on the table (that is: 99cm, 149cm to 299cm). For every placement, three values were
measured in order to evaluate the errors. The processed data from the table [Appendix
table 2] and the propagated error values appendix [Appendix table 2]were used to plot
a graph of delta t against x. Error bars for both the y and x-axis were drawn along with
the best fit line and 2 other lines having the largest and the smallest possible slope.
The gradient of the best fit line was calculated and the error for the slope was also
determined [Appendix equation 1.4].

6
Results
After all measurements are carried out, the raw data is recorded along with units
[Appendix Table 1]. These time values are averaged and graphed [Graph 1.1], giving a
straight line through the origin. Using equation 1.4, we gain a slope value equal to
2.80 x 10-9 s/m. Using equation 1.3, we get c = 3.57 x 108 m/s. The smallest slope
from the graph gives us value = 2.50 x 10-9 s/m, giving us a value for speed= 4.00 x
108 m/s. The largest slope from the graph gives us a value= 2.80 x 10-9 s/m, giving us a
value for speed= 3.57 x 108 m/s. [Calculation 1.2 in Appendix]
The largest difference of slope from the three values is= 0.30 x 10-9 s/m, this gives our
final uncertainty value of ∆t= ±3.34 x 109. We arrive at our final value of the speed of
light= 3.57 x 108 m/s ±3.34 x 109 m/s.

Discussion
We found out that by graphing the values found and plotting the values of 𝑡 against
(x1 + x2) the obtained value of ‘c’ turned out to be greater than the theoretical value by
a factor of 1.12. This can be verified by comparing it to the value 299792458 m/s.
However, this factor must be greater as 299792458 m/s is the speed of light in
vacuum, whereas what we measured was that in air, which is slightly slower.
This difference might be slight, but since our measurements were taken in
nanoseconds, there might have been a change in the error had this been considered
during the calculation of the results.
Some factors contributing to this error could have been avoided. For example, the
mirror used had fingerprints and dust over it, affecting the results.
Another approach that could have been taken is to digitally calculate the time
difference between the signals on the oscilloscope rather than using the cursor and
relying on the estimation by eye to find the corresponding points on both graphs.
There could have also been a human error when measuring the distance between the
setup and the mirror, as the distances taken were too small to properly ensure that the
laser hit the middle of the mirror. This also correlates to the fact that the change in the
position of the mirror, that is achievable in a Lab, is not significant enough to achieve
a noticeable change in the phase shift. More care should have also been taken during
the setup to ensure the highest intensity of light was used.

7
Conclusion
We found out that the speed of light can in fact be determined using an oscilloscope,
however, as seen, this has resulted in several errors, giving us a value of ‘c’ that is
greater than the hypothesised value. Some ways of improving the setup to enhance the
results would be to perform the experiment over a larger change in distances and by
accurately calculating the phase shift. A set intensity LED could have been used to
prevent error caused by changing frequency in the function generator. The exact
distance from the point on the mirror the laser beam hits and the receiver should be
calculated, not the mirror base and receiver. This should give us a more accurate
answer for ‘c’.

8
References
[1] Arribas, E., Escobar, I., Ramirez-Vazquez, R., Franco, T., & Belendez, A. (2020).
An indirect measurement of the speed of light in a General Physics Laboratory.
Journal of King Saud University - Science, 32(6), 2797-2802.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksus.2020.06.017

9
Appendix
A. Raw and Processed data

Appendix Table 1. Raw data for experiment C

Distance in cm Time in seconds (x10⁻9)

𝓧1 (laser to mirror) 𝓧2 (mirror to t1 t2 t3

receiver)

1. 99.0 95.0 75.60 71.23 69.96

2. 149 144 76.90 77.59 73.77

3. 199 195 78.23 78.23 78.23

4. 249 245 81.40 80.77 80.77

5. 299 294 83.32 84.59 83.95

Appendix Table 2. Processed data for values shown in graph

𝓧1 +𝓧2 (distance in tavg in seconds (x10⁻9) Δt in seconds

metres) (x10⁻9)

1. 1.99 72.26 1.25

2. 2.93 76.12 6.50

3. 3.94 78.23 0.00

4. 4.94 80.98 4.20

5. 5.93 83.95 6.40

10
Graph 1.1: Linear graph of ∆𝑡 versus x

11
B. Calculations Required:
𝑡
𝑚= 𝑑
(equation 1.5)
𝑑
𝑐= 𝑡

1
Comparing the two we get: 𝑐 = 𝑚

C. Derivations of error analysis

Error propagation for x-axis:

∆𝑥𝑚 =
𝑑
𝑑𝑥𝑐𝑚 ( ) · 0. 1
𝑥
100
(Calculation 1.1)

1
∆𝑥𝑚 = 100
· 0. 1

∆𝑥𝑚 = 0. 001

Error propagation and slope calculation for y-axis:

Best fit: Points used (5.5, 83) and (5, 81.6) (Calculation 1.2)

𝑚 = 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒 = ( (83−81.6)
(5.5−5) ) × 10 −9
= 2. 8 × 10
−9

Smallest slope: Points used (5, 81) and (5, 81.6)

𝑚 = 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒 = ( 81−78.5
5−4 ) × 10
−9
= 4. 00 × 10
−9

Largest slope: Points used (5.25, 82.9) and (3.5, 78)

𝑚 = 𝑠𝑙𝑜𝑝𝑒 = ( 82.9−78
5.25−3.5 ) × 10 −9
= 2. 8. 00 × 10
−9

12
13