Past exam of the physics 2 paper of the University of Oxford / 2016 / 6 / b

With $D=5\mathrm{mm}$, the circular-aperture diffraction limit is ${\theta }_R=244\lambda$ when $\lambda$ is in metres. No wavelength is specified, so a unique numerical diffraction angle cannot be deduced. Taking representative visible light at $\lambda =550\mathrm{nm}$ givesFor a roughly square receptor arrangement with surface density $n=10^5{\mathrm{mm}}^{-2}$, the characteristic receptor pitch is $s\simeq n^{-1/2}=3.16\mathrm{micrometres}$. With the retina $f_{\mathrm{eye}}=17\mathrm{mm}$ behind the lens, that pitch subtendsThis is an order-of-magnitude estimate of the point-separation scale from retinal sampling. A periodic intensity pattern needs at least two samples per period under the Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem, giving a corresponding period angle of about $3.72\times 10^{-4}\mathrm{rad}$ or $1.28\mathrm{arcmin}$. A different receptor packing changes the pitch by an order-one geometric factor; density alone does not specify a full sampling lattice or a contrast threshold.

At a $5\mathrm{mm}$ pupil and the chosen visible wavelength, the optical diffraction limit is somewhat finer than the receptor pitch. The supplied model is therefore not purely diffraction limited: retinal sampling is comparable to, and slightly more restrictive than, ideal aperture diffraction. Real optical aberrations and neural processing can further reduce resolution. Different wavelengths or a smaller pupil can change which effect dominates.