Step 1: Evaluate Assertion (A).
When the ray strikes the prism's first face normally (\( i_1 = 0 \)), the angle of refraction \( r_1 \) is 0. At the second face, the angle of incidence becomes \( r_2 = A \) (where \( A \) is the prism angle). For the emergent ray to just skim the second face, the angle of emergence \( e \) must be \( 90^\circ \). Applying Snell's law at the second face yields:\[n \sin r_2 = \sin e \quad \Rightarrow \quad n \sin A = 1 \quad \Rightarrow \quad \sin A = \frac{1}{n}\]The critical angle \( \theta_c \) at the glass-air boundary is defined by:\[\sin \theta_c = \frac{1}{n}\]Since the assertion states \( \theta_c = A \), it implies \( \sin \theta_c = \sin A \), which is true if \( \sin A = \frac{1}{n} \). Therefore, the emergent ray grazes the second face precisely when \( A = \theta_c \). Assertion (A) is thus valid.Step 2: Evaluate Reason (R).
The refractive index \( n \) is an intrinsic property of the prism material and is contingent upon the wavelength of light, not the prism angle \( A \). The angle \( A \) is a geometric characteristic of the prism, and \( n \) is independent of it. Consequently, Reason (R) is invalid.Step 3: Conclusion.
Assertion (A) is true, while Reason (R) is false. The correct option is (C).