>Jacob's case is twinning in P3(2)12 making the data appear as P6(2)22, so it
>is indeed a rotation by 180°.
Yes, this all fits together nicely. If I understand correctly, this would make
my crystals a blend of mero- and pseudo-mero-hedral, so involving I's and F's,
no?
JPK
Here is the answer, I think, to why twinning leads to negative CCanom:
In fact, in any case in which the anomalous signal changes as a function of
exposure, CCanom can be negative.
The usual case is radiation damage:
Consider, to start, four independent measurements of one reflection, two I+ an
[Sorry, typography was off a bit in the last one]
Here is the answer, I think, to why twinning leads to negative CCanom:
In fact, in any case in which the anomalous signal changes as a function of
exposure, CCanom can be negative.
The usual case is radiation damage:
Consider, to start, four in
