Yah know,,,I'm wrong The last one is a triple scattering path with just two
scattering atoms. the leg part is right...
oops
SK
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Kelly, Shelly D.
Sent: Wed 7/16/2008 11:45 PM
To: XAFS Analysis using Ifeffit
Subject: Re: [I
Hi Eckhard,
The first slide also has problems. The first path is a single scattering path.
All the others are double scattering paths. The word "single", "double" and
"triple" are used to describe the number of atoms that scatter. The number of
legs is used to tell the difference between t
I'd like to add my 2cents worth about the mean square displacement term. I
wrote it up on the EXAFS wiki, since I like to say it over and over. see
http://www.xafs.org/Common_Mistakes
Shelly
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Scott Calvin
Sent: Wed 7/16/200
Hi Rich,
"Mean-square radial disorder" (MSRD) is one good alternative.
I'll also point out another bit of ambiguity with "Debye-Waller
factor" aside from the confusion with the XRD term. Some EXAFS
practitioners use Debye-Waller factor to indicate all disorder-type
modifications to the EXAF
>
> I also dislike the phrase "Debye-Waller factor" for the exafs disorder
> term. In crystallography, the Debye-Waller factor refers to disorder
> of atoms about their lattice positions. In exafs, the disorder is
> about the path length of the N-body configuration -- clearly not the
> same th
Hi Eckhard,
the printout you have was taken from lectures given by Paolo Fornasini, from
Trento (Italy). You can probably find them on the web.
Cheers,
Federico
---
Prof. Federico Boscherini
Department
Whoops--it helps if I actually read the formula that the person
actually wrote.
--Scott Calvin
Sarah Lawrence College
On Jul 16, 2008, at 3:40 PM, Bruce Ravel wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 July 2008 15:27:27 Scott Calvin wrote:
>> Bruce--I'm not following your critique of the third panel. Where's
On Wednesday 16 July 2008 15:27:27 Scott Calvin wrote:
> Bruce--I'm not following your critique of the third panel. Where's the
> confusion? I see the disorder term, and I see the mean-free path term,
> but I don't see them inappropriately labeled or confused with each
> other (aside from the
Hi Eckhard,
I Googled one of the phrases, and found this as a source:
alpha.science.unitn.it/~fisica1/ raggi_x/pdf_ppt/
lezione_assorbimento.ppt
Perhaps you can check on that site to find out more.
Bruce--I'm not following your critique of the third panel. Where's the
confusion? I see the
On Wednesday 16 July 2008 12:04:26 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
> i have a print out of a talk (about XANES, XAFS and multiple
> scattering...) and i want to cite some figures (attached). Can anybody
> tell me the author etc...? I searched everywhere on the web (on several
> sites of XAFS-Summer
Matthew - as you know, it's trivial to just let b=1/a and the write
the distribution as
(x-x)^s Exp[- (x-x0)/b]
so that the gaussian limit is obtained as b->0. So infinite
parameters are not a problem.
Your suggestion and other observations are quite right. In fact, if
convoluting distribu
Dear all!
Recently I read the two inspiring XAFS13-contributions of Shelly and Bruce
dealing with the energy-shift (p.132) and the use of SCF-calculations (p. 137).
In this respect I have a question regarding the Enot parameter in Artemis:
Plotting the mue (4th column in xmu.dat) of a FEFF8.4 S
12 matches
Mail list logo
