Oh - you meant how one could take nonrandom distrubution
into account in the analysis-
funny how I always understand what someone meant after
i push send on an inappropriate reply
Edward A. Berry wrote:
Ian Tickle wrote:
below the noise threshold. This does make the tacit assumption that
the unmeasured reflections are distributed randomly in reciprocal
space, which is clearly not entirely true, but it's hard to see how
one could account for the non-random distribution. Again, in any case
What about collecting in the corners of a square detector?
Due to the crystal diffracting better than expected or
the need to sacrifice resolution for spot separation?
eab
