Hi,
Talking with some colleagues, I realized that some people record R1 data
with 2D versions of inversion-recovery pulse sequences, where the signal
starts from a negative value to a positive value, with a cross-point at
~ ln 2 / R1. The equation needed to fit such data is the following:
At = A0 (1−2e^(−R1 t))
In relax (and relaxgui), it is assumed that, for both R1 and R2, the
user records data with intensities decaying in an exponential manner
(i.e. At = A0 e^(−R1 t) ).
Is there a reason why most people use the exponential decay approach,
rather than the inversion-recovery approach ?
Should relax (and relaxgui) support the inversion-recovery approach ?
Cheers,
Séb :)
--
Sébastien Morin, Ph.D.
Postdoctoral Fellow, S. Grzesiek NMR Laboratory
Department of Structural Biology
Biozentrum, Universität Basel
Klingelbergstrasse 70
4056 Basel
Switzerland
_______________________________________________
relax (http://nmr-relax.com)
This is the relax-devel mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this list, get a password
reminder, or change your subscription options,
visit the list information page at
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/relax-devel
