I commonly receive half a dozen error messages for each Rietveld_L message, and when
this number becomes large I delete the email addresses generating the errors ! (This
is NOT some kind of sanction :-) It usually occurs when people change their email
address, or more commonly when the local routing changes.
If you receive a message that you have been un-subscribed, please just RE-SUBSCRIBE
with your current address by sending an email to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> with, in the body
of the message, "SUB Rietveld_L" (no quotes and no signature or Subject heading, and
note the last character is L for List).
And please send an email to yourself first to check that the return address is correct
:-)
Other useful commands to send to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> are:
HELP
REV Rietveld_L (to review the list of subscribers)
SIG Rietveld_L (to sign-off or un-subscribe).
Now back to science :-)
>I'd like to take this even a step further and suggest that not only should
>we plot data in Q space, but even collect it in Q space.
Hmm, let's not go too far here :-) This may be possible with some detectors, but other
kinds of position sensitive detector have fixed steps (in 2-theta). If you have to do
some kind of computer interpolation to "collect" in Q-steps, then I would prefer to
see the raw data. But certainly plotting vs Q is a good thing en principe.
>It would be more profitable
>to increase the 2theta step size at high angles and spend that saved time to
>count longer.
Not sure that that changes much statistically if the Rietveld weights are done
correctly, but anyway you can save even more time with a detector that covers the
whole angular range.
Alan Hewat, ILL Grenoble, FRANCE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> tel (33) 4.76.20.72.13
ftp://ftp.ill.fr/pub/dif fax (33) 4.76.48.39.06 http://www.ill.fr/dif/
