Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Loop: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Sequence: 211
Precedence: list
X-no-archive: yes
List-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=subscribe%20rietveld_l>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe%20rietveld_l>
List-Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
List-Owner: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Luca,
Not true. Polarization from incident beam monochromator is 
same correction & same formulas as for diffracted beam 
monochromator. Problem is symmetric wrt Azaroff's 
equations.
Bob Von Dreele
On Wed, 16 Oct 2002 15:25:15 +0200
  Luca Lutterotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Primary monochromator don't need such correction,
>
>       Best regards,
>                       Luca Lutterotti
>
>On Wednesday, October 16, 2002, at 10:36 AM, Natale 
>Perchiazzi wrote:
>
>>What about a primary Ge monochromator?
>>
>>Best regards      Natale Perchiazzi
>>
>>
>>Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra
>>Via S.Maria 53
>>56126 Pisa   ITALIA
>>fax +39050500932
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>www.dst.unipi.it
>>
>

Reply via email to