« Profile refinement » is misleading as with Rietveld method we are refining also the crystal structure …
I think that it is too late to change the terminology in the text books. The history of science is full of wrong legends. One point of view of the people involved in the story is now published in the article, and as Hugo Rietveld cannot answer the questions, there is no sense to correct the terminology. Maybe, our respective bodies CPD-IUCr and EPDIComm may give a recommendation? Radovan Cerny Laboratoire de Cristallographie, DQMP Université de Genève 24, quai Ernest-Ansermet CH-1211 Geneva 4, Switzerland Phone : [+[41] 22] 37 964 50, FAX : [+[41] 22] 37 961 08 mailto : radovan.ce...@unige.ch<mailto:radovan.ce...@unige.ch> URL : http://www.unige.ch/sciences/crystal/cerny/rcerny.htm De : rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr <rietveld_l-requ...@ill.fr> De la part de Alan Hewat Envoyé : vendredi 17 août 2018 11:31 À : rietveld_l@ill.fr Objet : Re: Rietveld > ...your responsibility in establishing and approving the legend is quite high > Then times to destroy the legend come, and you want to be a part of it too, > apparently. As I get older, I believe less and less in legends. In the IUCr 1999 issue that I cited, I should have also mentioned that there is an interesting article on p.4 called "The Powder Diffraction Handicap<http://ww1.iucr.org/news/v7n4/7-4.pdf>" by Armel le Bail :-) I personally think we should use Rietveld's original term "Profile Refinement", which I already used in my Harwell report 1973_The_Rietveld_Program_for_the_Profile_Refinement_of_ Neutron_Diffraction_Powder_Patterns_AERE_R7350-von_Dreele_annotations.pdf<http://hewat.net/science/papers/1973_The_Rietveld_Program_for_the_Profile_Refinement_of_%20Neutron_Diffraction_Powder_Patterns_AERE_R7350-von_Dreele_annotations.pdf> On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 at 10:31, Le Bail Armel <le-bail.ar...@orange.fr<mailto:le-bail.ar...@orange.fr>> wrote: >Probably, that's how legends begin. Your presence on so many pictures together with Hugo Rietveld, suggests that your responsibility in establishing and approving the legend is quite high, between 30 and 60% maybe, but I recognize that Rwp is poorly satisfying for this fit. http://home.wxs.nl/~rietv025/crystallografen-s.jpg Then times to destroy the legend come, and you want to be a part of it too, apparently. Should we rename the Rietveld decomposition formula (equation 7 in his 1969 paper) the Loopstra decomposition formula ? I am lost. Best, Armel ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Please do NOT attach files to the whole list <alan.he...@neutronoptics.com<mailto:alan.he...@neutronoptics.com>> Send commands to <lists...@ill.fr<mailto:lists...@ill.fr>> eg: HELP as the subject with no body text The Rietveld_L list archive is on http://www.mail-archive.com/rietveld_l@ill.fr/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -- ______________________________________________ Dr Alan Hewat, NeutronOptics, Grenoble, FRANCE <alan.he...@neutronoptics.com<mailto:alan.he...@neutronoptics.com>> +33.476.98.41.68 http://www.NeutronOptics.com/hewat ______________________________________________
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Please do NOT attach files to the whole list <alan.he...@neutronoptics.com> Send commands to <lists...@ill.fr> eg: HELP as the subject with no body text The Rietveld_L list archive is on http://www.mail-archive.com/rietveld_l@ill.fr/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
