Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

diffraction" is justified. Regards Colin -Original Message- From: Tim Gruene [mailto:t...@shelx.uni-ac.gwdg.de] Sent: 09 July 2014 10:49 To: Nave, Colin (DLSLtd,RAL,LSCI); ccp4bb Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1

Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

Gerard Bricogne >> [mailto:g...@globalphasing.com] Sent: 09 July 2014 00:38 To: ccp4bb >> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction >> >> Dear all, >> >> The downstream end of this thread seems to have drifted into >> learned considerations of s

Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

#x27;? Curiously, Tim > > Colin > > -Original Message- From: Gerard Bricogne > [mailto:g...@globalphasing.com] Sent: 09 July 2014 00:38 To: ccp4bb > Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction > > Dear all, > > The downstream end of this thread seem

Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

t; > > > > > ---------- > *From:* CCP4 bulletin board [CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] on behalf of Ian > Tickle [ianj...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 09, 2014 12:19 AM > *To:* CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > *Subject:* Re: [ccp4bb] question about

Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

p4bb Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction Dear all, The downstream end of this thread seems to have drifted into learned considerations of spelling, so I am getting back to this early reply. I am surprised that nobody has mentioned the role of the wavelength in all this:

Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

Dear all, The downstream end of this thread seems to have drifted into learned considerations of spelling, so I am getting back to this early reply. I am surprised that nobody has mentioned the role of the wavelength in all this: there is no way that one can directly link the first fou

Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

    From: CCP4 bulletin board [CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] on behalf of Ian Tickle [ianj...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 09, 2014 12:19 AM To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction Yes, the way I like to think of it as a double condition, the

Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

Yes, the way I like to think of it as a double condition, the > reflection‐in‐a‐mirror condition *plus* the special condition imposed > by Bragg’s Law. This is why I often prefer the unfashionable spelling > “reflexion”. > > -- > Ian ◎ > Me too. Actually "reflexion" (but the verb is "reflect") i

Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

"Edward A. Berry" writes: > The plane will scatter, and all atoms in the plane will scatter in phase > if angle of incidence equals angle of reflection. this is how a mirror > reflects. Furthermore all the parallel planes will also reflect at this angle. > Trouble is the beams scattered from the

Re: [ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

The plane will scatter, and all atoms in the plane will scatter in phase if angle of incidence equals angle of reflection. this is how a mirror reflects. Furthermore all the parallel planes will also reflect at this angle. Trouble is the beams scattered from the different parallel planes are syste

[ccp4bb] question about powder diffraction

Hi If a sample of powder crystal (say Nickel) is shot with monochromatic x-rays, one will observe reflections from planes that satisfy Bragg's Law. For Ni the first four planes are (111, 200, 202, 311) with 2theta (44, 52, 76, 93 degrees) respectively. Why doesn't one observe a reflection a