View Single Post
Old 30th April 2019, 01:05 PM   #412
The Man
Unbanned zombie poster
The Man's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Poughkeepsie, NY
Posts: 14,403
Originally Posted by PeterWol62 View Post
Sorry guys, but a document created by a user does not trump reality, as expressed by a scientist working for the manufacturer. And it was always obvious that only the resolution would be degraded.

Si l’on considère que les 2 réseaux sont optimisés pour l’UV (blazés ds l’UV), ce sera principalement une question de résolution spectrale, avec un réseau 1200 t/mm elle sera au moins 2 fois moins bonne qu’avec un 2400t/mm.

Bien à vous,

__________________________________________________ _
Lionel LE BIHAN, Ph.D.
HORIBA Scientific
Ingénieur commercial
14, Boulevard Thomas Gobert
Passage Jobin Yvon
CS45002, 91120 PALAISEAU – France

I do not know of independent tests, but I would encourage them if I had influence anywhere. For the samples, just ask Mills - he obviously would not deal with you guys, but only with a serious lab at, for example a university.

I think that you should give up on this point! Bye.

The statement quoted makes absolutely no specific assertions about the applicability 325 nm laser with the 1200 t / mm grating for the frequency ranges in question.

However, as a conditional statement it does make a specific assertion to your claim "that only the resolution would be degraded". In that it limits the assertion to the specific condition of both gratings being optimized (blazed, the cut angle noted by HappySkeptic99 ) in the UV.

If we consider that the 2 networks are optimized for UV (blazed in the UV), it will be mainly a matter of spectral resolution, with a network 1200 t / mm it will be at least 2 times worse than with a 2400t / mm.*

*Per google translate.

While the 2400 grating appears to be so optimized, the 1200 grating doesn't. Hence, the quote doesn't support your claim. As I recall in the original discussion of this topic the wavelength in question even fell outside the range of just the 325 nm laser with the 2400 t / mm grating by about 1/2 again of that total range.

For MarcoM85BG’s chart most of the relevant features fall within the stated range of 325 nm laser with the 2400 t / mm grating. One falls just outside. So there would be absolutely no reason to use the 1200 t / mm grating other than just to get crap data or, as W.D.Clinger notes, instrument and/or configuration specific artifacts. None of which bodes well for Mills.

Also quoting an answer without the presented question is disingenuous to say the least.

I think you should try a heck of a lot harder.
The Man is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top