[Laser] last message was 8/12/2016?

[Glenn Thomas]

Just a lurkers thought...

The spectrum line from a coherent monochromatic source should be zero
width. It's not quite because of thermal doppler in the individual
emitting atoms in the source. Other than that spreading, monochromatic
should be zero width and any width that is observed (other than thermal
doppler) should be an artifact of the instrument.

So, what kind of width did you observe?

73 de Glenn wb6w
(back into lurk mode...)

On 5/14/2018 4:30 PM, Chuck Hast wrote:
> That did it. I went back through and all of the indications I had on
> different
> documents do a calculation to figure out the distance between lines but the
> lines are ZERO width, now that I look at it. That cannot be, or I am missing
> something.
>
> Take a look at the UCLA video here, I do not see where he takes into account
> line width just spacing from center of line to center of line.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-3uht9LAhM
>
> Several others have given the same calculation, I end up at the same thing
> Spacing = 1 um, so the line is infinitely small based on that. Of course we
> know
> it is not.
>
>

-- 
"i" before "e" except after "c", or when sounded as "a" as in neighbor and weigh.

This rule is “counterfeit”. General spelling rules “forfeit” generality. 
They are “foreign”, being not “either” or “neither”, possibly the result of some 
“leisure” activity of a “sovereign heir” who, lacking “height”, is studying, 
without “conscience, inefficient glacier science”. It’s not as nutritious 
as "protein". It's just plain old "weird"

Is this example “sufficient”?