Talk:Radial distribution function

message: The line below equation 13 reads: "In fact, equation 13 gives us the number of molecules between r and r + d r about a central molecule." However, it looks to me that equation 13 gives us the total number N of the molecules of the system, .... 
Lwzhou (talk) 12:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Eq. 13

message: In practice, the radial distribution function is not just used as a descriptor for equilibrium systems. For example, the pair distribution function of glasses are measured all the time from scattering experiments, but it is improper to speak of the equilibrium statistical mechanics of such systems. As such, I have provided a definition in terms of well-defined physical quantities for general (i.e. equilibrium and non-equilibrium) systems which is equivalent to the statistical mechanical definition for systems at equilibrium. I will also work on adding a section on how one measures these functions, and adding sources to existing material.Mgibby5 (talk) 23:31, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: More General Definition of g(r)

message: The pair distribution function and radial distribution function are essentially the same concept. I propose the two articles be merged.Polyamorph (talk) 16:13, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your comment  I think we have to be careful with the terminology. I work with liquids and glasses and use XRD and neutron diffraction to measure their "radial distribution functions". But I just call them pair distribution functions. Others in my field describe them as radial distribution functions or pair correlation functions. These terms are all used interchangeably and I think there is a problem that either no one knows or there isn't a correct standardised terminology. So I feel it would just be better on wikipedia to just use pair distribution function and have a section on the special case for non-crystalline materials, but not necessarily call this the radial distribution function. Does that make Sense? Anyway, I'll wait a while to see if there are any other responses to this and then perform the merge. Polyamorph (talk) 16:00, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: If it is true—as currently stated in the wiki articles if I'm reading them right—that pair correlation function is a function of the 3D displacement vector (both distance and direction), and radial correlation function is a function only of distance, then it would be totally unsurprising that the terms would be used interchangeably by the folks who are studying isotropic media like liquids and glasses. So your observation (that you and your glass-studying friends use "radial" and "pair" interchangeably) is IMO extremely weak evidence against the current wiki definitions. So the question is, if you spend time hanging around crystallography labs, do they use the "pair" and "radial" terms interchangeably? Whatever, it's probably best to just look up the definitions used by popular textbooks. --Steve (talk) 21:37, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks for your insight! That makes sense. Polyamorph (talk) 21:48, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

text: Closed given the absence of consensus for the merge, and discussion now stale. Klbrain (talk) 10:46, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal 

message: The comment 
g^{(n)} is called a correlation function, since if the atoms are independent from each other \rho^{(n)} would simply equal \rho^{n} and therefore g^{(n)} corrects for the correlation between atoms.
is incorrect.   If the atoms are independent from each other then \rho^{(n)} would still have the factorial terms that are required for the indistinguishably.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.4.165.23 (talk) 18:39, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Correction