Talk:Spectral line

message: Does anyone know how easy it is to see these spectral lines? For instance, if I have a simple prism and I use it to see the sun's spectrum, can I observe a few lines with the naked eye?
Looking at the sun, probably not, but looking at a high-intensity street light, you certainly
can see the lines of the evaporated metals in the lamp.Paul Reiser 01:11, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oldest comment 

message: What about the Zeeman Effect on spectral lines? Korandder 09:24, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zeeman Effect

message: The revision by 84.194.165.197 read:
...photon is absorbed. Then it will be spontaneously re-emitted, either in the same frequency as the original or in a cascade (even multiple of the original photon frequency), where the sum of the energies of the photons emitted will be the same as the energy of the one absorbed.
This can't be right. If the sum of the energies of the emitted photons equals the
energy of the original photon, then each of those energies must be less than the
energy of the original photon. The energies (and therefore the frequencies) of
the emitted photons can't be even multiples of the original photon energy or 
frequency. I don't know enough about photon cascades to correct this statement,
however, so I hope 84.194.165.197 will correct it. Paul Reiser 18:42, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photon Cascade 

message: isn't there missing something? I tought collision broadening was the predominant effect in all chaotic light sources e.g. in spectral lamps. (see Loudon, R: The Quantum Theory of Light. 3rd edn. Oxford Science, 2000. p. 76: "The dominant effects in the majority of experiments are the Doppler and collision broadening, and the latter is used (...) to model the typical features of a chaotic light source.") Or is this an article about plasma-related stuff only? any comments? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joerglwitsch (talk • contribs) 13:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  collision broadening 

message: A couple of articles mention Gaussian broadening and there seem to be a fair number of papers which mention the term. Should this be included in the list here? --Salix alba (talk) 21:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this means any broadening mechanism which produces a Gaussian lineshape. Doppler broadening gives a Gaussian profile, as does natural broadening. Broadening is better classified by the physical phenomenon which causes it rather than the lineshape it produces. PAR 08:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for that. I've changed Gaussian broadening appropriately. --Salix alba (talk) 09:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gaussian broadening 

message: A new spectral line intensity formula for optical emission spectroscopy was presented by Dr:s Bo Thelin (experimental physicist) and Sten Yngström (theoretical physicist) at the beginning of the 1980:s. This formula has shown very good agreement between experiments (Ref 1) and the new theory (Ref 2). These references are summaries of earlier papers.
I = K \ left (frac { v^2 }{ c^2 }\ right ) \ e^left (\ frac { -J}{ k \ T \ right )} \
\ left (\ e^left ( \ frac { h \ v }{ k \ T \right -  \ 1)^-1
 
K  includes transition rates and element concentrations
I= spectral line intensity, v= frequency , J=ionization energy and T=temperature
Many independent experimental methods strongly support the new formula, while the standard intensity formula with the Boltzmann term (upper energy level), deviates very much from experiments.
Ref 1  Yngström,S.  and Thelin,B.  Applied Spectroscopy, 44, 1566, (1990)
Ref 2  Yngström,S.   International Journal of Theoretical Physics,Vol.33,
No 7,(1994)--79.138.179.27 (talk) 21:40, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Stuff

message: I think the section on Doppler Broadening could be stated a little more clearly. It says that the motion of particles causes a Doppler shift of the emitted radiation.  The section then switches to talking about the bulk effects of this, which results in broadening and no shift.  I don't think the transition from the single particle to bulk effects was clearly noted.  I read it three times before I understood what it meant in saying it causes a shift and doesn't cause a shift. --TonyB 2005/05/02 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.233.98.29 (talk) 15:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doppler Broadening 

message: Added a stubby nomenclature section, please proofread, correct and enhance! I'm not anything near a physicist. For example I know of so called forbidden lines such as [OIV] that occur in planetary nebulae. Said: Rursus (☻) 07:09, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please proofread! 

message: Oppose - molecules also have spectral lines. I suggest expanding both articles and making that point clear. --Kkmurray (talk) 23:11, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with [[atomic spectral line]]?

message: Should the list of named spectral lines (ED: specifically Fraunhofer lines) currently in the Abbe number article be added to this article? --SoledadKabocha (talk) 03:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest including links out to specific lists of named spectral lines within the naming section. However, I don't think those lists should be included here. Since this article is aiming to be broad, I think it needs a general introduction to nomenclature. These lists of named lines is one historical approach but not the only that is relevant to this article. ronningt (talk) 12:53, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of spectral-line names 

message: Absorption lines are produced even during reflection from an illuminated cold gas, as after reflection there is still the opportunity for a selective absorption (and re-scatter) between the point of reflection and the detector.
(1) What are some familiar or lab examples where light gets reflected from a cold gas?
(2) If the absorption occurs after the reflection, why do we bother to mention the reflection?
The description "reflection from an illuminated cold gas" seems to correspond to some established situation that is being inadequately presented. 89.217.11.36 (talk) 10:25, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for drawing attention to this. I think this sentence was drawing attention to a very narrow age and was confusing the explanation in the process. I've edited that section. Please take a look. ronningt (talk) 20:36, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reflection from gas 

message: It appears that physicists pay the same rapt attention to the telltale details of spectral line broadening as a hunter does to a trace of wind-blown sand in a hoof spoor. 89.217.11.36 (talk) 10:55, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snowclone 

message: Tantalum's spectrum is displayed next to tungsten.  I don't know how to fix it - adding to this talk page is hard enough ;-)
76.167.219.69 (talk) 03:09, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks! The tantalum image was used twice, a typo. Fixed. Thanks for the notice. -DePiep (talk) 05:00, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect image for tungsten's spectrum 

message: This is the spectrum of a blue sky somewhat close to the horizon, pointing east at around 3 or 4 pm (i.e., Sun toward the west) on a clear day.
It must at some level be presumed non-polar, because the poles don't even have east / west. At least the tropics? — MaxEnt 16:59, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Also assumed to be equatorial?  

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:07, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: There is corrected version image of Mercury spectrum available (atomic number 80). 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mercury_spectrum_visible.png.
The older version was duplicate of 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Barium_spectrum_visible.png,
so it was deleted as I understood from
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Mercury_spectrum_visible.png.
The new version is obviously different. I do not know how to incorporate it into the table
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Spectral_lines_of_the_elements
90.177.43.233 (talk) 07:37, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mercury spectrum is missing in the table.