Talk:Synchrotron light source

History and scope of article

This article was previously named "Synchrotron Light", and overlapped with another called "Synchrotron radiation". A merge proposal in November 2008 received little comment, but all supportive of merging the two articles or dividing them to remove redundancy, as Synchrotron Light and Synchrotron radiation are physically identical.

I have acted now to move the old "Synchrotron light" to "Synchrotron light source", and tentatively redefined the scope to cover artificial sources of synchrotron radiation, ie, electron accelerators specialized to produce optical, UV, and X-ray emission for use as a tool in materials science, condensed matter physics, and other technical investigations. I see it as a specialized branch of the particle accelerators topic.

The companion article, "Synchrotron radiation", is suggested to cover the physics of the emission of synchrotron radiation, and its uses for diagnostic purposes in physics, astronomy, and other fields. "Curvature radiation" is closely related and might also be covered. The frequency range is from radio clear to gamma rays. This article presently has very little on the physics at all, which can be found in any comprehensive graduate-level text (eg, Jackson) on the physics of electricity and magnetism, and is also covered in many astrophysics texts. Some material on the laboratory uses of synchrotron radiation should be moved from synchrotron radiation to here, I think.

Seeing major overlap between the two previous articles, and little comment about the proposed merge after a month or so, I have started the above process without further ado. Hope this proposal and action is acceptable to interested editors. Wwheaton (talk) 01:46, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Current status

I have now moved almost all of the "storage ring" material from the old version of synchrotron radiation to this article, and made some attempt to put it in a reasonable order, plus some changes and extra words to make it look like an article instead of just a heap of random papers. However I have really only shuffled information around, and it still has absolutely no sources, except implicitly via wikilinks, even though I see nothing in it that I think is incorrect. I think it is still no better than start class. I may not be able to return to it for a while, so others should feel free to leap in and make it into something respectable. Wwheaton (talk) 19:04, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

"Especially when artificially produced"

Are there naturally-occurring synchrotron radiation sources? If so, this should probably be explained, and if it's intended as a joke, that might not be appropriate for the tone of the article. 173.164.244.73 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:31, 3 August 2011 (UTC).

Yes, there are: see Synchrotron_radiation#Synchrotron_radiation_in_astronomy. There's a link in the very beginning of this article, but maybe that can be re-phrased a bit. — HHHIPPO 22:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Synchrotron light source. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080916062040/http://www-als.lbl.gov/als/science/sci_archive/SRTurns50.html to http://www-als.lbl.gov/als/science/sci_archive/SRTurns50.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:06, 18 October 2015 (UTC)