Talk:Ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Ultraviolet-visible spectroscopy is part of WikiProject Spectroscopy, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to spectroscopy. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. |
| Comments | Please leave a short summary to explain the ratings and to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
Contents |
[edit] Maybe a new "Chemistry" section
Maybe a Chemistry section should be added to this article explaining electronic transitions, chromophores, lambda max, mentioning Woodward-Hoffman rules. H Padleckas 21:47, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
- May not be necessary since all those terms are mentioned throughout the article. LostLucidity (talk) 20:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Use in HPLC
Might be worth adding something about the use of UV/VIS spectrophotometers as detectors on High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) instruments. Alan Pascoe 20:27, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Done. Anything to add? --Rifleman 82 21:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Types of instrument, tweak; See also: IR
I think the types of instruments listed is an artifact from how spectroscopy is traditionally taught. Single and double beam machines, choppers, etc. Stuff like diffraction gratings which are no longer used, now that we have FT.
I added the See also: IR because I feel that they are complementary techniques. One is quantitative, while the other is qualitative.
--Rifleman 82 18:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'd just noticed that the content under "Types of Instrument" was all also under the section "Ultraviolet-visible spectrophotometer". It should certainly be there, since the majority of instruments are still dispersive, even with improvements in FT performance. UV/Vis and IR *are* complementary techniques, so we might as well 'see also' NMR, and Raman, and MS, since all of these also "complement" UV/Vis. (That's slightly ironic; I don't really suggest pointing to NMR since the two techniques aren't really very similar in either how they work or what they provide. Then again, I wouldn't have thought to point out IR as being particularly close to UV/Vis.) Anyway. I don't think any information's been lost, in either section; if you think I condensed too much feel free to change it back. :) Jaeger5432 19:22, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Molar (decadic) absorption coefficient
IUPAC recommends that ε be called the molar (decadic) absorption coefficient. See [1], [2], and especially [3].
— DIV (128.250.204.118 08:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC))
[edit] See Also APPLICATIONS
More detail of specific applications in the APPLICATIONS sections, and also SEE ALSO links to wiki articles of specific applications would be informative. For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicinchoninic_acid_assay
[edit] Capitalization consistency
Is there a standard way to capitalize UV/VIS? The page uses UV/VIS, UV/Vis, and UV/vis interchangeably, as far as I can tell. Perhaps a note should be added about this. Chessbot (talk) 16:46, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
