On 06/27/2014 01:14 AM, Sin Yuen Chang wrote:
Given how many times AuCl XANES has been published before, has anyone else perhaps run into this problem? Has anyone perhaps measured solid AuCl under exclusion of moisture and air, or several times as a function of time to assess beam damage?
I was under the impression that *everyone* runs into that problem. As you say Au(1+) chloride is quite unstable. Given that the white line in the data that you took from my LCF fitting example is so close in size to that of Au(3+) chloride, I would guess that the sample was no pure Au(1+) by the time we measured it. For something as tricky as Au(1+) chloride, I think it is unwise to blindly trust data that you found in some disreputable corner of the internet. It really seems like the kind of thing you need to measure for yourself if you want confidence in what you have. B -- Bruce Ravel ------------------------------------ bravel@bnl.gov National Institute of Standards and Technology Synchrotron Science Group at NSLS --- Beamlines U7A, X24A, X23A2 Building 535A Upton NY, 11973 Homepage: http://xafs.org/BruceRavel Software: https://github.com/bruceravel