Hi Paul,
I think we're getting confused over what we each mean by
"interfere." Whether sites are equivalent or inequivalent,
neighboring or far apart, the wave functions do not interfere
at all, in part because the odds of two x-ray photons being absorbed
by sites close to each other at nearly the same time is very very
small--if it wasn't, your material would disintegrate in an
instant!
The idea behind the path expansion used in EXAFS analysis by
ifeffit, however, is that the chi(k) for each possible scattering
event by a single electron can be computed separately, and then the
results added (I'll defer to John or Matt or whoever for a clear
explanation of why this is justified). In other words, the EXAFS
spectra can be thought of as if there were a contribution from an
electron scattering off a near-neighbor, another scattering off a
2nd-nearest-neighbor, another doing a multiple-scattering thing, etc.
(all weighted, of course, by the relative contributions of these
scattering events). These are literally just added. Given that system,
if there really are multiple sites that are each having their
own scattering events, then it is perfectly appropriate to treat them
in exactly the same way--just add. So, depending on your terminology,
either we are combining all scattering paths coherently or we are
adding none of them coherently, regardless of whether they correspond
to the same absorbing site or not. It would not be correct to
add, say, the magnitudes of the FT's for the separate
contributions...the phase of the FT indicates where the peaks and
troughs are in k-space (and thus energy-space), and it certainly
matters whether a given scattering path has enhanced or suppressed
absorption at a given energy!
Hope that helps...
--Scott Calvin
Sarah Lawrence College
P.S. I've published several analyses of systems with inequivalent
sites. If you'd like a pdf of one of those papers, let me know.
Thanks for the message. I guess
what I wanted to say was that from what I understand due to lifetime
effects the "effective" radius about the absorbing site for
which the outgoing scattered wave "exists" is on the order
of 2 nn (I have big lattice constant material). It would seem to
me then that the inequivalent sites being physically separated by more
than this distance (we are talking about crude approximations here)
would not interfere. In reality, with bond lengths
on the order of 3 Angstroms and 2nn along the lines of 4.5 Angstroms,
my case is somewhere in between the coherent interaction and the
dilute dopant -- e.g. every site is by itself -- extreme.
Certainly, in the latter case it would be wrong to add the signals
together coherently! What is the consensus for this sort of
thing? The different E0's is a good point too.
Paul