Talk:Frequency addition source of optical radiation
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.jpg){kind=small}
Notability?
[edit]I am really puzzled about where this term FASOR came from. I have never heard of lasers generated by NLO being called anything other than lasers. I think someone just made the term up. If you do a google search for "Frequency Addition Source of Optical Radiation" you get only the wikipedia articles and one publication in a conference proceeding (Advances in Adaptive Optics II. Edited by Ellerbroek, Brent L.; Bonaccini Calia, Domenico. Proceedings of the SPIE, Volume 6272, pp. 62721L (2006)). So hmmm... maybe we need to think about proposing this article for deletion? Comments? --Chuck Sirloin 18:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- The description makes sense, but I didn't consider notability. I created this article because I thought the elaborate descriptions with all articles that included Image:Starfield Optical Range - sodium laser.jpg and in laser were not in place there. I believe the image description originally stated that it was a dye laser, which turned out to be wrong. I think Deglr6328 (talk · contribs) digged up the information, as in this edit. Maybe Deglr6328 knows more. If you are right, it might be more appropriate to put it at the image description, or maybe at the starfire optical range page. Han-Kwang 20:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Equation
[edit]Why is that formula written in that way . Is it to impress people ? maybe for simpler people like me you can write lambda = lambda1 + lambda2 doesn't that make the world a lot simpler ? 80.255.247.57 (talk) 07:06, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- It would be much simpler, but not correct. If l1=l2=500, the equation in the article produces l=1/(1/500+1/500)=250, but in your proposal l=500+500=1000 which is obviously not the same thing. Han-Kwang (t) 10:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Advantages?
[edit]What are the advantages of frequency addition? Why not immediately produce the desired frequency? For example, since the target frequency is supposed to excite sodium atoms, it is conceivable that it can also be produced using sodium vapor.--2003:4:F010:2:0:0:0:2 (talk) 14:23, 18 August 2017 (UTC)