Thank you for the insightful lecture on fluorescence. Quick question. I have Em Ex plot of humic solution and the 2nd order Rayleigh line cuts through. How do you correct for the lost signal data in results evaluation?
It is always problematic when you have one of the scattering lines on top of your fluorescence signal. The best approach to handle this is to model the Rayleigh scatter (and there are several options here). The other, more simple approach, would be to investigate your excitation and emission profile, and then (either visually or manually) remove the scattering signal by drawing a "reasonable" interpolation between your existing fluorescence signal.
Sorry, I don' understand your comment. I am mentioning that several researchers are measuring a single excitation and emission pair. NOT that they are measuring an exact, specific wavelength.
Lol UV spectrometric methods are based on the suposition that a single wavelength is being absorbed. It is part of the noise of the instrument working in the UV region. That is why we accept the fact that there will be absorbance on a single wavelength. Excellent video, love from Colombia.
@@danielmalaver1869 Haha, you can accept what you like, mate. But nobody has ever seen a spectrum in which exactly one frequency was absorbed. Learn your lesson on bandwidth again ;-)
I wish you could also explain nmr and IR spectrometrics. Excelent for an instrumental analysis class. U r the best
Thank you very much for the nice comment.
Thank you for this invaluable content!
Very good lecture...... Thanks a lot
thank you sir
That was an extremely good presentation
Hi , can you help me please?
How can I use the synchronous scan in Rayleigh scattering method.
If you're running synchronous scan, you would normally just select a delta that is sufficiently high to get away from the Rayleigh Scatter line.
Thank you for the insightful lecture on fluorescence.
Quick question. I have Em Ex plot of humic solution and the 2nd order Rayleigh line cuts through. How do you correct for the lost signal data in results evaluation?
It is always problematic when you have one of the scattering lines on top of your fluorescence signal. The best approach to handle this is to model the Rayleigh scatter (and there are several options here). The other, more simple approach, would be to investigate your excitation and emission profile, and then (either visually or manually) remove the scattering signal by drawing a "reasonable" interpolation between your existing fluorescence signal.
Tusind tak :-)
thank you
Thank you
@ 15:21 A single wavelength? Really? In my opinion, a single wavelength can't be measured, because it isn't localized (according to Heisenberg).
Sorry, I don' understand your comment. I am mentioning that several researchers are measuring a single excitation and emission pair. NOT that they are measuring an exact, specific wavelength.
@@aarinnan "A very, very specific wave length", that's what you said. Just listen.
Lol UV spectrometric methods are based on the suposition that a single wavelength is being absorbed. It is part of the noise of the instrument working in the UV region. That is why we accept the fact that there will be absorbance on a single wavelength.
Excellent video, love from Colombia.
@@danielmalaver1869 Haha, you can accept what you like, mate. But nobody has ever seen a spectrum in which exactly one frequency was absorbed. Learn your lesson on bandwidth again ;-)
👍
informative..