Talk:Fourier-transform ion cyclotron resonance

This is a nice start!

Thanks. Is there anything more that needs to be included? It could be a whole book but then people should buy a book. A basic definition and informative basic explanation seems like all that is needed. Any suggestions?--Nick Y. 20:08, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 09:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Question
The article doesn't explain, in my view, why a packet that rotates "in phase" in the device, produces a signal of different frequencies. Is the exciting signal switched off at some point? If so, this should be stated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Just127 (talk • contribs) 08:42, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

I will modify the lead to clear that up. Paulthomas2 (talk) 12:28, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

RfC FTICR Cell Types
In ICR cell types, several users have added specific examples of Open cells over the years, but the list is not comprehensive (nor is it a list). There are many newcomers to this field, but I don't know if adding them would conform to WP:GNG. I propose that we either expand and edit the current list of cell types or remove the specific types listed in the article and make Ion cell types generic with 'open' and 'closed'. Thoughts? Paulthomas2 (talk) 12:28, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: Sorry, but as far as I can see there isn't any list that I could make out; presumably I have misunderstood. In principle however, it seems to me that unless we fall foul of the Wikilawyers, the GNG concern is mistaken. The list of non-GNG attributes should be perfectly simple to conform to, not by struggling to make the subject matter fit the definitions, but by making it fit the rest of the article. If each item in the cell list (whether in list format or not) contributes material coherently, factually and relevantly, how could that not be desirable in such an article? Of course, if some of the items are too large for the article, then those should be mentioned briefly and for the rest should be linked to in other articles that deal with them adequately, but that is a pretty routine task in editing, no? Am I missing a point? JonRichfield (talk) 18:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Is a vacuum necessary or is atmospheric pressure suitable?
According to wikipedia pages on other mass spectrometers, they need a vacuum. Is a vacuum necessary for this kind of spectrometer? or can it operate at atmospheric pressures? Would an atmospheric pressure merely add the mass spectrum of air, so that it would still be usable for heavier molecules than those in air? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.49.90.74 (talk) 20:30, 6 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Vacuum is always necessary within a mass spectrometer (MS), but an ionizer can be partially in atmospheric pressure (see: Atmospheric-pressure chemical ionization). Vacuum is needed because:


 * 1. Ions lose their charge (deionize) when they come in contact with the molecules of air. Loss of charge makes their m/z impossible to measure.


 * 2. Even if the sample ions wouldn't deionize from the get go (in an imaginary world), they would be hitting the air molecules. These constant collisions would make it hard to guide the ions consistently within the MS. The ions would be moving pretty much randomly. Thus any meaningful m/z measurement would be impossible.


 * 2. Even if the sample ions wouldn't deionize and move randomly from the get go (in an imaginary world), they could break apart (fragment) if they hit air or other molecules fast enough. This could mess up measurements, but sometimes small amounts of noble gasses are intentially made to collide with the ions intended to be measured. This fragments the ions (see: Fragmentation (mass spectrometry) and Collision-induced_dissociation). Noble gasses can't deionize sample ions. 5-HT2AR (talk) 16:55, 22 January 2020 (UTC)