Talk:Spectral line shape

Incomprehensible
In the section "Lifetime broadening" is written: "As the excited state decays exponentially in time ..." What exactly disintegrates? The electron? The entire atom? The energy? What is the decay product? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810D:AF3F:EC88:599C:9DD6:F9D5:170C (talk) 14:18, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Natural lifetime broadening?
Suggestion: For Origins and instances, mention natural lifetime broadening before pressure broadening. Both are Lorentzian but the natural lifetime is for an unperturbed atom or molecule so should be first. Dirac66 (talk) 01:28, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Organization
I think reordering the sections was a good move. Now, the chicken-and-egg problem can be fixed by removing references to the line shape models in Spectroscopic line shape. The following section could be renamed "Models for line shape", and the discussion of each line shape could begin with a physical process, move to the statistical model for it, and then finally describe the line shape. For example, the Lorentzian could start with atoms radiating with equal probability and then describe the statistical models for the time domain and frequency domain. Similarly, the Gaussian could start with a discussion of thermal processes and continue with normal distributions. Finally, there could be a general description of how different contributions can be combined by convolution, leading to the specific example of the Voigt line shape. RockMagnetist (talk) 18:14, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * These are interesting suggestions. They indicate the importance of the subject. Unfortunately I don't have the expertise to implement them. I wrote this article to fill a glaring hole in WP coverage which became apparent when working on Vibronic spectroscopy, Rotational-vibrational spectroscopy, and Rotational spectroscopy. It had to be a broad-brushh approach as I am not familiar with the physics, having been concerned, in my research, only with applications in chemistry. Petergans (talk) 08:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Proximity broadening?
Does anyone have a good reference for proximity broadening? It would be nice to add which line shape is the correct one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.133.8.114 (talk) 09:58, 15 April 2015