User talk:Phyczz

Welcome!
Hello, Phyczz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! --Srleffler (talk) 04:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Gaussian beam
Hi Phyczz. I saw your edit to Gaussian beam. The equation is supported by a reference: Equation (5) in that reference agrees with the version in the article, and contradicts your change. It looks like you missed the factor of $$\exp\left(-\frac{r^2}{w^2(z)}\right)$$, which is included in the equation given in the article, and which probably isn't in whatever source you are looking at. Even if you had done it correctly, I don't see writing the equation in terms of q as an improvement. R and w are clearer and easier to interpret.

If you reply here, I will see your response.--Srleffler (talk) 04:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I checked the reference you mentioned, and found that I was wrong. I did miss the factor of $$\exp\left(-\frac{r^2}{w^2(z)}\right)$$.Then I changed q(z) to R(z) and add $$\exp\left(-\frac{r^2}{w^2(z)}\right)$$ in my matlab program for calculating Laguerre Gaussian field, it gave the same answer as before. Thank you! --phyczz 07:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)