This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
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 Sirloin18:10, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
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-Kwang20:13, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
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)Reply
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)Reply
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
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)Reply