On a spectroradiometer measurement, the wavelength value is given as the middle of the bandwidth. But exept that we have a kind of gaussian shape in reality, as the curve in the bandwidth is not "horizontal" (=constant power) and not also a linear function, I am trying to find if the wavelength measured must be considered as the average wavelength${\displaystyle \overline{\lambda }}$ or the median wavelength${\displaystyle \tilde{\lambda }}$, any idea ?Malypaet (talk)09:25, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The term "average" is an umbrella term for any of several ways to capture a dispersed value with a single number, which includes thearithmetic mean (or "arithmetic average") as well as themedian. I expect the distribution of the measured wavelength of a monochromatic source to have a more or lesslog-normal distribution, in which case the expected median coincides with the expectedgeometric mean. Using the geometric mean (or the median) as the average has the advantage that the average of the frequency is proportional to the inverse of the average of the wavelength, which is not true for the arithmetic mean or themodus. Unless the spread is gigantic, however, the differences between these various averages should in practice be much smaller than the measurement error and may even vanish when rounding the values.  ​‑‑Lambiam12:32, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For a spectroradiometer the spectral bin (channel) width should be smaller than a spectral resolution element (the width of an unresolved line), so indeed it does not matter how the wavelength is defined exactly. In broad-bandphotometry one often uses the "effective wavelength" to characterise a filter; this is an average wavelength, weighted by the transmission${\displaystyle T(\lambda )}$ of the filter:

${\displaystyle {\lambda }_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{f}\mathrm{f}}=\frac{\int \lambda T(\lambda )\mathrm{d}\lambda }{\int T(\lambda )\mathrm{d}\lambda }}$. --Wrongfilter (talk)13:44, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to position the wavelength value on the curve given by Planck's law, taking into account the bandwidth and ensuring equal power in both portions of that bandwidth. But I realize that the measuring instrument, with its filter, complicates the problem and reformulates it, as you point out. Thank you very much for these explanations.Malypaet (talk)21:40, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure for the frequency, if you keep a constant wavelength bandwidth, the corresponding frequency bandwidth is a function of the wavelength:

${\displaystyle \mathrm{\Delta }\nu =\frac{c}{{\lambda }^2}\cdot \mathrm{\Delta }\lambda }$

So I don't think it's a problem.

And indeed, compared to the accuracy of a measurement, it is a negligible problem.

Before the filter, it's theory; after, it's experimental physics.

Thanks
Malypaet (talk)22:04, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The title says it all. Are there anygeneral anaesthetics that don't causedependence oraddiction?~2025-33937-00 (talk)05:22, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Etomidate is notknown to cause dependence or addiction, but there are definite indications that the potential for addiction exists.^[1]  ​‑‑Lambiam09:56, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Carbon dioxide is regularly used in entomology laboratories to anaesthetise insects: seedoi:10.1016/j.jinsphys.2006.07.001. There's no reason to think that it would be addictive. See alsoDiethyl ether#Anesthesia for some historical human anaesthetics.Mike Turnbull (talk)14:53, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article onether addiction !~2025-34243-06 (talk)11:28, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WHAAOE indeed.Mike Turnbull (talk)14:37, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BeforeEinstein, physicists wereaddicted to ether.  ​‑‑Lambiam23:25, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely to be a problem for normal indicated usage, then many are problematic for exended use. The reference desk cannot give medical advice, so consult your doctor about your concerns.~2025-32692-02 (talk)03:42, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This question does not express a concern of the questioner and can IMO not be classified as a question for advice, whether medical or otherwise. If you ask your doctor (who is most likely not specialized in anesthesiology) whether any general anesthetics don't cause dependence or addiction, they will probably need to do research to answer the question. In doing so, they may consult our reference desk.  ​‑‑Lambiam08:18, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thenitrous oxide article doesn't mention dependence or addiction, as far as I could tell from Ctrl+F; if you ignore navigational templates and references, "addic" finds nothing, and "depen" finds onlyamount released depends on which fuel (environmental impact of burning),This correlation is dose-dependent (damage from occupational exposure), andThe ignition of nitrous oxide depends critically on pressure. If the concepts are mentioned, it's via other terms that I didn't think to check.Nyttend (talk)19:52, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The dentist fromLittle Shop of Horrors would like a word. --Avocado (talk)20:03, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are good sourcesNitrous oxide - Alcohol and Drug Foundation andNitrous Oxide Addiction which suggest it has, at least, potental to cause psychological addiction or compulsive behaviour. These sources should probably be added tonitrous oxide (medication).Mike Turnbull (talk)23:17, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article says human physicists are making quark gluon plasma at CERN now. That's great but isn't the equivalent substance early in the Big Bang probably subjected to strong gravity, strong and complicated magnetic fields, and strong and complex angular momentum that would bring in more relativistic effects that the substance doesn't experience at CERN?Rich (talk)01:40, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I gotta ask. What are the non-human physicists doing?Clarityfiend (talk)04:15, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was warned not to say, unless I want to breathe vacuum.Rich (talk)06:58, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is probably the case, but we have to start somewhere. Actually creating quark soup at all and observing its physical properties are steps forward, necessary before we can begin to figure out the significance of those other factors in the Big Bang (even assuming that's possible). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195}~2025-31359-08 (talk)19:45, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Morning folks!! I was wondering if anybody knows what "healing by organisation" means in its context in 1960-1870. This is specifically for theJoseph Lister article which I'm writing. Its long I know. It will be split. I'm confused about this term. It seems to be healing by organisation in blood clots and relates to an address that Lister gave in "An Address on the Antiseptic System of Treatment in Surgery, delivered before the Medico-Chirurgical Society of Glasgow" on 17 April 1868. As a surgeon there is discussions about wound healing. I've discovered healing by "First Intention" means but not by healing by organisation. Would any medical historians have any idea?

• The collected papers of Joseph, Baron Lister Volume 2 pp=51-86.scope_creep^Talk08:33, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to ChatGPT:

“Healing by organization” is an archaic medical term used in 19th–early-20th-century pathology and surgery.

It referred to:

Definition

Healing by organization meant that damaged tissue was repaired not by regeneration of the original tissue, but by the ingrowth of granulation tissue that later matured into fibrous (scar) tissue.

In other words, the body “organized” the injury by filling it with connective tissue.

Modern terminology

Today this process is simply called:

Fibrous (scar) formation

Healing by fibrosis

Granulation tissue formation and maturation

Secondary intention healing (when referring to open wounds that must fill in from the bottom)

Historical context

Before modern histology and wound-healing science, “organization” described how:

A blood clot or inflammatory exudate becomes infiltrated by fibroblasts and capillaries.

This tissue gradually becomes dense collagenous scar tissue.~2025-34800-71 (talk)09:04, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@~2025-34800-71: I know what is now, which I didn't before, but I need proper references for the definition, so I can check the book reference.scope_creep^Talk19:57, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here you find a discussion of what Lister meant by the term. It appears that the term has not fallen into complete disuse:[2],[3],[4].  ​‑‑Lambiam23:21, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks@Lambiam: I don't know how I didn't see that last night. I must have been conked out when I was searching; on automatic. Thanks folks.scope_creep^Talk23:45, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Isthis guy (found in New England) anAgelenidae coras? If so, what species?JayCubby14:33, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming the specimen is in the genusCoras, it may be hard to identify the species from these images, because the visual differences between different species may be subtle and not displayed in these images. Case in point: the caption for the first image in our article on the genusCoras has: "Coras species,probablyC. medicinalis". Is the specimen even in this genus? If so, their anterior median eyes are larger than their anterior lateral eyes, but I doubt even this can be discerned from the available images.  ​‑‑Lambiam10:23, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia resources for researchers
• Wikipedia help forums
• Wikipedia reference desk

• Non-talk pages that are automatically signed
• Pages automatically checked for incorrect links
• Wikipedia help pages with dated sections