Talk:Attenuation length

This is an interesting piece indeed. I was an electronics technician in the USAF many years ago, but I have never heard of that before. --TracyRenee 11:48, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Though I'm not familiar with the term attenuation length either, I saw it written in some paper about scintillators used for PET. So the term seems to be in use. --84.56.12.216 15:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've got the impression that the attenuation length is closely releated to the linear attenuation coefficient, which has an own article. Probably the two articles should be cross-referenced or better yet merged. Is there some expert who can clarify on this, and make the relation of the attenuation length and the linear attenuation coefficient explicit? --84.56.12.216 15:35, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

attenuation length is definitely used, e.g. in XPS (Photoelectron spectroscopy), Reference: E. Paparazzo, G.M. Ingo: Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phenomena, 95, (1998), 301-304., talking about the possible probing depth of XPS rays (in the order of 5-35 Angstroems, depending on material properties. --84.56.12.216 13:08, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At least for X-rays I have understood it as beeing synonymous with penetration depth. From these two articles it seems like penetration depth is only used for electromagnetic radiation while attenuation length does not have this restriction and could be used with other particles also. In most cases I don't think that generalization would work as easily as it is presented here. Other particles than photons usually do not follow the Beer-Lambert law (see e.g. Particle therapy). My suggestion is thus a merge with the penetration depth article. As it looks now that would mean turning this article into a redirect and mention attenuation length as a synonym in the penetration depth article. Any thoughts on this? Ulflund (talk) 20:12, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]