Open JamesJieranShen opened 8 months ago
It looks like these generic scintillator materials are not implemented well, or are out-of-date. For example, are these values used anywhere?
https://github.com/rat-pac/ratpac-two/blob/8883adc556ec714fc6b129ad76f6378a7ed2ba0b/ratdb/OPTICS.ratdb#L444-L449
It may be best these materials, and replace them with a single material "scintillator" with properties that come from documented, publically available measurements (perhaps for LAB).
See: https://github.com/rat-pac/ratpac-two/blob/8883adc556ec714fc6b129ad76f6378a7ed2ba0b/ratdb/OPTICS.ratdb#L426-L436C1
This is undefined behavior. I think pseudocumene is a solvent that does not scintillate itself. In that case, the re-emission probability should be removed.