Slashdot Mirror
Caltech Shows Off a Lensless, Miniaturized Microscope
DeviceGuru writes "Caltech claims its researchers have 'turned science fiction into reality' with their development of a single-chip microscope. Although it doesn't have any lenses, the device is said to provide magnification comparable to that of sophisticated optical microscopes. The microscope's magnifying capabilities derive from a technology known as microfluidics, which is based on the channeling of fluid flow at incredibly small scales. Applications for the so-called 'optofluidic microscope' are expected to include field analysis of blood samples for malaria, or checking water supplies for giardia and other pathogens. The project's director thinks devices based on it could be implanted directly into the human body, in order to help arrest the spread of cancer." There's also coverage of the microscope at EE Times.
It's "Caltech", not "Cal Tech".
The coin in the photo is actually a dime, not a quarter as is indicated in the text.
All of the images are then pieced together to create a surprisingly precise two-dimensional picture of the object.
So how much of this device is really software on a much larger device like a laptop?
How many Washington quarter noses will fit in a Library of Congress?
Could they have just used millimeters?
love is just extroverted narcissism
I didn't know you'd only need a microscope to stop cancer...
They're trying to turn your own body into a police state, you just let them go after the "rogue" cancer cells, but then it will be the normal cancer cells, and then they'll start profiling against any minority cell, and soon enough every cell will be living in fear of their screening chip overlords.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Suspicious that they couldn't include an example of the images this thing is capable of taking. If I'm going to be using a microscope, I'm going to want it to be able to, you know, SCOPE.
Also suspicious: the "motivation". FTFA
Guh?!? Very little change?
Electron microscope- 1931
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_microscope
Phase contrast-1930's
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phase_contrast_microscopy
Fluorescence microscopy- I don't know but well after the 16th century
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorescence_microscopy
Confocal microscopy- 1957
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confocal_microscopy
2 photon microscopy-1960?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-photon_excitation_microscopy
Total internal reflection fluorescence microscope- also don't know, at least after fluorescence microscopy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_internal_reflection_fluorescence_microscope
Inverted microscope- I don't know, but not too old
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_microscope
And considering the 16th century microscopes had but one lens and no artifical light sources, you won't find anything similar to that in a modern day lab.
http://www.az-microscope.on.ca/history.htm
a micro-microscope?
Nope, I'm working on a project with these kinds of devices and the throughput of the microfluidic channel is not sufficient to work in your bloodstream (and I doubt they have enough channels in a small enough space). You could take a tiny portion of your blood and run it through the device, but if you're looking for rouge cancer cells to zap then this would not prove effective.
hmm but if they also go after excess fat cells I just might make a deal.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Just because it's not built from glass (which some may argue is also a liquid) does not make it any less of a lens.
It's not lensless, it's a different kind of lens.
I expected a new microscope to have some pictures to show...
No sig today...
Well, the first part of my post, upon further inspection, is incorrect. It's poor reporting on the part of "device guru" to not include examples, but the researchers themselves do provide a nice picture of a c.elegans in one of the links. Called that one a bit early.
So... sorry guys at caltech/ cal tech, if you happen to be reading. And guys from "device guru," shame on you (doesn't excuse me though.)
There are lots of applications for a $10 fluid microscope chip.
- Restaurants. You could pour a few drops of your soup, or drink, or meat juice, into your cell phone gadget and it will tell you if there are nasty critters.
- Hospitals. Medical workers can do preliminary blood screenings at admission time--just do a thumb prick, and get a urine sample, and they can discover proteins, various microbes, cell counts (perhaps). This info can go right into the (electronic) chart before the patient has even finished filling out the paperwork.
- Home. Self-diagnosis kits. Test water for microorganisms. Other stuff I can't think of, probably--science kits, for example.
I notice this project is funded by DARPA. Another cool, practical invention from that amazing agency with a tiny budget. Who says you need to throw billions of dollars at a project to get incredible results? If anything, DARPA proves that the opposite is generally true.
it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
Calcutta Technical Institute is a fine school.
I drank what? -- Socrates
So does this mean that if I jam my finger on a piece of wood I can send one of these microscope things in looking for splinter cells?
Homonyms are fun!
You're driving your car, but they're riding their bikes there.