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.

Comments

Re:Practical Applications

[GameboyRMH]

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.

Examples? And blatantly wrong about history

[philspear]

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

Our research is motivated by the fact that microscopes have been around since the 16th century, and yet their basic design has undergone very little change and has proven prohibitively expensive to miniaturize

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

Re:Argh

[Anonymous Coward]

It's "Caltech", not "Cal Tech".

Yes, exactly. I'm an alumnus. Often when I say, "it's Caltech, not Cal Tech," people look at me funny. By way of explanation, I carry on, "it's a private institution, not part of the UC system." If they continue to have crossed eyes, then, "look, Berkley is Cal Berkley because it's really the University of California at Berkley, Davis is Cal Davis because it's the University of California at Davis, and the same is true for for UCLA, UCSF, UC Irvine, UCSB, etc., but Caltech is the California Institute of Technology, not part of the UC system." By this time, they've either walked away, or have written me off as a total loon, but the point has been made: Caltech, not Cal Tech.

Slashdot editors, please take note.

It's Berkeley, not Berkley.