Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Stanford Bioengineer Develops a 50-cent Paper Microscope

Posted by Unknown on from the check-out-those-microbes dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Scope: A Stanford bioengineer has developed an ultra-low-cost print-and-fold microscope and is now showing others how to make one themselves. The 50-cent lightweight, paper 'Foldscope' — which 'can be assembled in minutes, [and] includes no mechanical moving parts' — was designed to aid disease diagnosis in developing regions." The paper describing the design is on arXiv, and a video demoing the microscope is attached below.

83 comments

  1. Lenses too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Paper lenses would be a neat trick.

    1. Re:Lenses too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cheap spherical glass beads will work as the lens. These are far cheaper to make than a fancy pants lens.

    2. Re:Lenses too? by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Informative

      The one shown in the video uses pinhole projection.

    3. Re:Lenses too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on the frequency I guess. You can make lenses out of wax for microwaves...

  2. Also a recent TED talk by canadiannomad · · Score: 4, Informative

    Also a recent TED talk on the topic

    --
    Hmm, the humour and sarcasm seem to have been be lost on you.
  3. Not entirely made out of paper, of course. by Rhymoid · · Score: 4, Informative
    FTA:

    The Foldscope design accommodates different optical configurations, including spherical ball lenses, spherical micro-lens doublets (such as a Wollaston doublet), and more complex assemblies of aspheric micro-lenses.

  4. Summary of Thread by The+Cat · · Score: 4, Funny

    1. It will never work.
    2. Big fuckin deal. Made one myself over breakfast last week.
    3. Biology is a worthless major.
    4. At least 68 replies starting with the word "Actually"
    5. This is proof there's no God.
    6. Shut up teabagger
    7. Fuck beta
    8. I'm competing to be the world's biggest talking penis
    9. Four PhDs? No wonder you're a dumbfuck
    10. Someone dropped a bulldozer on your car? The problem is you.

    1. Re:Summary of Thread by bob_super · · Score: 4, Funny

      11. Useless because I can't use it to do heart surgery or Si lithography
      12. Will be destroyed by a patent from Big Optics
      13. How many bitcoins?

    2. Re:Summary of Thread by John+Bokma · · Score: 1

      14. In xxx microscope develops you And I think "last week" in #2 should be "10 years ago" ;-)

      --

      Perl Programmer for hire
    3. Re:Summary of Thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...you forgot "smug hipster irrelevantly commenting about other comments before they are commented."

      Which, of course, has never been done before.

    4. Re:Summary of Thread by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      1. It will never work.

      Looks like someone's got the Mondays!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    5. Re:Summary of Thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah! 50 cent isn't worth 2 bits as a musician, but at least his paper microscope will do some good! :D

    6. Re:Summary of Thread by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      15. How often do we get to hear about it? I read about it on $otherpage $time ago.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:Summary of Thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      16. Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!

    8. Re:Summary of Thread by drkim · · Score: 4, Funny

      17. Oblig. XKCD:
      http://xkcd.com/860/

    9. Re:Summary of Thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      40 years ago, apparently. There's at least one "we did this in the 70s" already.

    10. Re:Summary of Thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      #soylentNewsFTW

    11. Re:Summary of Thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You all forgot the best one.

      18. Why are they wasting money on this instead of curing cancer?

    12. Re:Summary of Thread by OakDragon · · Score: 1

      This is really the only Slashdot post I'll ever need again.

      --
      Dark Reflection
    13. Re:Summary of Thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      18. Oblig. Far Side:
      http://media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/82/f4/7d/82f47d72afa03dc058eb0c0679f20b14.jpg

    14. Re:Summary of Thread by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      18. Oblig. Far Side:
      Far Side Cartoon

    15. Re:Summary of Thread by genner · · Score: 1

      1. It will never work. 2. Big fuckin deal. Made one myself over breakfast last week. 3. Biology is a worthless major. 4. At least 68 replies starting with the word "Actually" 5. This is proof there's no God. 6. Shut up teabagger 7. Fuck beta 8. I'm competing to be the world's biggest talking penis 9. Four PhDs? No wonder you're a dumbfuck 10. Someone dropped a bulldozer on your car? The problem is you.

      Well that covers everything. Get the lights on the way out.

  5. Thank you come again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fella is an indian . For you racist slashdotters .

    1. Re:Thank you come again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah yeah .. when its convenient they are ..

    2. Re:Thank you come again by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      no, indians are from india the country on the indian continent, making them indians. You're lack of geographical knowledge pegs you as USian.

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    3. Re:Thank you come again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, indians are from India, the country on the Asian continent, making them indians. Your lack of geographical knowledge pegs you as USian.

      FTFY.

    4. Re:Thank you come again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      India, the country on the Eurasia continent. Where is the sea between Asia and Europe?

  6. Concentrate on the optics, forget about the paper by n7ytd · · Score: 1

    This is very cool.
    The magic and complexity seems to be all in the optic path; if they're forming a carrier tape with a special cavity to carry the lens, maybe they should focus (ha!) on also putting the LED on that carrier and controlling the dimensions of that small piece such it it can be held directly against a slide and remove the need for laser-cut paper and controlling the focal distance during folding and assembly of the paper. Then a reel of the optical "guts" could be produced and shipped.

    But then again, I could just be a random stranger on the Internet talking out of my ass.

  7. How to get the lenses by invictusvoyd · · Score: 1

    Where/how does one get the lenses ? The video looked like an ad .

    1. Re:How to get the lenses by pz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you read the article (I know, I know) you'll learn that he uses industrial grit, also known as glass beads, which are tiny bits of glass that are reasonably spherical and ridiculously cheap. The quoted lens cost in the article is $0.17, but unless I'm misunderstanding something, like how special the grit is that he's using, or what kind of secondary selection process is required to pick out beads that will make good lenses, that should be closer to 0.17 cents, not 0.17 dollars.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    2. Re:How to get the lenses by TeknoHog · · Score: 2

      If you read the article (I know, I know) you'll learn that he uses industrial grit

      I think the questions on every Slashdotter's mind now are:

      1. Are the grits hot?
      2. Can I pour them down my pants?
      3. Where is Natalie Portman when you need her?
      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
    3. Re:How to get the lenses by pz · · Score: 1

      Feh. So the news article says he's using industrial grit. The presumably more authoritative arXiv paper states

      Ball Lenses.
      The ball lenses used in constructing Foldscopes included material types borosilicate, BK7 borosilicate, sapphire, ruby, and S-LAH79. The vendors included Swiss Jewel Co, Edmund Optics, and Winsted Precision Ball. Part numbers for some select lenses include: 300m sapphire lens from Swiss Jewel Co. (Model B0.30S), 200m sapphire lenses from Swiss Jewel Co. (Model B0.20S), 2.4mm borosilicate lenses from Winsted Precision Ball (P/N 3200940F1ZZ00A0), 300m BK7 borosilicate lenses from Swiss Jewel Co. (Model BK7-0.30S), and 1.0mm BK7 borosilicate lenses from Swiss Jewel Co. (Model BK7-1.00). Note that half-ball lenses from both Edmund Optics and Swiss Jewel Co. were also tested for use as condenser lenses for the LEDs.

      So they aren't exactly industrial grit, but very tiny lenses that look like they were originally intended for the telecommunications industry. The question of how does one get these lenses is answered by, "pick up the phone and call one of the listed suppliers who specialize in micro-spheres of clear, hard stuff."

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    4. Re:How to get the lenses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read the arxiv.org article, and it says there that they are buying optical lenses:

      Ball Lenses. The ball lenses used in constructing Foldscopes included material types borosilicate, BK7
      borosilicate, sapphire, ruby, and S-LAH79. The vendors included Swiss Jewel Co, Edmund Optics, and
      Winsted Precision Ball. Part numbers for some select lenses include: 300 [micrometer] sapphire lens from Swiss
      Jewel Co. (Model B0.30S), 200 [micrometer] sapphire lenses from Swiss Jewel Co. (Model B0.20S), 2.4mm
      borosilicate lenses from Winsted Precision Ball (P/N 3200940F1ZZ00A0), 300 [micrometer] BK7 borosilicate lenses
      from Swiss Jewel Co. (Model BK7-0.30S), and 1.0mm BK7 borosilicate lenses from Swiss Jewel Co.
      (Model BK7-1.00). Note that half-ball lenses from both Edmund Optics and Swiss Jewel Co. were also
      tested for use as condenser lenses for the LEDs.

      Note: I had to replace their abbreviation for micrometers because Slashdot support for Unicode totally sucks. I put square brackets around my change.

      These sound like they are totally worth the $0.17 they cost... better than just "reasonably spherical". If you want a usable microscope at 2000x, you will need precision lenses.

  8. Can build paper microscope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can build paper microscope, but can't figure out how to master audio properly. The dialog is panned way left. Why are video editors so bad at audio?

    1. Re:Can build paper microscope by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Can build paper microscope, but can't figure out how to master audio properly. The dialog is panned way left. Why are video editors so bad at audio?

      I could tell you, but that would start a Windows versus OSX war.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    2. Re:Can build paper microscope by Jmc23 · · Score: 1

      Are they? Maybe they're really good but laptop manufacturers are really bad at speaker placement?

      --
      Don't complain about syntax, grammar, or spelling. There is no.hell like input on android.
    3. Re:Can build paper microscope by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      'cause all the money they had went into the product and nothing was left for the PR department?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. http://www.foldscope.com/ by steveha · · Score: 4, Informative

    They have a website devoted to this:

    http://www.foldscope.com/

    And the news on the web site is that they will give away 10,000 of these to people who volunteer to test them. If you think you could do a good job of testing, maybe you should sign up.

    http://www.foldscope.com/#/10ksignup/

    To me, the most impressive part is that he claims they have very accurate focusing. I believe he said "micron" focusing. I'm not sure how that works, but the paper is cut to a very accurate shape (the video showed some sort of computer-controlled cutter, it might even have been a laser cutter). By moving a tab I guess the paper can be made to flex predictably to focus the lens?

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    1. Re:http://www.foldscope.com/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      To me, the most impressive part is that he claims they have very accurate focusing. I believe he said "micron" focusing. I'm not sure how that works, but the paper is cut to a very accurate shape (the video showed some sort of computer-controlled cutter, it might even have been a laser cutter).

      The device being used to "draw" the lines *and* cut the paper in the video is an Epilog laser engraver. Hint: Not cheap (5-digit USD range).

    2. Re:http://www.foldscope.com/ by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      If all you're going to do is cut paper, then a simple home-made laser cutter made from old inkjet printers and fitted with a Blu-ray diode would be more than enough.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    3. Re:http://www.foldscope.com/ by mattr · · Score: 1

      800 NANOMETER resolution due to
      fascinating optics holding a glass
      sphere up to your eye can obtain
      2000x magnification! Woohoo!
      Check out the website and arxiv pdf.
      He uses origami techniques to
      structurally engineer the paper to
      compensate for buckling among other things.
      Awesomeness!

    4. Re:http://www.foldscope.com/ by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      If you're making high-five-digit numbers of these microscopes - and the test run itself is into that range - that only raises the cost from $0.50 to $1.50.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    5. Re:http://www.foldscope.com/ by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      To me, the most impressive part is that he claims they have very accurate focusing. I believe he said "micron" focusing. I'm not sure how that works, but the paper is cut to a very accurate shape (the video showed some sort of computer-controlled cutter, it might even have been a laser cutter).

      The device being used to "draw" the lines *and* cut the paper in the video is an Epilog laser engraver. Hint: Not cheap (5-digit USD range).

      If you're making high-five-digit numbers of these microscopes - and the test run itself is into that range - that only raises the cost from $0.50 to $1.50.

      Or, you go for the traditional printing press which you can use a standard offset print with die-cut and die-mark techniques. At 50,000 copies, this is an extremely cost-efficient way of making the things, uses no special technology (printing presses and die cutters are readily available at your bulk print shop).

      We traditionally use them to produce the fancy boxes you see for packaging of products - boxes, displays, etc.

      That's what makes this cool - there's no real fancy technology needed, and aside from minor setup costs, it's really, really, really efficient. The printers can even remove the excess paper, leaving you with just the cut out parts (though if you go this way, they can even nest the pieces so you can use a sheet roll of cardboard with very little waste).

      Why use fancy laser cutters and such when the technology and means to mass produce them cheaply already exists?

    6. Re:http://www.foldscope.com/ by davewoods · · Score: 1

      Why use fancy laser cutters and such when the technology and means to mass produce them cheaply already exists?

      Because things need to be incredibly precise. I asked the same question initially, but there is no way I could ever cut the pieces out precisely enough to be usable, even with a precision knife (Exacto, etc)

    7. Re:http://www.foldscope.com/ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why use fancy laser cutters

      Well, for one thing, they are still in the prototyping stage. It seems likely that when they get into the mass-production stage, someone will find a way to do without the laser cutter.

      They did say cost of goods was around fifty cents. That's not including cost to manufacture. Currently an expensive laser cutter is involved and the microscope is assembled by hand, but I expect both of those to change when they start mass production.

      Once mass production really gets going and cranking out these microscopes by the millions, maybe the entire cost including cost to manufacture will be about the same as the cost of goods now.

  10. Thank you come again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The fella is an indian"

    Indians are americans.

  11. A tip of the hat to Leeuwenhoek. by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is EXTREMELY cool. But it seems to me they might have given a tip of the hat to Antony van Leeuwenhoek, who developed spherical glass microscope lenses in the late 1600s. Well, I see their paper does: "Although the use of high-curvature miniature lenses traces back to Antony van Leeuwenhoek's seminal discovery of microbial life forms (8), manufacturing micro-lenses in bulk was not possible until recently."

    --

    "How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!

    1. Re:A tip of the hat to Leeuwenhoek. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I keep typing "man 8 microbial-life-forms" but I get nothing. I think you have the wrong man page number...

    2. Re:A tip of the hat to Leeuwenhoek. by Nimey · · Score: 1

      That's probably in section 5.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    3. Re:A tip of the hat to Leeuwenhoek. by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 0

      Try " apropos milf "

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
  12. Why not put them out in schools ? by slincolne · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The developing world chant always gets sympathy, but what about the potential benefit in schools ?

    I can remember in school the problem getting accessed (more students than microscopes) and with these schools could give them to students.

    Not only are they useful in class, but potentially they might get students interested in looking a the wider world!

    It would also potentially drive someone to mass market them - laser cut them in school and fix in the lense (or worst case outsource the manufacturing to China)

    1. Re:Why not put them out in schools ? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      we did in the 70s, we made lenses out of glass rods melted to have bead with "thread" for mounting. and doesn't have the hassle of needing to put industrial grit into a tumbler to make polished spheres like this article's

      I swear, I'm old enough to see shit get re-invented again and again, a little bit worse each iteration

    2. Re:Why not put them out in schools ? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      Same goes for clothes, music, movies, TV shows, videogames.

      I can't wait to play BurgerTime 2014: Revenge of the Pickles for the Playstation 5.

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    3. Re:Why not put them out in schools ? by esten · · Score: 5, Informative

      but what about the potential benefit in schools ?

      The kids do love them. And can assemble them by themselves.

      I'm a Stanford PhD student and for an outreach organization Science Bus we actually worked with 2-5th graders locally to each build their own microscope to keep. The Foldscope works well and actually found the projection ability great in the classroom so that multiple students can see the same thing at once.

    4. Re:Why not put them out in schools ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you misread that paragraph

      These poppy-seed-sized lenses where originally mass produced in various sizes as an abrasive grit that was thrown into industrial tumblers to knock the rough edges off metal parts.

      The lenses _were_ the grit, so I gather their production was significantly less effort than that...

    5. Re:Why not put them out in schools ? by mattr · · Score: 1

      If you woild read the site before
      commenting you would see schools
      are also targeted.
      Of course it is mote important to
      save lives though wouldn't you agree?

    6. Re:Why not put them out in schools ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we did in the 70s, we made lenses out of glass rods melted to have bead with "thread" for mounting. and doesn't have the hassle of needing to put industrial grit into a tumbler to make polished spheres like this article's

      I swear, I'm old enough to see shit get re-invented again and again, a little bit worse each iteration

      It's called "mass production", and it involves finding the most efficient and cheap way of producing a product that achieves the required task acceptably well. The complicated part in most current microscope manufacture is the glasswork. Melting your rods would have been relatively labour-intensive compared to using extremely mass produced spherical glass beads.

    7. Re:Why not put them out in schools ? by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      nonsense, as soon as you invoke mass production the fact is extremely cheap real and *properly* shaped convex lenses can be made from glass for a penny a pop, that would exceed by far the abilities of this article's tumbled grit.

      the article and its device make no sense, they're nonsense

  13. Developing countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This microscope is sure to bring the warlords, kleptocrats and imams to heel.

  14. Re:Concentrate on the optics, forget about the pap by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

    But then again, I could just be a random stranger on the Internet talking out of my ass.

    You know who else talked out of his ass? Ace Ventura, pet detective.

    --
    Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  15. The real benefit is ... by TrollstonButterbeans · · Score: 1

    Take this technology and make 50 cent eyeglasses for children in third world countries.

    This idea is on to something!

    --
    Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
    1. Re:The real benefit is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it is actually harder to make corrective glasses than a magnifying device out of tiny glass beads. Certainly it is harder to make custom glasses for each person's prescription rather than making a mass-produced gadget that does one thing.

      Also, it's hard to think that corrective lenses are "the real benefit" compared to effective treatment of malaria. Malaria is pretty bad news.

    2. Re:The real benefit is ... by Mikkeles · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but if you have corrective lenses, then you can see the malaria coming and get out of the way!

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    3. Re:The real benefit is ... by jfengel · · Score: 1

      Step 2 would have to be "flood the world with extra light", because a pinhole camera does a great job of focusing but doesn't bring in a lot of light.

      That said... pinhole eyeglasses are a real thing. They're mostly quackery, aimed at reducing the amount of light from a computer display screen and supposedly "strengthening the eye", but that's rubbish.

    4. Re:The real benefit is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are not pinhole cameras. Whoever said that was mistaken.

      If you go to arxiv.org and download their paper, you can read about the actual lenses. Here's the most relevant paragraph:

      Ball Lenses. The ball lenses used in constructing Foldscopes included material types borosilicate, BK7
      borosilicate, sapphire, ruby, and S-LAH79. The vendors included Swiss Jewel Co, Edmund Optics, and
      Winsted Precision Ball. Part numbers for some select lenses include: 300 [micrometer] sapphire lens from Swiss
      Jewel Co. (Model B0.30S), 200 [micrometer] sapphire lenses from Swiss Jewel Co. (Model B0.20S), 2.4mm
      borosilicate lenses from Winsted Precision Ball (P/N 3200940F1ZZ00A0), 300 [micrometer] BK7 borosilicate lenses
      from Swiss Jewel Co. (Model BK7-0.30S), and 1.0mm BK7 borosilicate lenses from Swiss Jewel Co.
      (Model BK7-1.00). Note that half-ball lenses from both Edmund Optics and Swiss Jewel Co. were also
      tested for use as condenser lenses for the LEDs.

      Note: I had to replace their abbreviation for micrometers because Slashdot support for Unicode totally sucks. I put square brackets around my change.

  16. I kept waiting until the end by paiute · · Score: 1

    That was one of the least satisfying technical videos I have seen lately. And tie your shoes, man.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    1. Re:I kept waiting until the end by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      damn hippies...!!!??

  17. Resin lenses ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    Talking about lenses ... has anyone invented lenses made from clear resin ?

    Resins are cheap and easy to mould. It shouldn't be too hard to make lenses out of resins.

    Plus there are some types of resins with the ability to absorb/refract part of the light frequencies, making them suitable to become "light filter", filtering out part of the light spectrum.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Resin lenses ? by Goaway · · Score: 1

      Of course. Check your closest piece of optical equipment and see if it brags about being aspherical. In that case, it probably contains resin lens elements.

    2. Re:Resin lenses ? by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      Not just resin. We have been molding glass aspherical lenses for sometime with high precision and relatively cheaply. You would need a fairly largish aspheric for it to be ground these days, and even then they probably start by molding it first.

  18. This guy by vikingpower · · Score: 1

    merits an engineering prize.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:This guy by zlives · · Score: 1

      i read it as an engineering pizza. i am down for that

  19. 50 cents, per use.... by danknight48 · · Score: 2

    “I wanted to make the best possible disease-detection instrument that we could almost distribute for free,”

    And without any doubt.
    Unless "3rd world" countries spend 50 cents to create a new one each time, those diseases will be distributed for free.

    1. Re:50 cents, per use.... by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      I'm picturing you just waving your arms at your keyboard and slurring "cyniiicisssssm" here. You did actually read the article, yes? Oh, I can answer that: no, you didn't.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    2. Re:50 cents, per use.... by danknight48 · · Score: 1

      I'm picturing you just waving your arms at your keyboard and slurring "cyniiicisssssm" here. You did actually read the article, yes? Oh, I can answer that: no, you didn't.

      cost = 50 cents
      item = paper
      Final Product = non-reusable
      3rd world countries will be forced to reuse item = diseases transferred on paper

      You dont even need to read the article to suss that out, its basic logic.

  20. Incredible... but by bmajik · · Score: 1

    If the point is to look for pathogens in other peoples fluids...

    well, I'm not real excited about holding the thing mm from my eye :)

    (somehow having a giant metal/glass column as a buffer seems less creepy)

    --
    My opinions are my own, and do not necessarily represent those of my employer.
  21. Very cool! Similar is a 3D printed one by WillAdams · · Score: 1

    using mirrors and lenses from disposable cameras:

    http://www.thingiverse.com/thi...

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  22. 50 cents + tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure the microscope is 50 cents.

    But the tools to make it are probably closer to 50 thousand dollars.

    1. Re:50 cents + tools by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      So what?

      You are distributing the microscope not the tools to make it.

  23. I did! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1.- Use $20 phone for actual phone calls
    2.- Stop trying to impress people with the same bloated thing that everyone already has
    3.- Use the pc at home, free pc lab in school and any pc I want at work

  24. I invented a paper baseball bat by dosun88888 · · Score: 1

    Step 1: get a baseball bat
    Step 2: wrap it with paper

  25. Image of it in use by Verdatum · · Score: 2

    I had to do far too much wandering about to find a simple image of the thing as it is to be used. Hope this helps someone: http://imgur.com/RzvY6nf