Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Zorlin
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 2:31 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Zorlin » Thu Jan 07, 2010 5:28 pm UTC

Via: http://blog.makezine.com/archive/2010/0 ... scopy.html
Spoiler:
Image
Image
Pardon me while I go chemistry geek. It has recently come to my attention that Leo Gross and co-workers at IBM Research in Switzerland have developed a special atomic-force microscopy technique that can image actual molecules with enough resolution to "see" individual bonds and hydrogen atoms. Shown uppermost is a computer-generated model of the pentacene molecule, and below it, an actual image from the microscope. The microscope's probe is tipped with a single molecule of carbon monoxide. Unbelievable.
Mysterious wizard rabbit of unknown proportions.

Check out #xkcd-hugs movie night! Watch movies with your fellow xkcdians.

Meaux_Pas wrote:You're all mad.

User avatar
Velict
Posts: 609
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 9:07 pm UTC
Location: Icecrown Citadel

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Velict » Thu Jan 07, 2010 5:33 pm UTC

This is really, really cool.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Dauric » Thu Jan 07, 2010 5:53 pm UTC

Very terribly cool. It's awesome to be able to actually see one of those chemistry-class wooden and spring models of molecules does look like the real thing (well if you're half asleep and looking at it through half-closed eyes still blinking out the gunk...)
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
Zorlin
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 2:31 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Zorlin » Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:09 pm UTC

The image is blurry as hell, but as the technology matures it may get a little better. Either way - I'm amazed that they pulled this off. I was pretty much taught in Chemistry that it's impossible to photograph an atom because of obvious reasons.

This page, which was linked in the original post but perhaps hard to see, has a video and some more details. Apparently this was in August or so of last year.
Mysterious wizard rabbit of unknown proportions.

Check out #xkcd-hugs movie night! Watch movies with your fellow xkcdians.

Meaux_Pas wrote:You're all mad.

User avatar
Darkscull
Posts: 798
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 10:46 am UTC
Location: Now where I want to be

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Darkscull » Thu Jan 07, 2010 6:27 pm UTC

Zorlin wrote:I was pretty much taught in Chemistry that it's impossible to photograph an atom because of obvious reasons.


You were taught correctly (which is probably a first in the history of science in education, unless you mean at degree level), since this is not a photograph.

If it is what I think it is, the tip (a single CO molecule, awesome) scans over an area and detects whether there is charge at a point or not, and builds up the picture that way.

I will be very surprised if the image posted is actually what the probe saw. It seems more likely that the presence of bonds was assumed from certain patterns in the data and they were therefore drawn in.
Physicists do it in an excited state.
m/bi/UK/Ⓐ/chaotic good
b. 1988 d. 20xx

Walter.Horvath
Posts: 933
Joined: Fri May 15, 2009 11:33 pm UTC
Location: Orlando, FL

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Walter.Horvath » Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:20 pm UTC

Holy shit! I'm sure this serves a purpose, but all I can think of so far is how cool it is.

2010 is the future :D

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Dauric » Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:32 pm UTC

Walter.Horvath wrote:Holy shit! I'm sure this serves a purpose, but all I can think of so far is how cool it is.

2010 is the future :D


Molecular manipulation. If you're looking at technologies that would potentially allow us to fabricate molecules from raw elemental atoms (like a ST Replicator) you're going to need some way to make images of the resulting material to check that they're coming out right. In a ST like application the imager may only run on every 1 out of a billion molecules, but sampling like that is the way Quality Control works. This application is obviously a looonnggg ways off from this particular imaging device, however the proof-of-concept is an important first step.

Perhaps less 'practically' is the proof-of-concept of a means of "Looking" at the very small. As was mentioned it's impossible to image molecules in a visible means, however this provides a methodology of imaging at levels "Photography" (IE, images generated through reflected radiation in all wavelengths) can not.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
torontoraptor
Posts: 442
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 11:58 pm UTC

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby torontoraptor » Thu Jan 07, 2010 8:42 pm UTC

Ironically, I was just learning two days ago that my university (McMaster) has the most powerful microscope in the world, with a max mangification of 0.7 Angstroms. Apparently thats no longer true. Very cool.
Promicin wrote:Now if I can just grab on with my tongue-like foot... wait. I am not a mussel.

pseudoidiot wrote:
You, sir, name? wrote:fucking owls is enjoyable.
Someone should sig this

User avatar
NoodleIncident
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:07 am UTC

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby NoodleIncident » Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:02 pm UTC

This . . . just awesome. I always thought the stick-bonds were just schematic, though. I hope they didn't fake add in the bond-lines, though. I was reading Scientific American earlier, though, and this might be beat--there were actual pictures of electron orbitals. It probably doesn't count, though; it was done by looking at a chain of atoms, I think. The past's future is now!
Zagibu wrote:Don't ask how many times I've accidentially spawned an alligator completely covered in adamantine with a battle axe strapped to its tail.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby The Reaper » Thu Jan 07, 2010 9:45 pm UTC

NoodleIncident wrote:This . . . just awesome. I always thought the stick-bonds were just schematic, though. I hope they didn't fake add in the bond-lines, though. I was reading Scientific American earlier, though, and this might be beat--there were actual pictures of electron orbitals. It probably doesn't count, though; it was done by looking at a chain of atoms, I think. The past's future is now!

could be charge density, so think, z orbitals? the ones that connect the entire structure? so thats why it looks like theres sticks holding together?

Seraph
Posts: 343
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:51 pm UTC

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Seraph » Thu Jan 07, 2010 10:58 pm UTC

Walter.Horvath wrote:2010 is the future :D

Except for the fact that this was published back in the middle of 2009.
You'll note that the blog post provided link to an article from back then: http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/ ... 080902.asp
Or you could go straight to IBM for the news: http://www.zurich.ibm.com/news/09/pentacene.html

User avatar
Zorlin
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 2:31 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Zorlin » Thu Jan 07, 2010 11:16 pm UTC

Seraph wrote:
Walter.Horvath wrote:2010 is the future :D

Except for the fact that this was published back in the middle of 2009.
You'll note that the blog post provided link to an article from back then: http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/ ... 080902.asp
Or you could go straight to IBM for the news: http://www.zurich.ibm.com/news/09/pentacene.html

And there's also my referring to it as being posted in August of last year. :P
Mysterious wizard rabbit of unknown proportions.

Check out #xkcd-hugs movie night! Watch movies with your fellow xkcdians.

Meaux_Pas wrote:You're all mad.

opsomath
Posts: 89
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby opsomath » Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:23 am UTC

So I'm a chemistry grad student. I run our group's scanning probe microscope, which is what this technique basically is. And compared to this, my stuff is...the Wright Brothers' glider-with-motor compared to the Concorde. Brilliant work.

MrGee
Posts: 998
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby MrGee » Fri Jan 08, 2010 1:46 am UTC

Well that's lame, I just finished my course on NMR and mass spectrometry--now all that information is obsolete. Luckily I only learned enough to get a C+

User avatar
joshz
Posts: 1466
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 2:51 am UTC
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby joshz » Fri Jan 08, 2010 2:28 am UTC

That is truly awesome.

Just imagine what the state of chemistry will be like when this technology improves and/or gets cheaper.
You, sir, name? wrote:If you have over 26 levels of nesting, you've got bigger problems ... than variable naming.
suffer-cait wrote:it might also be interesting to note here that i don't like 5 fingers. they feel too bulky.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Diadem » Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:29 am UTC

Zorlin wrote:The image is blurry as hell, but as the technology matures it may get a little better.

No, the image is accurate. At that level, reality itself is blurry.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

Paranoid__Android
Posts: 516
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 6:54 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Paranoid__Android » Fri Jan 08, 2010 3:43 am UTC

This is very cool.
I was messing around on a 'cheap' electron microscope in my physics lab the other day, looking at the crystalline structure of graphite. I was blown away then and I'm blown away now.
The Great Hippo wrote:Paranoid__Android,
... truly, you are a champion among champions. ...

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Vaniver » Fri Jan 08, 2010 4:05 am UTC

Diadem wrote:
Zorlin wrote:The image is blurry as hell, but as the technology matures it may get a little better.

No, the image is accurate. At that level, reality itself is blurry.
Damn it, Diadem, you beat me to it.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
Zorlin
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 2:31 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Zorlin » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:18 am UTC

Diadem wrote:No, the image is accurate. At that level, reality itself is blurry.

Either I partially understand what you're saying or I'm completely clueless, but this subject generally fascinates me. Any links to further reading? :)
Mysterious wizard rabbit of unknown proportions.

Check out #xkcd-hugs movie night! Watch movies with your fellow xkcdians.

Meaux_Pas wrote:You're all mad.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby The Reaper » Fri Jan 08, 2010 7:45 am UTC

Zorlin wrote:
Diadem wrote:No, the image is accurate. At that level, reality itself is blurry.

Either I partially understand what you're saying or I'm completely clueless, but this subject generally fascinates me. Any links to further reading? :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_noise
amongst other things.
oh and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_noise

User avatar
TheKrikkitWars
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Bangor, Gwynedd, Gogledd Cymru
Contact:

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby TheKrikkitWars » Fri Jan 08, 2010 9:10 am UTC

The Reaper wrote:
NoodleIncident wrote:This . . . just awesome. I always thought the stick-bonds were just schematic, though. I hope they didn't fake add in the bond-lines, though. I was reading Scientific American earlier, though, and this might be beat--there were actual pictures of electron orbitals. It probably doesn't count, though; it was done by looking at a chain of atoms, I think. The past's future is now!

could be charge density, so think, z orbitals? the ones that connect the entire structure? so thats why it looks like theres sticks holding together?


If it helps, don't think of this as a literal picture but like the track on a record; higher density of charge, needle goes up, that pixel is assigned a higher greyscale colour value...

It is a synthetic picture, but it's not fakery, just processing the raw numbers into something useful.

Also, this has the potential to render a lot of the structural determination skills I'll be assesed on in the coming monday's exam totally useless; Balderdash.

@ Reaper, Z-orbitals are a subset of the P, D, & F orbitals; it's the molecular orbitals δ (single bond) and π (double, triple, conjugated aromatic ring bonds) which form the electro static backbone of molecules.
Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet,
This is not Done by Jostling in the Street.

Alexius
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:45 pm UTC

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Alexius » Fri Jan 08, 2010 12:10 pm UTC

TheKrikkitWars wrote:@ Reaper, Z-orbitals are a subset of the P, D, & F orbitals; it's the molecular orbitals δ (single bond) and π (double, triple, conjugated aromatic ring bonds) which form the electro static backbone of molecules.

σ not δ surely?

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby The Reaper » Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:58 pm UTC

Alexius wrote:
TheKrikkitWars wrote:@ Reaper, Z-orbitals are a subset of the P, D, & F orbitals; it's the molecular orbitals δ (single bond) and π (double, triple, conjugated aromatic ring bonds) which form the electro static backbone of molecules.

σ not δ surely?

Oh chemistry, how I barely pass you....

User avatar
TheKrikkitWars
Posts: 2205
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Bangor, Gwynedd, Gogledd Cymru
Contact:

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby TheKrikkitWars » Sat Jan 09, 2010 3:52 pm UTC

The Reaper wrote:
Alexius wrote:
TheKrikkitWars wrote:@ Reaper, Z-orbitals are a subset of the P, D, & F orbitals; it's the molecular orbitals δ (single bond) and π (double, triple, conjugated aromatic ring bonds) which form the electro static backbone of molecules.

σ not δ surely?

Oh chemistry, how I barely pass you....

Firstly I fail at recognising greek letters; Secondly I too am indeed scared of not passing my degree :S
Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet,
This is not Done by Jostling in the Street.

User avatar
iop
Posts: 930
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 11:26 am UTC
Location: The ivory tower

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby iop » Sat Jan 09, 2010 8:29 pm UTC

MrGee wrote:Well that's lame, I just finished my course on NMR and mass spectrometry--now all that information is obsolete. Luckily I only learned enough to get a C+

Maybe it is not wonder you got a C+. Though you did probably "solve" NMR spectra of very simple compounds, today's NMR can determine the structure of tremendously more complex molecules that you cannot easily image with atomic force microscopy. And mass spectroscopy - well, let's just say that to determine which several hundred different proteins are in a drop of liquid is a bit hard if you have to scan them one by one.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Jan 11, 2010 2:24 am UTC

Darkscull wrote:It seems more likely that the presence of bonds was assumed from certain patterns in the data and they were therefore drawn in.

Then why are they also so fuzzy? What makes you think that's not entirely from information the probe "saw"?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
dedalus
Posts: 1169
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:16 pm UTC
Location: Dark Side of the Moon.

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby dedalus » Mon Jan 11, 2010 2:40 am UTC

I think people are getting mixed up between 'seeing' as in 'absorbed photons of wavelength x' as opposed to 'seeing' as in 'observed a difference in charge of magnitude x'. Both are producing similar information as far as this stuff is concerned on a larger scale, but our traditional observations vis-a-vis EMR are fairly impossible at this level (to the point of distinguishing atomic structure, especially bonding), because you can't really get a photon to rebound off of an electron cloud very well.

The bit that interests me is that the molecule doesn't seem to be symmetrical along the x-axis as far as density is concerned, and the hexagons don't appear to be regularly shaped, which makes me wonder exactly what is around the molecule, and whether it's in a lattice or not (possibly loosely bound somehow?)
doogly wrote:Oh yea, obviously they wouldn't know Griffiths from Sakurai if I were throwing them at them.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:20 am UTC

dedalus wrote:The bit that interests me is that the molecule doesn't seem to be symmetrical along the x-axis as far as density is concerned

Really? It looks close enough to symmetrical to me for any variation to be down to imprecision in the measurement.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
scikidus
Posts: 792
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:34 pm UTC
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby scikidus » Mon Jan 11, 2010 3:47 am UTC

Wolfram|Alpha tells me that 0.2 angstroms is about 0.13 times the interatomic distance in diamond.

Wow. Just wow.
Happy hollandaise!

"The universe is a figment of its own imagination" -Douglas Adams

User avatar
BlackSails
Posts: 5315
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 5:48 am UTC

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby BlackSails » Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:30 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
dedalus wrote:The bit that interests me is that the molecule doesn't seem to be symmetrical along the x-axis as far as density is concerned

Really? It looks close enough to symmetrical to me for any variation to be down to imprecision in the measurement.


Its symmetrical, just not the same along the entire axis. its brightest on the ends - I would guess that the molecule is for whatever reason, polarized towards the ends.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:43 am UTC

Well yeah, it's a string of hexagons surrounded by hydrogen. I would expect the ends to look different because the hydrogen is relatively more dense there.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
dedalus
Posts: 1169
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:16 pm UTC
Location: Dark Side of the Moon.

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby dedalus » Mon Jan 11, 2010 5:08 am UTC

I also can see a slight difference in the brightness between the top and the bottom... Maybe it's just my computer.

Edit: actually, that could be because it's the chair conformer..
doogly wrote:Oh yea, obviously they wouldn't know Griffiths from Sakurai if I were throwing them at them.

User avatar
Goldstein
Posts: 985
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: Newcastle, UK

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Goldstein » Mon Jan 11, 2010 12:16 pm UTC

NoodleIncident wrote:This . . . just awesome. I always thought the stick-bonds were just schematic, though. I hope they didn't fake add in the bond-lines, though. I was reading Scientific American earlier, though, and this might be beat--there were actual pictures of electron orbitals. It probably doesn't count, though; it was done by looking at a chain of atoms, I think. The past's future is now!

I just wanted to bring this to your attention.
Chuff wrote:I write most of my letters from the bottom

User avatar
Zorlin
Posts: 950
Joined: Sat May 30, 2009 2:31 am UTC
Location: Perth, Western Australia

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Zorlin » Mon Jan 11, 2010 6:21 pm UTC

Goldstein wrote:I just wanted to bring this to your attention.
I basically do this all the time with the words "actually" and "basically", actually.
Mysterious wizard rabbit of unknown proportions.

Check out #xkcd-hugs movie night! Watch movies with your fellow xkcdians.

Meaux_Pas wrote:You're all mad.

User avatar
Goldstein
Posts: 985
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: Newcastle, UK

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Goldstein » Mon Jan 11, 2010 7:34 pm UTC

Yeah, I do it too, but I hate myself for it.

On a more relevant note, can anyone explain to me how they got such a good example of this molecule? Is it a property of the molecule's structure that dictates it must lay flat like that, so it can't bend? And what is it resting on? The only way I can see this working is if the material behind it is flat to within a tolerance of less than an atom. Is it simply floating instead? I'm thinking these are dumb questions, but I'm more into maths so I don't know anything about the real world.
Chuff wrote:I write most of my letters from the bottom

tgjensen
Posts: 145
Joined: Sat Dec 02, 2006 10:15 pm UTC

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby tgjensen » Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:10 pm UTC

That's not much of a problem, actually. With a little practice you can get a perfectly flat surface of graphite (and other suitable materials) simply by adhering and removing scotch tape. As for finding a molecule in the right conformation, yes, that's probably a property of the molecule/its bond with the background material. Zoom out a little from the picture in the first post and you'd see dozens of molecules; then you just look about a bit until you find a suitable one.

User avatar
Goldstein
Posts: 985
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 9:38 pm UTC
Location: Newcastle, UK

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Goldstein » Fri Jan 15, 2010 8:18 pm UTC

tgjensen wrote:With a little practice you can get a perfectly flat surface of graphite (and other suitable materials) simply by adhering and removing scotch tape.

Wow! I'll have to Wikihow this later. Thank you for the science, I promise to use it only for good, though I'll have no way of knowing whether or not I've achieved it.
Chuff wrote:I write most of my letters from the bottom

User avatar
scikidus
Posts: 792
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2008 9:34 pm UTC
Location: New York, NY
Contact:

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby scikidus » Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:00 am UTC

Goldstein wrote:
tgjensen wrote:With a little practice you can get a perfectly flat surface of graphite (and other suitable materials) simply by adhering and removing scotch tape.

Wow! I'll have to Wikihow this later. Thank you for the science, I promise to use it only for good, though I'll have no way of knowing whether or not I've achieved it.

Unrelated: this technique also picks up dry-erase marker from whiteboards, creating instant stickers.
Happy hollandaise!

"The universe is a figment of its own imagination" -Douglas Adams

User avatar
poxic
Eloquently Prismatic
Posts: 4751
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2008 3:28 am UTC
Location: Left coast of Canada

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby poxic » Sat Jan 16, 2010 4:23 am UTC

scikidus wrote:Unrelated: this technique also picks up dry-erase marker from whiteboards, creating instant stickers.

Now THAT I have to find a way to use somehow. Much more practical than electron bond teleomicroscopinanobondical stuff.
A man who is 'ill-adjusted' to the world is always on the verge of finding himself. One who is adjusted to the world never finds himself, but gets to be a cabinet minister.
- Hermann Hesse, novelist, poet, Nobel laureate (2 Jul 1877-1962)

Technical Ben
Posts: 2986
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 10:42 pm UTC

Re: Atomic-bond resolution microscopy

Postby Technical Ben » Sat Jan 16, 2010 1:40 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:
Zorlin wrote:The image is blurry as hell, but as the technology matures it may get a little better.

No, the image is accurate. At that level, reality itself is blurry.


Ninja'd way beofore I got here. Glad to know that I'm not mistaken in thinking this. It is blurry to some degree. How much so I am not sure of. But that looks close to the actual limit right now.
It's all physics and stamp collecting.
It's not a particle or a wave. It's just an exchange.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests