Two items need to be added to our list of what constitutes life for biology
All life that we know about is carbon based and all living things are composed of cells. In essence, living things are composed of little bags of chemicals.
1. All living things that we know about are composed of cells.
2. The cell is the smallest thing that we know that can perform all the functions we recognize as life. As such, the cell is the smallest unit of life.
3. All cells come from pre-existing cells.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. Cells exist on the order of micrometers. A micrometer is a thousandth of a millimeter and that's way too small to observe with just my eyes. I need help with that so let's talk about microscopes first.
When we moved from Denver to Roswell, we moved lightly. Most of our stuff, we left behind, so I've been replacing some things and reorganizing since the move. In a way, that's good because I was collecting way too much stuff. This blog is about experiencing the world out there and that means inexpensively and portably.
There is also the issue of me dumping my phone into the washing machine. Now I have a new phone. Beside the expense, moving and destroying my phone was a good thing and, to some degree, enjoyable. It let me evaluate what I have, what I need, and what I want. I've spent some time reorganizing and getting to know my set-up.
So now I have two clip-on microscopes to try out. I have my old clip-on that I brought with me. It's not terribly powerful but very portable. I keep it in the phone wallet I carry on my belt on technical hikes. The other is the much more powerful clip-on from ScienceWiz. It's a little more fiddly but the magnification is considerably more. It's still not strong enough to show a lot of very important cell structures but it's fine for field observations.
The top left is my old clip-on. The magnification wasn't expressed when I bought it and I'm still not sure how powerful it is. The other photos are of my new ScienceWiz. It's a replacement. The magnification for that microscope was expressed in the package insert and on the website. It's a fascinating piece of technology that I will discuss later in the blog.
Of course, the best thing about both in my case is that imaging is done through my smartphone so that all the functions of the phone are available, including my blog editor.
The differences between the scopes are important
The old clip-on is a reflection microscope. It shines a light onto the specimen which returns it's image to the scope to be magnified. It uses the back camera with its better magnification and resolution.
The rear camera actually has two cameras. One has a resolution of 50 megapixels and the other has a resolution of 8 megapixels. The front camera (selfies and mirror) has a resolution of 32 megapixels.
Resolution is an important limit which I will explain (and demonstrate) later. It is the total number of pixels that the camera captures in a single picture.
The main camera has an aperture of f/1.8. f stops are related to the size of the opening. In general, the smaller the number, the larger the opening, the more light is gathered, the sharper (and closer) the focus, and the shallower the depth of field, (the subject is in sharp focus but the background is more out of focus.) f/1.8 is about as low as it gets for digital cameras. Electronically, higher f stops can be simulated. T
he pixels for the primary camera are 0.61 micrometers across. That provides for decent resolution (it can resolve details in the tens of micrometers). A micrometer is a thousandth of a millimeter.
The secondary camera has an aperture of f/2.2 and a pixel size of 1.12 micrometers. It's intended for macrophotography.
The front camera is located at the top of my camera screen as a 4 millimeter wide black dot. It's used by the ScienceWiz microscope and the image is right there on the phone screen beneath the microscope. That camera has a f/2.4 aperture with 1 micrometer pixels.
It may have struck you that, maybe, the better rear cameras could be used by the stronger microscope, but then the screen would be face down. That would be practical with an add-on monitor, which is available for phones. I may consider it later. The ScienceWiz clamp-on is illuminated from above so that what you see is light after it has passed through the subject. That makes the other microscope better for opaque subjects.
The cameras on my phone (I have several) will provide up to 4x magnification. That may sound good but that is where resolution comes in. You can improve the size of an image but resolution caps clarity and detail. Optical magnification can give you sharper images. Digital magnification can not.
So, the ScienceWiz microscope provides from 200 to 400 X magnification according to the phone optics. With 4x zoom, that expands to 800 to 1600 X power. Again, zooming (digital magnification) doesn't improve resolution.
Several folks were said to have invented the microscope including the inventor of the telescope, Hans Lippershey, around 1600. When Robert Hooke named cells, he wasn't looking at anything alive. His specimen was a fragment of cork, which is the dead outer layer of the bark of a cork tree (a species of oak).Being dead, the cells were not doing anything and were, in fact, empty and they looked to Hooke like the cells (private rooms) of a monastery.
I have mentioned that I have several camera apps and they all have strengths and weaknesses. The one used here, the standard camera for Motorola phones will not zoom with the front camera. I have since found that a couple of my other phones will, so I'm still learning.
The resolution problem that I have repeatedly mentioned is a problem and should be kept in mind, but it's perhaps not as much of a problem as I've indicated because the phone itself has algorithms to clean up blurry photos, to an extent, and photo apps such as cameras and Google Photos give you tools to clean up and modify photos. The edges of the image in the large photo at the bottom has been sharpened.
This is my second try at a stained slide since biology labs back in the 70s. The first was bad....
.
















































