Such a simple principle but still mindblowing. The picture is so sharp! It must be amazing to play around with an SEM at home. Also big 👍 for Windows 98! If it ain't broke...
@@WurstPeterlall that work for a machine that can’t do elementary math. Takes scientists decades to figure light can slow down. Quibble over deminsions.
"Sometimes" is the correct choice I believe; also, please excuse my English. As a "normal", flat, optical mirror doesn't really flip images horizontally (in a direction parallel to its flat surface), but rather appears like it inverts the axis normal to its surface (Consider punching holes, in the shape of English characters, into an opaque sheet and then illuminating the text thus formed by shining a beam of light through it. If you hold the text 'facing' you, so that you can read it without looking in the mirror, then the reflection in the mirror will also be readable/'unmirrored'.) In this case, each point on the sphere gets projected to some other point in the microscope, with the 'warping' depending on how close the 'focus' is to its surface. However, whether or not this warping will 'flip' depends entirely on the sensor's position, focal length and on if the external or internal surface of the sphere is being imaged. For example, cutting something like a ping-pong ball in half and moving your focus 'into' and back 'out of' the half-shell.
Due to the long working distance/low angle of convergence of the electron beam I don't think the focus point has much of an influence. Aside from creating an incredibly blurred image if you are not approximately focused on the charged sphere that is. Just to make sure we're on the same page, I define the default image of the electron microscope as taken by a camera that is placed at the sample holder and faces upwards. The bottom of that image shall be closest to the chamber door. With this default in mind, to which all images will be considered mirrored or not, I think it does produce an inverted image. If the electron beam points to the top left corner of the charged sphere as seen in the microscope if imaging as usual it is deflected and hits a point of the chamber that is the top right of the camera image. You can repeat this though process for all corners of the image and get the following relationship: SEM image - camera image top left - top right top right - top left bottom left - bottom right bottom right - bottom left As you can see with the above definitions of what the reference, not mirrored, image is, the charged sphere does indeed mirror the image. Keep in mind though, that this reference is by no means set in stone. In fact neither is it for a classical mirror. If you have the opportunity at home, lay in front of a mirror - is it still changing the image in a way that you would call horizontally flipped? The answer is yes, if you rotate around your z axis to get the default image and no, if you roll along your length axis to get the default image. But neither of those is considered more right or wrong than the other. The same can be said about the camera orientation in the SEM that is supposed to produce the reference image - no orientation is objectively right or wrong.
@@turun_ambartanen intuitively I find your answer more agreeable, at least the first.. Though I'm not sure I understand your last claim with the mirror, rotating around axis to get the original image, because it makes me think of chiral figures (For others who might not know the term, this is from wikipedia: "In geometry, a figure is chiral (and said to have chirality) if it is not identical to its mirror image, or, more precisely, if it cannot be mapped to its mirror image by rotations and translations alone." - Wikipedia; Chirality (mathematics))
@@turun_ambartanen "I define the default image of the electron microscope as taken by a camera that is placed at the sample holder and faces upwards" That's very arbitrary. The microscope produces an image that's from a top-down-perspective. Imagine that in a regular use-case: You put a coin in the chamber, you turn on the microscope, you get an image, it looks like you are looking down on the coin and you can read the text on it. At 1:23 we look into the microscope through the door. Take note of the detector currently occupying the right half of the shot, and the squiggly copper wire being close to the camera, i.e. close to the door. Imagine you took the top off the chamber and took a photo looking down into it. Orient the camera such that "down" in the photo is towards the corner of the chamber that is close to the detector and away from the door. In the shot at 1:23 that is the far-right corner. (If you're wondering "Why the weird orientation?": We'll get to that in a moment.) On this photo you would see the detector in the bottom-left corner and the door with the squiggly wire in the top-left corner. Also note that the squiggly wire is mounted higher-up than the detector, so on this photo, the squiggly wire is seen in front of the detector. Now imagine placing a flat mirror at the bottom of the chamber and taking another photo from the same orientation. Mirrors don't flip left and right, and they don't flip up and down, so in the reflection, you would still see the detector in the bottom-left corner of the image, and you would still see the squiggly wire and door in the top-left corner of the image. But mirrors **do** flip forwards and backwards: In the reflection, the squiggly wire is **behind** the detector. Now imagine placing a polished steel ball in the center of the chamber and taking another photo from the same orientation. Same result, but just warped a little bit. In the reflection, the detector is in the bottom-left, the squiggly wire and door are in the top-left, and the squiggly wire is behind the detector. Now take a look at the image that the microscope produces at 4:04: You can see exactly that. The detector is in the bottom-left, the squiggly wire and door are in the top-left and the squiggly wire is behind the detector. (This is why we imagined the hypothetical photo above from this weird orientation, so it's easier to relate the two images.) So the electron mirror behaves just like a photon mirror in this regard. It does not flip left and right, and it does not flip up and down, but it does flip backwards and forwards. If you choose to see the image as taken from a different orientation - namely flipping the camera around to point upwards - then yes, the image is flipped relative to that already-flipped orientation. But that's extremely arbitrary and does not really help at explaining the original question: "Does it actually flip the image horizontally like a real mirror does?"
Very cool! Couldn't this also be done using a metallic object by placing an insulator between it and the stage? I've been studying secondary electron emissions a little bit lately for some upcoming experiments, and my understanding is that metals generally have a SEE ratio below unity, so they should also accumulate a charge eventually (slower than an insulator) if they're not grounded. Your thirst for knowledge is both humbling and inspiring. Keep up the great work, Sam!
I'm shocked (heh) that the image quality is that good. The images are really sharp! I would have thought for sure you would have had to take advantage of DeBroglie particle wave duality and use glancing incidence metallic reflectors to do any kind of useful reflective electron optics the way soft x-ray telescopes/microscopes work, but thinking about it a little more I *guess* this method is sort of similar to the way field ion microscopy works...
This is really cool. I think I've missed a step in the understanding though - do the reflected electrons still scatter secondary electrons from the chamber walls like they would if you were targeting the sample normally?
I also "someone already came up with this in the 70s" every day. Half the time I am pissed that I am so late to the party, other half the time I am giddy to see how they did it with brilliant ingenuity rather than modern tech. I wonder if people were net better or worse off before we could instantly know how unoriginal most of our ideas are? Hmmm....
@@Gameplayer55055 "ai" is just convex models, its applied mathematics, but with a marketing bullshit name. cryptocurrency is just gambling with even more hype and marketing. both are boring.
@@Gameplayer55055 XXI century and its post-moderning is basically decadency because we couldn't keep making it better to the next level. I guess, two steps forward and one backwards.
@@monad_tcp yes. Everything is being limited by current technologies. Moore's law is dead, internet cannot be faster without making more optic cables, tiktok kills brains, everything is done for hype and marketing
My guess would be that it functions the same way the mirror does. Just imagine a spherical mirror instead of the ball and map every dot on the chamber walls to its surface. Then compare it with reflecting electron beam, which effectively also maps it the same way. Waiting for the full explanation by the way, it was just a guess. Also thought that this trick might be used to image hard to reach places) Thanks for sharing, I will remember it.
Wouldn't like a ball bearing, placed on a teflon isolator just work the same, only with better image, because it's more round and at same charge all around? Wish I had my own SEM, btw. Had one at work a while ago, but having one at home to play with, is much nicer.
@Chuck Norris Metals and plastics are very different on the molecular scale. Metals are more conductive due to the metal's ability to 'allow' the electrons to free flow across the atomic surface, or metallic bonded atomic orbitals, making up the metal. My guess would be the photoelectric effect as the quanta of energy, not wavelength, affect the displacement of electrons from the material. Metal is a much different 'polymer' than plastic (using polymer extremely broadly). We are using electrons, not photons. Though I am certain you are aware of this and not trying to say you're wrong by any means... Just my curiosity. Input? Also, why teflon exactly though? Inert, non-reactive, C-F bond strongest in ochem giving it these characteristics, or conductive, but much more porous than your standard raw HDPE/LDPE cheaper plastic polymer. One reason I'd never use teflon tubing for vacuum lines, even with my triple diaphram teflon lined (only ~1mmHg ultimate vacuum, but excellent for a diaphram lab pump) vacuum. Just curious on your reasoning as I'm self taught in organic chemistry and quantum mechanics and in a completely different career. (Personally hobbies and work I like to separate, but that's just me). Any input on this too? Thanks. In my videos I owned a KNF UN820.3 FTP, but now own a brand new KNF N 920 G.
Hmm, the charged insulator does act as a convex spherical mirror for electrons. So - assuming your EM is a Reflection-EM - it should be virtually identical to taking a photo of a mirror ball that is being illuminated from the top, the insides also reflecting electrons and becoming visible. Thus LeftRight should be mirrored. The fact that the inside of the chamber becomes visible at all strikes me as odd, since it means (at least to my knowledge) that whatever isn't black in the image, doesn't absorb the electron beam -> at least part of it is reflected. Which in turn means that a beam, that bounced off the sample without landing in the detector/camera might do so after multiple reflections. While the "selfie" feature is very cool, i think it could increase image quality to place a hollow conducting box over the sample, with holes for coming and going electron beams, acting as a collector. But since a collector should de-focus the beam, the collector and its holes should be rather large, spherical and centered on the sample, the holes need to be perfectly circular (more precisely: circles around the lines connecting beam-source sample detector) , and the focus of the beam as well as the detector adjusted (independently) to obtain a crisp image. Anyway, those are my thoughts as someone that has never touched an EM and only knows the theory behind it, so do take it with a handful of salt.
You asked "if this really was a mirror" and something about images being flipped horizontally. I think answering that requires saying: 🤓 ACTUALLY 🤓 mirrors don't flip horizontally. The same objects are on the left or the right of the observer. They in fact flip depth. Another way to consider it is that they negate the cross product between observed vectors. And I believe your "electron mirror" would do that, as the observer and the mirror are on opposite sides of the observed object(s). Tl;dr: yep, it's a mirror.
The mirror flipping is a bad question. Mirrors don't flip images, it's that either the object being viewed or the observer have flipped are facing the wrong direction. Hold up a sign and look at it, now if you want to look at it in a mirror you need to flip the sign. Usually we do this horizontally, but if you flip it vertically instead, now you have a weird mirror that flips things vertically! Except you don't; mirrors don't flip anything.
Well it's the same electrons you're using to image, so I would think that nothing is flipped or reversed, though quantum effects get weird at certain scales. If anyone says they understand QM, they're lying.
Do you really run you’re electron microscope on windows 95? I feel like you would be able to emulate it on modern hardware. Also nice touch with the MS paint.
Try using the concave surface of a spoon as a mirror. If you look into a spoon that is close to your eyes, the image is right side up. Move the mirror away past the focal point, and the image flips. Spoons usually have different radiuses of curvature, so the image is distorted in interesting ways. Keep this in mind if there is a bored child at the table in a place with shiny silverware, like at a wedding reception. The adults at the table usually start looking into their spoons too. A nice thing about a spherical surface is that the electric field will also form a sphere. That won't hold with other shapes. A small concave imperfection in a smooth surface will disappear from the objects electric field as the voltage goes up. Any statically charged surface is electrically identical to a sphere if the voltage is high enough. With a difference of 25kv I am hoping that a teaspoon will make an interesting fun house mirror reflection, but I last did that sort of math 35 years ago.
I imagine you could correct the spherical aberration if it was indeed spherical object. Perhaps the steel ball suggestion by Chuck Norris could achieve this. In answer to your question, an electron microscope "sees" by illuminating a phosphorescent screen, like an old tube tv. I imagine that the image you are creating by essentially blocking the electron beam to the screen is created by reflections off the walls of the microscope which is what creates the details on the screen. Very cool indeed.
i know it seems unlikely that it should work this well! That mesh in front of the detector is actually biased a few kV positive so it sucks up all the electrons from around the chamber easily
@@SamZeloof I wonder what the average time of flight for this new path is. I get that the scan rate should be matched with the emitted electrons, but I'd expect it would start to bleed "pixels" together. So surely there is a correlation between the scan rate and image quality.
I don't think it works as a classical mirror, flipping the image in any axis. because there is no real axis, it's all spherical. It basically transforms the BB to your point of view, projecting all the chambers surface onto that
Why don't you zoom in further and further to the metal of the microscope? I want to see how much of a resolution the ball can provide. Would it damage the microscope or something?
According to Physics Girl mirrors don't flip image horizontally, but since "camera" is looking into the microscope then image can look like it's flipped I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Can you create a 'square' shape mirror out of the same material and use it as a filter (negative) to 'carve' material out of silicon and make a chip? Scattering is too high?
@Yannick 73 What about the magnetic field created by the moving charges? It should interact with an equal and opposing magnetic field to them. It can create some special effects maybe.
Hey Sam! I have a question for you. I want to have my own electron microscope, but they tend to be pretty expensive. Looking at how they work, do you think its possible to convert an old CRT into an electron microscope?
Such a simple principle but still mindblowing. The picture is so sharp! It must be amazing to play around with an SEM at home.
Also big 👍 for Windows 98! If it ain't broke...
Why this youtube is not growing your channel. You deserve more than that
I'm a fan!
Really enjoying your regular, informative, uploads. Keep em coming.
You are the kind of a youtuber which I like the videos even before watching them 😁
I have absolutely no use for this information. It's still interesting though!
Izzie What if you need to service your electron microscope?
@@WurstPeterlall that work for a machine that can’t do elementary math. Takes scientists decades to figure light can slow down. Quibble over deminsions.
nice password;)
"Sometimes" is the correct choice I believe; also, please excuse my English.
As a "normal", flat, optical mirror doesn't really flip images horizontally (in a direction parallel to its flat surface), but rather appears like it inverts the axis normal to its surface (Consider punching holes, in the shape of English characters, into an opaque sheet and then illuminating the text thus formed by shining a beam of light through it. If you hold the text 'facing' you, so that you can read it without looking in the mirror, then the reflection in the mirror will also be readable/'unmirrored'.)
In this case, each point on the sphere gets projected to some other point in the microscope, with the 'warping' depending on how close the 'focus' is to its surface. However, whether or not this warping will 'flip' depends entirely on the sensor's position, focal length and on if the external or internal surface of the sphere is being imaged. For example, cutting something like a ping-pong ball in half and moving your focus 'into' and back 'out of' the half-shell.
Due to the long working distance/low angle of convergence of the electron beam I don't think the focus point has much of an influence. Aside from creating an incredibly blurred image if you are not approximately focused on the charged sphere that is.
Just to make sure we're on the same page, I define the default image of the electron microscope as taken by a camera that is placed at the sample holder and faces upwards. The bottom of that image shall be closest to the chamber door. With this default in mind, to which all images will be considered mirrored or not, I think it does produce an inverted image.
If the electron beam points to the top left corner of the charged sphere as seen in the microscope if imaging as usual it is deflected and hits a point of the chamber that is the top right of the camera image. You can repeat this though process for all corners of the image and get the following relationship:
SEM image - camera image
top left - top right
top right - top left
bottom left - bottom right
bottom right - bottom left
As you can see with the above definitions of what the reference, not mirrored, image is, the charged sphere does indeed mirror the image. Keep in mind though, that this reference is by no means set in stone. In fact neither is it for a classical mirror. If you have the opportunity at home, lay in front of a mirror - is it still changing the image in a way that you would call horizontally flipped? The answer is yes, if you rotate around your z axis to get the default image and no, if you roll along your length axis to get the default image. But neither of those is considered more right or wrong than the other. The same can be said about the camera orientation in the SEM that is supposed to produce the reference image - no orientation is objectively right or wrong.
@@turun_ambartanen intuitively I find your answer more agreeable, at least the first.. Though I'm not sure I understand your last claim with the mirror, rotating around axis to get the original image, because it makes me think of chiral figures (For others who might not know the term, this is from wikipedia: "In geometry, a figure is chiral (and said to have chirality) if it is not identical to its mirror image, or, more precisely, if it cannot be mapped to its mirror image by rotations and translations alone." - Wikipedia; Chirality (mathematics))
@@turun_ambartanen "I define the default image of the electron microscope as taken by a camera that is placed at the sample holder and faces upwards"
That's very arbitrary. The microscope produces an image that's from a top-down-perspective. Imagine that in a regular use-case: You put a coin in the chamber, you turn on the microscope, you get an image, it looks like you are looking down on the coin and you can read the text on it.
At 1:23 we look into the microscope through the door. Take note of the detector currently occupying the right half of the shot, and the squiggly copper wire being close to the camera, i.e. close to the door. Imagine you took the top off the chamber and took a photo looking down into it. Orient the camera such that "down" in the photo is towards the corner of the chamber that is close to the detector and away from the door. In the shot at 1:23 that is the far-right corner. (If you're wondering "Why the weird orientation?": We'll get to that in a moment.) On this photo you would see the detector in the bottom-left corner and the door with the squiggly wire in the top-left corner. Also note that the squiggly wire is mounted higher-up than the detector, so on this photo, the squiggly wire is seen in front of the detector.
Now imagine placing a flat mirror at the bottom of the chamber and taking another photo from the same orientation. Mirrors don't flip left and right, and they don't flip up and down, so in the reflection, you would still see the detector in the bottom-left corner of the image, and you would still see the squiggly wire and door in the top-left corner of the image. But mirrors **do** flip forwards and backwards: In the reflection, the squiggly wire is **behind** the detector.
Now imagine placing a polished steel ball in the center of the chamber and taking another photo from the same orientation. Same result, but just warped a little bit. In the reflection, the detector is in the bottom-left, the squiggly wire and door are in the top-left, and the squiggly wire is behind the detector.
Now take a look at the image that the microscope produces at 4:04: You can see exactly that. The detector is in the bottom-left, the squiggly wire and door are in the top-left and the squiggly wire is behind the detector. (This is why we imagined the hypothetical photo above from this weird orientation, so it's easier to relate the two images.)
So the electron mirror behaves just like a photon mirror in this regard. It does not flip left and right, and it does not flip up and down, but it does flip backwards and forwards.
If you choose to see the image as taken from a different orientation - namely flipping the camera around to point upwards - then yes, the image is flipped relative to that already-flipped orientation. But that's extremely arbitrary and does not really help at explaining the original question: "Does it actually flip the image horizontally like a real mirror does?"
Very cool! Couldn't this also be done using a metallic object by placing an insulator between it and the stage? I've been studying secondary electron emissions a little bit lately for some upcoming experiments, and my understanding is that metals generally have a SEE ratio below unity, so they should also accumulate a charge eventually (slower than an insulator) if they're not grounded. Your thirst for knowledge is both humbling and inspiring. Keep up the great work, Sam!
Almost definitely, i'm going to mess around with this next time the microscope is running. glad you enjoyed the vid!
Very cool!
Hey, Samy, why don't you make your cool videos anymore?
It's pretty cool and illustrates things aren't always as they seem
I'm shocked (heh) that the image quality is that good. The images are really sharp! I would have thought for sure you would have had to take advantage of DeBroglie particle wave duality and use glancing incidence metallic reflectors to do any kind of useful reflective electron optics the way soft x-ray telescopes/microscopes work, but thinking about it a little more I *guess* this method is sort of similar to the way field ion microscopy works...
this is amazing. the feeling when you think you invented something but then you google that somebody had done it earlier already is unfortunate
GREAT VIDEO, AND A GREAT ILLUSTRATION OF SEM TECHNOLOGY. IM PROUD LIKE YOU WERE MY OWN
your own what, pardon me?
This is really cool. I think I've missed a step in the understanding though - do the reflected electrons still scatter secondary electrons from the chamber walls like they would if you were targeting the sample normally?
Yes! Secondary electrons come from the chamber walls, the primary electron beam never even touches the sample
The reflection was shown me from the instructor during electron microscopy lab as reason why every sample is coated with gold.
i love your sense of humor
I also "someone already came up with this in the 70s" every day. Half the time I am pissed that I am so late to the party, other half the time I am giddy to see how they did it with
brilliant ingenuity rather than modern tech. I wonder if people were net better or worse off before we could instantly know how unoriginal most of our ideas are? Hmmm....
Our time is the time of ai and cryptocurrency.
I hate both, and we need something cooler
@@Gameplayer55055 "ai" is just convex models, its applied mathematics, but with a marketing bullshit name. cryptocurrency is just gambling with even more hype and marketing.
both are boring.
@@monad_tcp yes. XX century science was brutal and cool looking
@@Gameplayer55055 XXI century and its post-moderning is basically decadency because we couldn't keep making it better to the next level.
I guess, two steps forward and one backwards.
@@monad_tcp yes. Everything is being limited by current technologies.
Moore's law is dead, internet cannot be faster without making more optic cables, tiktok kills brains, everything is done for hype and marketing
Its so nice to see science and tech channels like this on youtube
I'm just baffled how you got a electron microscope. Absolutely cool!
My guess would be that it functions the same way the mirror does. Just imagine a spherical mirror instead of the ball and map every dot on the chamber walls to its surface. Then compare it with reflecting electron beam, which effectively also maps it the same way. Waiting for the full explanation by the way, it was just a guess.
Also thought that this trick might be used to image hard to reach places) Thanks for sharing, I will remember it.
Wouldn't like a ball bearing, placed on a teflon isolator just work the same, only with better image, because it's more round and at same charge all around?
Wish I had my own SEM, btw. Had one at work a while ago, but having one at home to play with, is much nicer.
perhaps, makes sense to me
@Chuck Norris Metals and plastics are very different on the molecular scale. Metals are more conductive due to the metal's ability to 'allow' the electrons to free flow across the atomic surface, or metallic bonded atomic orbitals, making up the metal. My guess would be the photoelectric effect as the quanta of energy, not wavelength, affect the displacement of electrons from the material. Metal is a much different 'polymer' than plastic (using polymer extremely broadly). We are using electrons, not photons. Though I am certain you are aware of this and not trying to say you're wrong by any means... Just my curiosity. Input? Also, why teflon exactly though? Inert, non-reactive, C-F bond strongest in ochem giving it these characteristics, or conductive, but much more porous than your standard raw HDPE/LDPE cheaper plastic polymer. One reason I'd never use teflon tubing for vacuum lines, even with my triple diaphram teflon lined (only ~1mmHg ultimate vacuum, but excellent for a diaphram lab pump) vacuum. Just curious on your reasoning as I'm self taught in organic chemistry and quantum mechanics and in a completely different career. (Personally hobbies and work I like to separate, but that's just me). Any input on this too? Thanks.
In my videos I owned a KNF UN820.3 FTP, but now own a brand new KNF N 920 G.
Hmm, the charged insulator does act as a convex spherical mirror for electrons.
So - assuming your EM is a Reflection-EM - it should be virtually identical to taking a photo of a mirror ball that is being illuminated from the top, the insides also reflecting electrons and becoming visible.
Thus LeftRight should be mirrored.
The fact that the inside of the chamber becomes visible at all strikes me as odd, since it means (at least to my knowledge) that whatever isn't black in the image, doesn't absorb the electron beam -> at least part of it is reflected.
Which in turn means that a beam, that bounced off the sample without landing in the detector/camera might do so after multiple reflections.
While the "selfie" feature is very cool, i think it could increase image quality to place a hollow conducting box over the sample, with holes for coming and going electron beams, acting as a collector.
But since a collector should de-focus the beam, the collector and its holes should be rather large, spherical and centered on the sample, the holes need to be perfectly circular (more precisely: circles around the lines connecting beam-source sample detector) , and the focus of the beam as well as the detector adjusted (independently) to obtain a crisp image.
Anyway, those are my thoughts as someone that has never touched an EM and only knows the theory behind it, so do take it with a handful of salt.
You asked "if this really was a mirror" and something about images being flipped horizontally.
I think answering that requires saying: 🤓 ACTUALLY 🤓 mirrors don't flip horizontally. The same objects are on the left or the right of the observer. They in fact flip depth.
Another way to consider it is that they negate the cross product between observed vectors. And I believe your "electron mirror" would do that, as the observer and the mirror are on opposite sides of the observed object(s).
Tl;dr: yep, it's a mirror.
Easy. Mirrors don't flip left-right, they flip in-out!
I would have never guessed the result is that good!
now i need SEM. thx a lot 😅
Very cool experiment!
That password is some This Old Tony level stuff
The mirror flipping is a bad question. Mirrors don't flip images, it's that either the object being viewed or the observer have flipped are facing the wrong direction. Hold up a sign and look at it, now if you want to look at it in a mirror you need to flip the sign. Usually we do this horizontally, but if you flip it vertically instead, now you have a weird mirror that flips things vertically! Except you don't; mirrors don't flip anything.
Thats a tone of gear,
Howd u get into all this
Is windows 95 the best for this era of gear, all of this is so amazing
Where you can buy such a Microscope???....Ebay or craigslist!?
2 people missed the like button, wtf
Well it's the same electrons you're using to image, so I would think that nothing is flipped or reversed, though quantum effects get weird at certain scales. If anyone says they understand QM, they're lying.
Great fun for a Sunday! TY.
Do you really run you’re electron microscope on windows 95? I feel like you would be able to emulate it on modern hardware. Also nice touch with the MS paint.
If it works don't touch it.
Try using the concave surface of a spoon as a mirror. If you look into a spoon that is close to your eyes, the image is right side up. Move the mirror away past the focal point, and the image flips. Spoons usually have different radiuses of curvature, so the image is distorted in interesting ways. Keep this in mind if there is a bored child at the table in a place with shiny silverware, like at a wedding reception. The adults at the table usually start looking into their spoons too.
A nice thing about a spherical surface is that the electric field will also form a sphere. That won't hold with other shapes. A small concave imperfection in a smooth surface will disappear from the objects electric field as the voltage goes up. Any statically charged surface is electrically identical to a sphere if the voltage is high enough.
With a difference of 25kv I am hoping that a teaspoon will make an interesting fun house mirror reflection, but I last did that sort of math 35 years ago.
If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.
all ready subscribed so the password was funny to see
I imagine you could correct the spherical aberration if it was indeed spherical object. Perhaps the steel ball suggestion by Chuck Norris could achieve this.
In answer to your question, an electron microscope "sees" by illuminating a phosphorescent screen, like an old tube tv. I imagine that the image you are creating by essentially blocking the electron beam to the screen is created by reflections off the walls of the microscope which is what creates the details on the screen. Very cool indeed.
Oh, the answer to the question - no I don't think the image is reflected.
So nice to see something New!!!
"subscribe" best password ever !!!
Yes it flips the image. But there's no sense of horizontal in this case.
Very nice work, I will definitely make same attempts on my SEMs :-)
what would a strong hallbach array look like under an SEM?
I'll try this out myself! only got a few missing key components.
Does it mirror the image itself ?
Why don't you try it with simple bearing ball, macro lens and ordinary camera and compare the images ?
Wow! Thats pretty novel! So this a Secondary Electron image of the whole chamber?
Why are you not famous yet????
Looks like your site have a broken ssl certificate.. or there is no any cert at all?
..... What in the hay?
I get how the electeons deflect... but how do they get to the detector and still give a decent image.
Facinating stuff.
i know it seems unlikely that it should work this well! That mesh in front of the detector is actually biased a few kV positive so it sucks up all the electrons from around the chamber easily
@@SamZeloof I wonder what the average time of flight for this new path is.
I get that the scan rate should be matched with the emitted electrons, but I'd expect it would start to bleed "pixels" together. So surely there is a correlation between the scan rate and image quality.
I would be interested in seeing what defishing the images would do
I don't think it works as a classical mirror, flipping the image in any axis. because there is no real axis, it's all spherical.
It basically transforms the BB to your point of view, projecting all the chambers surface onto that
Why don't you zoom in further and further to the metal of the microscope? I want to see how much of a resolution the ball can provide. Would it damage the microscope or something?
to a certain point it works just takes longer to get enough electrons in the area to form a good image
I already subscribed Sam.
Los alamos our garagem ?
According to Physics Girl mirrors don't flip image horizontally, but since "camera" is looking into the microscope then image can look like it's flipped I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Sam, here Is Elon, keep up with the good work, we need people like you for our ultimate goal. Mars
thank you elong
Sam, Is Elong Must, keep up with the good effort, wii need personals like you for our ultimately score. Uranus.
Pretty damn cool!
Windows 98 ! YES!
Can you create a 'square' shape mirror out of the same material and use it as a filter (negative) to 'carve' material out of silicon and make a chip? Scattering is too high?
What happens if you try to image a superconductor?
@Yannick 73 What about the magnetic field created by the moving charges? It should interact with an equal and opposing magnetic field to them. It can create some special effects maybe.
thanks for posting interesting content.
how do you predict oxide gowth?
This was awesome
Awesome
I need to try 😂
360 video stitching of this would be neay
Hey Sam! I have a question for you. I want to have my own electron microscope, but they tend to be pretty expensive. Looking at how they work, do you think its possible to convert an old CRT into an electron microscope?
Yes
smash it with a hammer and put it in a vacuum chamber, add a detector of some sort
Where do you live? What state?
Somewhere between the state of insanity and confusion
Looks like NJ)
Snow
0:40 i see what you did there. Just did it.
no
Yes. no. I don't know. Would you repeat the question? You're not the boss of me now (repeat).
Liiight on thr spheeeeeere
omg this is so interesting
a whiteboard in the middle of all your nice equipment would be nice, instead of that ugly ms-paint...