…and this is a 
I had my doubts about this; I got an offer from ASPEX corporation to let people get free scanning electron micrographs of just about anything. They make a desktop SEM, and all you have to do is fill out a form and mail it in with your sample of a dead bug or a microchip or bacon, and presto, within a few weeks they'll have it scanned in and the image available on their website.
I asked them if they knew how many readers I have, and they said no problem, they can handle it.
Huh.
Well, you heard them. Scavenge your trash cans, dig into your local sources of vermin and oddments, and send them in. I'm thinking this could be really fun for any school teachers out there — you could have the whole class looking for interesting specimens to zoom in on. You can see their current galleries for ideas.
Technology
Comments
Posted by: Russell Miller | November 10, 2009 2:57 PM
Ok, I HAVE to suggest this. Send them one of your consecrated crackers and see if they can find proof of Jesus.
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
November 10, 2009 2:59 PM
Can they resolve the residual intelligence of an IDiot, or a Berlinski, or do we have to wait for more powerful instruments?
As you may guess, I suspect that I already know the answer.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | November 10, 2009 2:59 PM
PZ - You got any of them crackers left?
Maybe we can find Jesus in them if we only use a high enough power microscope.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | November 10, 2009 3:01 PM
oh boy
Posted by: Bill Dauphin, OM | November 10, 2009 3:11 PM
I can't imagine what made me think, even for a picosecond, that somebody (or, in the event, several somebodies) wouldn't have beaten me to the frackin' cracker suggestion.
OTOH, I think it's very likely that they could find SEM-scale evidence of Jebus if someone sends them a sample of bacon: Surely if evidence of the divine is to be found anywhere in the universe, bacon would be the place you'd expect to find it.
Posted by: parkrrrr | November 10, 2009 3:18 PM
Maybe it's just me, but the images on their website seem pretty unimpressive. The one of the US penny shows features you can resolve with the naked eye, fercryinoutloud.
Posted by: catgirl | November 10, 2009 3:20 PM
The pictures of the air filter and the bleu cheese are pretty cool, but the hair looks the same as looking at it under an ordinary microscope.
Posted by: chinomalon | November 10, 2009 3:23 PM
I think I see a Jesus figure between the penny's engraving...yeah...look close...its is floating there...
http://aspexcorp.com/updates/penny-under-an-sem-scanning-electron-microscope-by-aspex/
Posted by: Mike Wagner
|
November 10, 2009 3:26 PM
That's pretty awesome.
I'm just wondering who is going to be the first to send in semen.
Posted by: Mike Wagner
|
November 10, 2009 3:29 PM
Ha! Isn't the moldy bread "before" picture one of those sandwich bags with the mold image printed on the plastic?
I guess I'll go mushroom hunting this week while we still have a warm spell, and see if I can get some spores.
Posted by: Alyson Miers
|
November 10, 2009 3:35 PM
I'll send them a photograph of a sunset and see if they can find evidence of God in there, because I sure as shit don't see it.
Posted by: T_U_T | November 10, 2009 3:36 PM
Wonder how long it is going to take till SEM will be cheap enough to be affordable for private persons.
Posted by: Orakio | November 10, 2009 3:36 PM
We have an ASPEX desktop machine where I work - given minimal sample preparation time, the throughput of one of these can be pretty high volume, if you don't expect a through analysis.
Be aware that much more than 1" W x 1" L x 1/2" H will probably require prep work. I'm obviously not with ASPEX, but if you keep your sample beneath that size, it /might/ get processed faster. If nothing else, their techs will like you more.
Some options you may want to ask for if you are not familiar with SEM work: Backscatter/Primary is the mode you see in most galleries, and is generally best for showing geometry and depth in samples. It will likely be the default if you do not ask for Secondary mode. Secondary mode is used to show the composition of the sample - Contrast is effectively by atomic number, with the highest element displaying as 'white', and the lightest element displaying as nearly 'black'. Not very useful on organic samples, but if you sent in, say, a broken knife blade, you might get something really interesting. There is a certain trade off with things like depth of focus compared to backscatter. EDS, which they may not be willing to do, will give the elements present at a given point or area in the image.
Have fun with bombarding them!
Posted by: Sili
|
November 10, 2009 3:36 PM
I hate this groupthink.
Three people have beaten me to the crackers already.
Posted by: Benjamin Franklin | November 10, 2009 3:38 PM
Mike Wagner @ #9 asks;
A sailor's wife?
Posted by: Zachary Miller | November 10, 2009 3:43 PM
Oh yes, this is exciting. And my wonder gecko just shed!
Posted by: whatbluedot | November 10, 2009 3:43 PM
Awesome. I think I just found the perfect source for nursery art!
Posted by: Jackal
|
November 10, 2009 3:43 PM
Would the best way to get a SEM of a sample of bacteria be to heat-fix it on a slide and send that in? Microbiology would be more fun if our college could afford SEMs for the lab.
Posted by: amk | November 10, 2009 3:56 PM
As ever, there's no indication of the cost of one of these contraptions on their website. "Affordable" means nowt without numbers.
Posted by: Orakio | November 10, 2009 3:57 PM
#18
Not a really great idea. Better to send them a suspension, if you can do so. They can filter, and mount it as appropriate. A glass or polymer slide and cover will conceal the sample from the electron beam.
I suggest calling them directly first.
Posted by: Yoritomo
|
November 10, 2009 4:01 PM
Impressive. Is this some sort of advertizing, or what's their reason for the offer? Indeed a great idea for school classes.
Posted by: Benjamin Bentley | November 10, 2009 4:14 PM
I agree with parkrrr - some of their sample pictures aren't so good. I even noticed that their 'mosquitoe's (sic) eyeball' is actually a housefly.
Posted by: Thommo | November 10, 2009 4:15 PM
I wonder what one of those Catholic crackers looks like under the electron microscope.. animal or vegetable?
Posted by: Killua | November 10, 2009 4:19 PM
Hum, I'm both reading your blog while I listen to a random lecture of yours.
... Apparently I'm incapable of not multi-tasking.
Posted by: Cath the Canberra Cook
|
November 10, 2009 4:36 PM
OT: here's another nice example of Catholic love and ethics.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/schoolgirl-suspended-for-cancer-head-shave-20091110-i6q3.html
Posted by: parkrrrr | November 10, 2009 4:45 PM
@ #8
That's Lincoln, not Jesus. Or, more specifically, the statue of Lincoln at the Lincoln Memorial. If you look really closely at a penny, you can see it on the reverse side, in the center of the Memorial.
Which is to say, the little man really is there. It's not pareidolia.
Posted by: Staphylococcus | November 10, 2009 4:53 PM
Great, I actually need some staph scanned for a paper I'm writing :)
Posted by: woodsong | November 10, 2009 5:11 PM
Anyone else notice that their penny doesn't have a date?
I might send them a bean sprout...or maybe just the root thereof.
Posted by: nitramnaed | November 10, 2009 5:13 PM
Is that dander or flea larve on the "Fat Cat" hair?
Posted by: JackC | November 10, 2009 5:26 PM
I came to ask if anyone else had seen the human-like figure in the centre column of the penny - glad I don't have to!
Now - is that pareidolia, or is it really there? Looks mighty "real" to me. But no. Not Jeebus.
And do you know what the scan area is from on the penny? Looks to me maybe the "E" on the back in E Pluribus Unum" - just from the spacing between the lands.
JC
Posted by: Dan B. | November 10, 2009 5:35 PM
@ Orakio #13
I have a bunch of 20 micron sections of rat brain on glass slides. Do you think these would be amenable to SEM? Like seeing some neurons and neuronal processes in there?
Or would the thinness and attachment to glass be a problem?
Posted by: Damien Trotter | November 10, 2009 5:38 PM
I wonder how many pubes ASPEX get in the post?
Aww, come on, you were all thinking it.
dt
Posted by: OhYes | November 10, 2009 5:54 PM
The price is on the website. They start at $75,000
You guys wanna chip in or what?
Posted by: David | November 10, 2009 6:01 PM
I could use one of those benchtop SEM. I wonder if my wife would let me buy one.
Posted by: puseaus | November 10, 2009 6:13 PM
I know this is a microscopic step (off topic) in the right direction, but the new bishop of Stockholm.
http://www.qx.se/english/10483/new-stockholm-bishop-is-a-lesbian
Good moments are still possible. If it weren't for all the strange stuff they believe in I could have remained (I was automatically enrolled at birth) a member of one of these Scandinavian Churches.
Posted by: Newfie
|
November 10, 2009 6:19 PM
Thank dog it was a Catholic girls school. If something like that happened at a madrasah, heads would have rolled.
Posted by: Jim1138 | November 10, 2009 6:39 PM
Ray Comfort's brain? Probably insufficient magnification...
Posted by: Orakio | November 10, 2009 6:53 PM
@Dan B. #31
It can be done, but, it's hard to say without knowing the exact setup of what you have. What is critical, though, is that the glass will most likely not be transparent to the SEM the way it is to light - The beam will probably not penetrate any cover slips or equivalent with any reliability. Someone would have to pry off any covers at the SEM lab to expose the neural tissue. Further, any non-conductive sample has to be made electrically conductive. Typically, this is done by sputter coating / vapor depositing an extremely thin layer of gold on the surface of the sample, which is sufficiently transparent to the electron beam. Preparation is always the key - ask them how far they're willing to go.
20 um is trival to look at under SEM - I regularly go hunting for structures under 100nm, though not with the ASPEX.
Posted by: DJ | November 10, 2009 6:56 PM
Dude, totally agree with the Jebus in a penny vision. I saw it too! Before I even looked at the comments on this thread.... Oh, its Lincoln? wouldn't the SEM be zoomed in way too far to make that out?
Posted by: Akiko | November 10, 2009 7:44 PM
My little girl wants to see the germs growing on her lovey. Okay.... I have a few hundred rock samples I would love to see sliced and magnified. I was just telling my kids about Laser Ablation analysis and Mass Spec work and had promised to take them to see an old friend who can run some samples for us (for beer, the scumbag). But this will do in the meantime. Let me get crackin'.
Posted by: scooter | November 10, 2009 8:58 PM
Mike Wagner @#9
this guy:
http://wonkette.com/412111/idaho-gop-leader-person-doesnt-win-his-ex-girlfriend-back-even-after-throwing-all-those-used-condoms-on-her-lawn
Posted by: Ellie | November 10, 2009 9:49 PM
Not only is the "mould" on the bread actually on the bag (and the photo stolen from the bag manufactures website) but the micrograph is the one allegedly from the cheese but zoomed out a bit.
I would have more faith in them as a company and in their equipment if they didn't feel the need to cheat on their website. How hard is it to choose a different area to scan so it isn't quite so obvious you are lying?!
BTW the scurfy looking stuff on the fat (please stop feeding it!) cat hair is probably a sample prep/vacuum artefact.
Posted by: Joshua White | November 10, 2009 10:00 PM
Desktop SEM. DESKTOP SEM! I had no idea. Awesome.
Posted by: Tim Callahan | November 10, 2009 10:13 PM
This is too funny. The guys from Aspex were in my lab on Monday doing a demo of one of their SEMs. I'll have to ask them if they have any clue how many samples they might see potentially. If you really want to bug them, give them low melting polymers...
Posted by: BG | November 10, 2009 11:52 PM
Ya, as stated above, I don't get why 2 of the 10 examples on their site are lies.
The "mosquito" is really the fly zoomed in, and the second mold is just the first mold zoomed in.
Really bad form.
Posted by: Psi Wavefunction | November 11, 2009 1:29 AM
Are they sure they wanna keep up this offer? I've got shitloads of dirt and ponds and moss and termites and other such intricate ecosystems around me, and an obsession with microbial life... =P
(But I'd have to fix the specimens myself, eh? Damn.)
Posted by: RobertL | November 11, 2009 1:47 AM
@ Cath the Canberra Cook (#25)
It appears that the shaved-head-school-girl wasn't actually suspended for shaving her head. Apparently, she has a bit of a history of a bad temper and violence (and is obviously having a tough time at home right now). She was suspended for hitting/shoving a teacher - and it was a couple of days after that theat she shaved her head.
Not like the mainstream media to mis-report something like that!
My source is the woman I sit next to at work who is on the board of the P&C at that school. She had to run the gauntlet of several press organisations this morning while dropping off her children. I don't believe that my workmate is particularly religious (even though it is a Catholic school) but I've got my eye on her just in case!
Posted by: OurSally | November 11, 2009 2:34 AM
Looking at the sample pictures on the website: there is a cat.
They scanned a cat? How did they get a cat in there? Pressed flat between plates of glass?
Posted by: Moggie
|
November 11, 2009 5:34 AM
#48:
Are you kidding? How could they keep it out? If there's a cat around, it's only a matter of time before it parks itself right on top of what you're doing - because, of course, it's more important than what you're doing.
Posted by: Redhead
|
November 11, 2009 6:30 AM
They cheat. They present an fruit fly head shot as a mosquito as well as a house fly. The way they probably do is to scan their image database and use one that is similar enough without actually making the scan. So, I recommend that people send very specific items, and see what happens.
Posted by: iHunger | November 11, 2009 8:45 AM
I have to agree with the comments on the site, although the images are cool, the resolution seems a bit underwhelming - like I could fake it with a decent digital camera and Photoshop.
Maybe that's why they want more samples, because a lot of the stuff that is sent in wasn't worth zooming in a lot.
...BTW, what's the trick to convincing PZ to send the Pharyngula hoard to visit my company website? Do we need to come up with biology PowerShell plug-ins?
Posted by: amk | November 11, 2009 10:55 AM
So it is... in a press release, not the product page. I don't understand why business-to-business websites like to hide their prices away.Posted by: Good Dr. Laura
|
November 11, 2009 3:19 PM
I just want to know who sent in their cat. Did they get it back?
Posted by: Judas.............Priest
|
November 12, 2009 8:55 AM
This offer has been around for a while now. But whatever you do, DON'T send them semen. I did that, thinking I was a funny guy, of course. That was about a year ago. Back in August, they sent me a BABY! A BABY! The little guy is cute enough, of course...But I'm not cut out for kids. So I'm thinking of starting a sweat shop. What to make...what to make...
Posted by: Stan | November 16, 2009 2:53 PM
So, how do you know that they are going to scan the item you sent instead of just something similar?