The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1897-10-08

/ INTO the realms OF the unknown II the
microscopicaI apparatus which Dr.. Ell
mer Gates, Of Washington, has develop.
ed fulf1ls the promise which is claimed
for ii? 1t is asserted by those who have
been taken into Dr.. Gates confidence
that his discovery is not less sensational
or momentus in its scientific import
ance than Dr.. Rontgen's Photographic
application OF the X ray.
When it is stated that, while the work
ing limit Of the best microscope in use
up to the present time has been abou.
ten thousand diameters, the extempor-
lied apparatus used by DR.. Gates and
named by him a photo-micro3ra pho
scope, magnifed an object three million
diametres, an idea may be had OF the
tremendous significance OF this discov-
cry, for DR.. Gates is confident that mag
MITIGATION TO one hundred million diam
etres is easily possible.
All this may seem like visionary
| dream, but DR.. Gates is a man OF science
and the scientific world will not fail in
giving him respectful hearing. He has
carefully prepared a paper for the Her
aid, in which he recounts the circum-
plains the principles which its use OPP
ems up. Heretofore by the aid OF the
| microscope the scientist has been en-
| abled to study the cellular structure Of
| animal tissues. With the photo-micro-
graphoscope ne thinks the study OF the
structure Of these very infinitesimal
cells themselves may be successfully
prosecuted.
In word, DR.. Gates says the new in
| strument bids fair to go as much fur
| thur into the province OF the unknown
as the unknown as the present micro
scope goes beyond tine power of the max
| ed eye.
| Professor Elmer Gates writes: I have
| been asked by the Yew York Herald 10
| describe the apparatus and method by
which l have extended the resolving
| power of the microscope to range far
beyond its present limits, and how l ex-
pect the same principal to extend it
| still further, and how the accetaed the
/ DRY of microscopic vision needs correc-
ton.
In the first place. il may be well to
define thenew word photo-micrograph phi
scope. When a small object like d.
atom or a bacillus Is placed upon the
slide uder a high power microscope
there is formed within the ocular, or
eye-piece, magnified real image OF
that object, and when the eye looks into
the ocular II sees still more enlarged
virtual" image OF that real image,
but il Is known to microscopes that
this virtual image has no addition de-
tails beyond that OF the real image, al
though it looks larger. (See page 20. in
DR.. Van Heurcks' recent book on The
Microscopy Now, If suitable pho
tographic camera is placed in position
in frnt OF this ocular instead Of the eye.
we may take an ordinary photograph
OF the projected real image OF which
the eye sees when il looks into the oc-
ular. And this photograph is technical
ly called photo-micrograph. If. now
ever. the photographer takes a picture
of some large object. like a house or
printed page, and reduces its size SO
that it cannot be seen by the naked eye,
Ii is called a micro-photograph. Thus, a
lonk poem or the Lords prayer may ba
photographed on a space too small to
be seen by the unaided eye. and can be
read only when viewed under the micro
scope.
Microscopists and photographers have
often tried to get additional detail by
enlarging a photo-micograph. but have
always signally failed. II has been
thought that a photograph Of the pro-
Jected real image OF an object under the
microscope might be viewed by a micro
scope and still further magnified, but
while visible details in the photograph
may by this method be enlarged. the
process reveals no new details of the
structure OF an object. This fact Is not. |
as has often been stated, due 70 the !
ma gnifcation Of the texture of the fab |
ric or film upon which the photograph |
is made. but TO an altogether different !
cause, the discovery of which led 10 the /
first steps in the invention of the photo |
microgrsphoscope. 1t is due TO the fact |
that when two visible details or mark |
ings in the real projected image are too |
graphed on the sensitive plate as two /
objects or markings. but as one. When |
two details OF the image on the film OF !
the sensitive plate are much less than |
the tenth OF a micron Cine ten thous-
andth of a millimetre) apart the light !
is irradatei from the molecules OF the |
photosalt. in the film where these two
images fall TO the molecules in the space
between these two images where the
light should act, and thus the demar-
cation between the two details Is OBJ
liberated.
II 1 draw two white lines upon a |
black surface and photograph them.
find that the width o. the lines on the
negative is greater than on the surface
from which they were photographed.
II l draw the lines quite closely together
but not TOO close, so as TO leave meas
lrab,e space between them, somewha:
less than the ten-thousandth OF MILL
metre wide, the sensitive plate will
show them as onel inc OF more than
double the width OF the two lines. and.
indeed. wider than the width OF the two
ines plus the width OF the space be-
ween them. This is probably caused by
radiation o, light from the molecule.
Ipon which the details % the image fan.
md also by diffusion of the Ngnt
through the semi-iranspa.ent gelatine
u the film.
l: follows. therefore, that photo-micro-
,raphy, as hitherto performed. has
.oou: reached its limits. because too
mall and too close together. And hence
ne impossi5ility OF getting additional
Ietails by geographically enlarging
or OF getting more
etail by by viewing a photo-mic-ograp h
Win a microscope
Hence there occurred u N. he idea
Z making a further Tagnlf1cation o:
ne real image of he microscope by a