Microscope Theory - Alternatives to the use of light?

In summary, alternatives to the use of visible light for microscope observation are discussed. Near UV light is not a problem, but at shorter wavelengths x-rays and gamma rays are not refracted strongly and there are no suitable lens materials. Gamma rays and UV light are not mentioned specifically, but gamma rays are potentially hazardous and UV light is difficult to work with. X rays can be imaged using grazing-incidence mirrors, but at shorter wavelengths this is not feasible.
  • #1
mohammed_a
3
0
Microscope Theory - Alternatives to the use of visible light?

Hey guys. I've been googling for ages but I've had no luck with this so I thought you guys could help me figure this out.

Why can't UV light or gamma rays be used to observe objects in microscopy?
I know the main idea behind the use of electron microscopes is that electrons can behave as waves with much smaller wavelengths than light can, thus allowing us to observe smaller objects. However, why can't UV light or Gamma Rays (X rays cannot be focused) be used instead of visible light or electrons to observe objects? They have a smaller wavelength than visible light and will therefore result in improved magnification.

Homework Equations


N/A

The Attempt at a Solution


I've checked my textbook but it fails to address gamma rays and UV light is only mentioned to be difficult to work with. Are gamma rays too hazardous to use? As for UV rays, I really have no idea why specifically they're difficult to use in this context.

Thanks for reading, and I hope what I'm asking is relatively clear.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Near UV is not a problem. But at wavelengths below around 250 nm, glass becomes opaque, so reflective optics (i.e. curved mirrors) must be used instead of lenses.

At even shorter wavelengths (x-rays, gamma rays), waves are not refracted strongly even though they can pass through objects, so there are no suitable lens materials at those wavelengths.

x-rays can be imaged using grazing-incidence mirrors, and in fact x-ray microsopes have been built:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_microscope

p.s. Welcome to Physics Forums.
 
  • #4
Redbelly98 said:
Near UV is not a problem. But at wavelengths below around 250 nm, glass becomes opaque, so reflective optics (i.e. curved mirrors) must be used instead of lenses.

At even shorter wavelengths (x-rays, gamma rays), waves are not refracted strongly even though they can pass through objects, so there are no suitable lens materials at those wavelengths.

x-rays can be imaged using grazing-incidence mirrors, and in fact x-ray microsopes have been built:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-ray_microscope

p.s. Welcome to Physics Forums.
Hey thanks for the speedy welcome.

I'm just a little confused about when you say glass becomes opaque... does that mean once photons have a wavelength of below around 250nm they do not penetrate glass? This is just for a high school project and I just need to give brief reasoning why electrons are chosen over UV light, X rays and Gamma rays.

So far I have:
Gamma rays: High energies can possibly alter and destroy the samples they are observing, cannot be focused.
UV light: Cannot penetrate glass (?), therefore curved mirrors must be used instead of lenses which is difficult to work with
X rays: Similar to UV light, cannot be focused very easily

It's not very detailed and I think I may need to go into a tad more detail. Thanks tiny-tim for the link to that thread, it covered gamma rays quite nicely.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
mohammed_a said:
Hey thanks for the speedy welcome.

I'm just a little confused about when you say glass becomes opaque... does that mean once photons have a wavelength of below around 250nm they do not penetrate glass?

Yes. Glass does not transmit electromagnetic waves below a certain wavelength. After googling, I've found it can be as low as 170-180 nm if the glass is made especially for uv transmission:


http://www.glassdynamicsllc.com/images/material-S1-UV-transmission.gif
Transmission of uv grade fused silica glass
from http://www.glassdynamicsllc.com/SI-UV Material Data Sheet.htm


A less expense glass, such as "BK7 glass", does not transmit below 300 nm:
http://www.glassdynamicsllc.com/BK7%20Material%20Data%20Sheet_files/image002.jpg
from http://www.glassdynamicsllc.com/BK7 Material Data Sheet.htm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
Redbelly98 said:
Yes. Glass does not transmit electromagnetic waves below a certain wavelength. After googling, I've found it can be as low as 170-180 nm if the glass is made especially for uv transmission:


http://www.glassdynamicsllc.com/images/material-S1-UV-transmission.gif
Transmission of uv grade fused silica glass
from http://www.glassdynamicsllc.com/SI-UV Material Data Sheet.htm


A less expense glass, such as "BK7 glass", does not transmit below 300 nm:
http://www.glassdynamicsllc.com/BK7%20Material%20Data%20Sheet_files/image002.jpg
from http://www.glassdynamicsllc.com/BK7 Material Data Sheet.htm
Oh, ok that makes sense. That's a great pic, thanks for explaining it so well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Related to Microscope Theory - Alternatives to the use of light?

What is the difference between using light and other alternatives in microscopy?

The main difference between using light and other alternatives in microscopy is the type of radiation used to illuminate the sample. Light microscopy uses visible light, while other alternatives may use electrons, X-rays, or lasers. Each type of radiation has its own advantages and limitations in terms of resolution, contrast, and depth of field.

Why would someone choose to use an alternative to light in microscopy?

There are several reasons why someone might choose to use an alternative to light in microscopy. Some samples may be too thick or opaque for light to pass through, making other radiation types more suitable. Additionally, certain alternatives, like electron microscopy, can provide higher resolution and magnification than light microscopy.

What are some common alternatives to light in microscopy?

Some common alternatives to light in microscopy include electron microscopy, X-ray microscopy, and laser scanning microscopy. Each of these techniques offers unique capabilities and can be used for different types of samples and research purposes.

What are the limitations of using alternatives to light in microscopy?

While alternatives to light in microscopy offer many advantages, they also have some limitations. For example, some techniques, like electron microscopy, require specialized equipment and training, making them more expensive and less accessible than light microscopy. Additionally, certain radiation types, such as X-rays, can be damaging to living samples.

How does the choice of microscopy technique impact the results of a study?

The choice of microscopy technique can greatly impact the results of a study. Different techniques offer different levels of resolution, contrast, and depth of field, which can affect the ability to visualize and analyze certain structures or processes in a sample. It is important for scientists to carefully consider which technique is most suitable for their research question and sample type.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
31
Views
5K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
2
Views
891
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • Sci-Fi Writing and World Building
Replies
6
Views
789
Back
Top