Page:EB1911 - Volume 18.djvu/417

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
  
MICROSCOPE
395


the stage, a black or white plate, forming a dark or light background, can be swung underneath the specimen.

When the recognition of the arrangement in space of small objects is desired a stereoscopic lens can be used. In most cases refracting and reflecting systems are arranged so that the natural interpupillary distance is reduced. Stereoscopic lenses can never be powerful systems, for the main idea is the recognition of the depth of objects, so that only systems having a sufficient depth of definition can be utilized. Very often such stereoscopic lenses, owing to faulty construction, give a false idea of space, ignoring the errors which are due to the alteration of the inter-pupillary distance and the visual angles belonging to the principal rays at the object-side (see Binocular Instruments).

Compound Microscope

Fig. 13.—Ray transmission in compound microscope with a positive ocular.
L1=objective, L2 L3=eyepiece of the Ramsden type.
F1, F1′=object- and image-side foci of objective.
F2=front focus of eyepiece.
P′P1′=exit pupil of objective.
P″P1″=exit pupil of complete microscope.
D D=diaphragm of field of view.

The view held by early opticians, that a compound microscope could never produce such good images as an instrument of the simple type, has proved erroneous; and the principal attention of modern opticians has been directed to the compound instrument. Although we now know how the errors of lenses may be corrected, and how the simple microscope may be improved, this instrument remains with relatively feeble magnification, and to obtain stronger magnifications the compound form is necessary.

By compounding two lenses or lens systems separated by a definite interval, a system is obtained having a focal length considerably less than the focal lengths of the separate systems. If f and f ′ be the focal lengths of the combination, f1, f1′ and f2, f2′ the focal lengths of the two components, and Δ the distance between the inner foci of the components, then f=−f1f2/Δ, f ′f1f2′/Δ (see Lens). Δ is also equal to the distance F1F2. The accented f ′s are always on the image side, whilst the unaccented are on the object side. From this formula it follows, for example, that one obtains a system of 1/8 in. focal length by compounding two positive systems of 1 in. each, whose focal planes, turned towards one another, are separated by 8 in.

A microscope objective being made in essentially the same Way as a simple microscope, and the front focus of the compound system being situated before the front focus of the objective, the magnification due to the simple system makes the free object distance greater than that obtained with a simple microscope of equal magnification. Moreover, this distance between the object and eye is substantially increased in the compound microscope by the stand; the inconveniences, and in certain circumstances also the dangers, to the eye which may arise, for example by warming the object, are also avoided. The convenient and rapid change in the magnification obtained by changing the eyepiece or the objective is also a special advantage of the compound form.

In the commonest compound microscopes, which consist of two positive systems a real magnified image is produced by the objective. This permits researches which are impossible with the simple microscope. For example, the real image may be recorded on a photographic plate; it may be measured; it can be physically altered by polarization, by spectrum analysis of the light employed by absorbing layers, &c. The greatest advantage of the compound microscope is that it represents a larger area, and this much more completely than is possible in the simple form. According to the laws of optics it is only possible either to portray a small object near one of the foci of the system with wide pencils, or to produce an image from a relatively large object by correspondingly narrow pencils. The simple microscope is subject to either limitation. As we shall see later, one of the principal functions of the microscope objective is the representation with wide pencils. In that case, however, in the compound microscope a small object may always be represented by means of wider pencils, one of the foci of the objective (not of the collective system) being near it. For the eyepiece the other rule holds; the object is represented by narrow pencils, and it is hence possible to subject the relatively great object, viz. the magnified real image, to a further representation.

History of the Compound Microscope.—The arrangement of two lenses so that small objects can be seen magnified followed soon after the discovery of the telescope. The first compound microscope (discovered probably by the Middelburg lens-grinders, Johann and Zacharias Janssen about 1590) was a combination of a strong biconvex with a still stronger biconcave lens; it had thus, as well as the first telescope, a negative eyepiece. In 1646 Fontana described a microscope which had a positive eyepiece. The development of the compound microscope essentially depends on the improvement of the objective; but no distinct improvement was made in its construction in the two centuries following the discovery. In 1668 the Italian Divini employed several doublets, i.e. pairs of plano-convex lenses, and his example was followed by Griendl von Ach. But even with such moderate magnification as these instruments permitted many faults were apparent. A microscope, using concave mirrors, was proposed in 1672 by Sir Isaac Newton; and he was succeeded by Barker, R. Smith, B. Martin, D. Brewster, and, above all, Amici. More recently these catadioptric microscopes were disregarded because they yielded unfavourable results. From 1830 onwards many improvements were made in the microscope objective; these may be best followed from a discussion of the faults of the image.

Position and Size of Image:—In most microscopic observations the object is mounted on a plane glass plate or slide about 0·06 in. thick, embedded in a liquid such as water, glycerine or Canada balsam, and covered with a plane glass plate of about 0·008 to 0·006 in. thick, called the cover-slip. If we consider the production of the image of an object of this kind by the two positive systems of a compound microscope shown in fig. 13, the objective L1 forms a real magnified image O′O1′; the object OO1, must therefore lie somewhat in front of the front focus F1 the objective. Let OO1y, O′O1′=y ′, the focal distance of the image F1′O′=Δ and the image-side focal length f1′, then the magnification

M=y ′/yΔ/f1 (3)

The distance A is called the “optical tube length.”

Weak and strong microscope objectives act differently. Weak systems act like photographic objectives. In this case the optical tube length may be altered within fixed limits without spoiling the image; at the same time the objective magnification M is also altered. This change is usually effected by mounting the objective and eyepiece on two telescoping tubes, so that by drawing apart or pushing in the tube length is increased or diminished at will. For strong objectives there is, however, only one optical tube length in which it is possible to obtain a good image by means of wide pencils, any alteration of the tube length involving a considerable spoiling of the image. This limitation is examined; below.

When forming an image by a microscope objective it often happens that the transparent media bounding the system have different optical properties. A series of objectives with short focal lengths are available, which permit the placing of a liquid between the cover-slip and the front lens of the objective; such lenses are known as “immersion systems”; objectives bounded on both sides by air are called “dry systems.” The immersion liquids in common use are water, glycerine, cedar-wood oil, monobromnaphthalene, &c. Immersion systems in which the embedding liquid, cover-slip, immersion-liquid and front lens have equal refractive indices are called “homogeneous immersion systems.” In immersion systems the object-side focal length is greater than the image-side focal length. Nothing is altered as to objective magnification, however, as the first surface is plane, and the employment of the immersion means that the value of f1′ is unaltered.

If we assume that a normal eye observes the image through the eyepiece, the eyepiece must project a distant image from the real image produced by the objective. This is the case if the image O′O1′ lies in the front focal plane of the eyepiece. In this case the optical tube length equals the distance of the adjacent focal planes of the two systems, which equals the distance of the image-side focus of the objective F1′ from the object-side focus of the eyepiece F2. The image viewed through the eyepiece appears then to the observer under the angle w″, and as with the single microscope

tan w″/y′=1/f2 (4)
where f ′2 is the image-side focal length of the eyepiece.