Re: PHYSICAL REVIEW FOCUS 24 January 2005 http://focus.aps.org/

From: Gregory L. Hansen (glhansen_at_steel.ucs.indiana.edu)
Date: 01/25/05 

Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 21:58:40 +0000 (UTC)

In article <Pine.OSF.4.58.0501252345390.14354@dingo.cc.uq.edu.au>,
Timo Nieminen <uqtniemi@mailbox.uq.edu.au> wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Jan 2005, Andy Resnick wrote:
>
>> Sam Wormley wrote:
>>
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> > A MICROSCOPE FROM FLATLAND
>>
>> <snip>
>> From the article:
>>
>> "To demonstrate their technique, the team shot pictures of metal films
>> carved with grids of nanoscale holes. Although somewhat distorted, the
>> images resolved holes less than
>>
>> 150 nanometers apart, which would be impossible without the plasmons'
>> help. The team believes the resolution could be pushed to perhaps 10
>> nanometers."
>>
>> This is quite worse than existing evanescent wave techniques, not to
>> mention atomic force microscopy. And, it's not clear how this could be
>> used for any biological sample. DOA.
>
>Aw, shucks, whether or not mercury is available, it managed to be an MPU,
>and managed to attract the attention of a PRF writer. Surely, it must be
>good and significant and important etc?

PRF writer? 

-- 
"Not that there's anything wrong with just lying around on your back.  In 
its way, rotting is interesing too... It's just that there are other ways 
to spend your time as a cadaver."  -- Mary Roach, "Stiff", 2003.