Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- From: "justbeats" <steve_beats@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 16 Jan 2007 17:36:13 -0800
... interesting and puzzling was that at 1300X, the pores were not
resolved but at 1400X and higher, they were. So besides resolution
based on NA and lambda, there must be some other relationship that
says that for size and pitch of the specimen, some minimum
magnification is required.
Resolution of the detector (i.e. image scale in relation to size of
pixels or phosphor/emulsion grains)?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- From: Gary G
- Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- References:
- Pix of A. pellucida
- From: Gary G
- Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- From: Gregor . Overney
- Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- From: Gary G
- Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- From: justbeats
- Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- From: Gary G
- Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- From: justbeats
- Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- From: Gary G
- Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- From: justbeats
- Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- From: Gary G
- Pix of A. pellucida
- Prev by Date: Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- Next by Date: Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- Previous by thread: Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- Next by thread: Re: Pix of A. pellucida
- Index(es):