What a revelation! That Huygens figured out the fundamentals in 1690 is also mind-blowing. Thank you for this fascinating presentation. It utterly changed the way I think about light and optics.

I've been searching for a clear, conceptual explanation of how and why optical resolution depends on the diameter/NA of a lens. Explaining it in terms of wavelets and illustrating the incremental influence of adding wavelets from larger arcs of the initial spherical wavefront hits the nail on the head. I finally understand this in a way I can explain to others...and also, of course, to show them this video! Great job.

@davesantiago1827

Жыл бұрын

You should also explain this is the reason we see things disappear bottom up and not due to earth curvature like claimed. This proves they have hijacked perspective and call it earth curve. Earth is flat. Please don't dismiss me because of your belief in the globe. Follow the actual science like this and make an objective opinion.

Great presentation! I really like the way the model for the viewer is gradually expanded during the story, keeping required prior knowledge to a minimum and allowing for fast understanding of the basics in this topic. Thanks.

@OOPECHO

9 жыл бұрын

BuysDB DB cant agree more, excellent presentation!

well explained and simple.... this lets us distinguish people who understand the material they are presenting from those who dont.

Very clearly explained, thank you!

Great lecture. Thank you, sir.

The equation 0.61Lambda/NA is sometimes presented as the radius of the main lobe and sometimes as the diameter. It is the radius. :)

Thanks for making this video.

Thank you sir, for your tremendous videos.

I'd just like to point out that the name Lichtman means Lightman in Dutch.

@MiottoGuilherme

2 жыл бұрын

I'd just like to point out that in German too.

Thank you, Sir!

Thank you for the great video! I would like to ask what I should use as lambda in the formel for the limit resolution by epiflurescence. d=0,61.lambda/ NA What is lambda by epiflurescence: excitatationwavelenght or emissionwavelengt. Or is it something with the stokes shift?

who the hell is going to tell me about optical nanoscopy? that is why i came here!

Skip to 14:00 if you just care about microscope

hard to believe that this guy's colleagues over in the non-science depts are mostly a bunch of pinko's