Abstract
THE discussion on microscope stands will do little good if it is directed towards the production of a universal type of instrument. As a maker of microscopes, I come into close contact with many branches of work the requirements of which are totally different. To make but one form would be a fatal mistake. The metallurgist cannot use the instrument which is best suited for the bacteriologist, neither will the Rosenhain metallurgical microscope suit the biologist. The Dick petrological microscope is quite unsuitable for the entomologist, and the binocular instrument, which demands long tubes and a great range of focus for the use of the lowest powers, will not satisfy the chemist. For the use of botanists, zoologists, and bacteriologists there is a certain similarity of requirements, but even here it would be unwise to endeavour to make all microscopes on one model. The work of the student in the botanical laboratory is totally different from that of the research worker who is making photomicrographs with the highest power immersion lenses.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
BECK, C. Microscope Stands. Nature 88, 480–481 (1912). https://doi.org/10.1038/088480b0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/088480b0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.