Can we see atoms or molecules and other subatomic particles using latest technology microscopes... If yes please tell the name of device used
205232
I think the other answerers have a few misconceptions.\n\nThe problem with your question is the use of the word "seen."\nSo I will answer your question in two parts.\n\n1) The best visible wavelength (optical) microscopes cannot see atoms. The best they can probably do, is see some of the fine detail of biological cells, nothing more.\n\n2) Using the term loosely, electron microscopes or atomic force microscopes can "see" atoms, and even electron clouds, but one should not take the word "see" too literally.\n\nAn atomic force microscope works by moving a very fine tip  over a sample. Without going into the specifics of it, a computer can build up a model of the shape and dimensions of atoms in the sample by measuring the forces that the atoms exert on the tip.\n\nSo I will state the answer to your question as this:\n\nWe CAN OBSERVE computer images of atoms; by this i mean that we can view computer images of atoms - but these are more like graphs of interatomic forces than actually viewing atoms.\nThe highest precision that can currently be achieved is viewing the electron clouds of various atoms. We cannot directly observe anything smaller than this.\n\nSo, you might ask, how do we know about the existence of particles like electrons, protons, neutrons, or even quarks?\nWell, that's because their existences can be inferred from various experiments.\n\nE.G. Rutherford's Alpha Scattering experiment showed that atoms consist of mostly empty space (in support of our massive nucleus and electron clouds model)\n\nAnd particle physicists can use devices a bit like cloud chambers to "observe" fundamental particles like quarks by accelerating e.g. protons high speeds and then making them crash into each other. This liberates particles smaller than protons, giving evidence for the existence of quarks.\n\nHowever, these particles are "observed" by the effect that they have on the surrounding medium, not by direct observation.\n\n\nSo to sum up, the atomic force microscope is the best microscope for "viewing" atoms, but don't take this literally. It's resolution allows us to examine the electron clouds of individual atoms.\n\n\nAlso note that "Electron clouds" is also not to be taken too literally, as anyone who knows anything about quantum mechanics will tell you.
422487
It has allready been done. Particles have been 'transported' from one local to another. It happen ed when I wrote and answered this question, \n\ninformation was teleported, as were some atomic and sub atomic elements. \nRecent developments\n\nUntil recently, scientists had been able to transport only light or single atoms over short distances (millimeters). However, it was reported in October 2006 that Professor Eugene Polzik and his team at the Niels Bohr Institute at Copenhagen University in Denmark have made a breakthrough in the field.[3] Their experiment involved the transportation of information from one macroscopic atomic object containing thousands of billions of atoms to another, located half a meter away. The technique involved the use of quantum entanglement, quantum measurement and quantum feedback. Little information is available, however, which throws suspicion over what would otherwise be a great accomplishment.\n\n[edit] Davis report\n\nIn 2001, the United States Air Force commissioned Eric W. Davis, Ph.D., FBIS, to do a scientific study of teleportation.[4] The Davis report has been very controversial due to its recommendation of further studies of p-Teleportation:\n\n    A research program improving on and expanding, or implementing novel variations of, the Chinese and Uri Geller-type experiments should be conducted in order to generate p-Teleportation phenomenon in the lab.[4]\n\nThe report (page 2) classified teleportation concepts into five sections:[4]\n\nsf-Teleportation \n    "the disembodied transport of persons or inanimate objects across space by advanced (futuristic) technological means." The report does not further define sf-Teleportation, and has no further comment on it than to dismiss it from the scope of the report. This type of teleportation could use a physical connection between the two locations, such as a wire. Using existing technology, such as the Internet, or telephone lines, could be the means for this type of teleport. However, this means it would be extremely slow, since a typical living animal is approximately equal to 600YB (yottabytes). Compression could be utilized, but would have to be effective in keeping all data intact.\n\np-Teleportation \n    "the conveyance of persons or inanimate objects by psychic means."\n\nvm-Teleportation \n    "the conveyance of persons or inanimate objects across space by altering the properties of the spacetime vacuum, or by altering the spacetime metric (geometry)." This category includes the use of wormholes for transport, and the modification of the speed of light.\n\nq-Teleportation \n    "the disembodied transport of the quantum state of a system and its correlations across space to another system, where system refers to any single or collective particles of matter or energy such as baryons (protons, neutrons, etc.), leptons (electrons, etc.), photons, atoms, ions, etc." The report explicitly includes in this category a process essentially the same as that envisioned by the fictional transporters of Star Trek. It also includes quantum teleportation by means of quantum entanglement.\n\ne-Teleportation \n    "the conveyance of persons or inanimate objects by transport through extra space dimensions or parallel universes."\n\nThe report did not investigate sf-Teleportation other than to define it. The report recommended further study in all other types of teleportation (pages 28-29, 47-49, 54, 62).\n\n[edit] Teleportation scenarios\n\nThe use of teleportation as a means of transport for humans still has considerable unresolved technical and philosophical issues, such as exactly how to record the human body sufficiently accurately and also be able to reconstruct it, and whether destroying a human in one place and recreating a copy elsewhere would provide a sufficient experience of continuity of existence. Believers in the supernatural, such as religious people, might wonder if the soul is
347159
1) *more info?\n2) microscopy\n3) electron
177684
Yes, you can probably see the structure of DNA with a tunneling electron microscope.  \n\nIt's very unlikely that Watson and Crick deluded us, because their conclusions were subject to peer review by the scientific method, and other scientists would've taken delight in disproving their theory.
365859
Actually, a lot of what you are envisioning is happening now.  The concept is called invariance and in general it does occur from the astronomical scale to the atomic scale.  Instruments are now available which do allow for the indirect imaging of actual electron clouds around individual atoms.  \n\nTwo types of microscopy are used to achieve this, atomic force microscopy and scanning probe microscopy.  The major difficulty with these instruments is accounting for the interference of the probe tips in the data acquired.  \n\nRadioactive decay and scattering experiments have also been developed to find some of the answers you are looking for.  Nuclear physicists have found that each time known particles are found by theoretical math or experiment to have smaller parts, that the smaller parts usually have still smaller parts within them.  Though commonly the divisions are leptons and bosons,  and quarks.\n\nSo, the two fields of study that may lead to your answers are nuclear physics and nanoscience or nanotechnology.
219400
Wave-particle duality of light in particular is observed in a number of experiments but only one or the other form.  To show this you will to explain 2 or more phenomena, for matter the photoelectric effect is the best example for waves there are plenty to choose from.\n\nThat however is for light, if you are talking about matter for example electrons as a wave, then you will have to use debrogle equation and explain a experiment like electron diffraction, where is acts as a probablility wave and builds up a diffraction pattern rather that each electron actually being considered as a wave.\n\nHope this helps
542920
yes its it called the scannig electron microscope I believe
198708
I would say NO... at certain point, particles are made of energy, and energy can't be splitted as matter does...
346269
Okay, let's try a summary.\n\nAll matter is made up of protons, electrons, and neutrons. However, the arrangement of the atoms and the movement of electrons different from one element to another.\n\nColors exist as different waves of light and energy are reflected or refracted through objects or mediums. Those objects or mediums are made up of different elements.\n\nIf there was no source of light, everything would be colorless or black (the absence of light).\n\n1) When a source of light is emitted, it passes through all sorts of atoms and the reflection and refraction of the light waves causes a separation of light waves. Certain waves produce certain colors. And since the world is not static and atoms are constantly moving, different combinations of atoms can "separate" certain colors.\n\n2) As electrons jump from orbitals to orbitals, energy is released. This is also a source of light waves and can be emitted from the atoms themselves (such as different colors in burning elements).\n\nAlso, there is strong trend to look at something known as "String Theory" in which scientists look smaller than an atom, smaller than a quark, to something known as "strings". These strings are constant strings (hence the name) of energy.\n\nHope that made sense.
545437
hi Fellow Genius !,\ngood question.\n\nYES. Protons do decay. they have an average lifetime of about 10 to the power 32 years. Now, since this is an average, it should be possible to monitor a large enough collection of protons, and observe a few decays in the space of an year or so. Such experiments, involving 100s of tons of H2O or some other material, are underway in many parts of the world [eg.: a cave 600m below Lake Erie, Ohio]. However, none of them have yet [so far as I know] found any convincing evidence for the "predicted" decays of protons. [will answer part 2&3 of ur Q seperately] contact me at email address: fizamaker@hotmail.com or IM with me on Y!Messenger [ I am usually online from 9 pm to 5 am India time all night ]. my ID there is :  fizanaqsh . Add my ID to ur contacts so we can talk back and forth on physics and metaphysical questions bothering u and/ or me !  I have a Skype ID also and its : homeworknetguru.\ndo take the trouble of replying if my answer satisfies ur curiosity or not. i am v. much interested in these questions. look out for my answer 2 the third part of ur question re the "arrow of time"
580551
"Current designs for moderately complex nanoparts, such as the Fine Motion Controller or the Neon Pump contain thousands of atoms.  Eventually nanoparts may move up to the scale of complexity and sophistication to tens to hundreds of thousands of atoms." \n"The prototypical "nanoassembler" is the "molecular manipulator" described in Nanosystems, Section 13.4:"\n\nIf this sounds interesting to you, you want to see this:\nhttp://www.nanoathome.org/General/
158746
Theoretically possible. You are making the "atom" analogy -- positive charge in the nucleus and electrons around it. Your magnetic analog would be hard to detect since it appears "non-magnetic" outside the "sphere".
24896
B only seems impossible because you're looking at it from a small, everyday perspective.  Read a book on quantum phenomenon and you'll discover that particles literally appear out of no where everyday, and we take this as completely normal.  The Universe and Everything is far more sophisticated than you're giving it credit for.
71209
Modern physics is showing that light can actually be both at the same time.  As the quote shows below:\n\n"Light can also behave as a particle and a wave at the same time. An example of light acting as both a particle and a wave is the digital camera---the lens refracts (bends and focusses) waves of light that hit a charge-coupled device (CCD). The photons kick electrons out of the silicon in the CCD. The electrons are detected by electronics that interpret the number of electrons released and their position of release from the silicon to create an image. Another example is when you observe the build-up of the alternating light and dark pattern from diffraction (a wave phenomenon) from light passing through a narrow slit. You see one bright spot (a photon), then another bright spot (another photon), then another... until the diffraction pattern is created from all of the accumulated photons. This happens so quickly that it is undetectable to the human eye."\n\n- http://www.astronomynotes.com/light/s3.htm\n\nThe interesting thing about the duality of light is that it still isn't entirely understood, and the people who understand it don't do a good job explaning.  Here is a link to a website that discuss the experiments which helped discover the wave and particle-like properties of light (and all matter in fact!).\n\nhttp://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/mod1.html
296525
This conversion is done daily at particle accelerators. The problem is that it is exceedingly difficult to produce much matter this way since anti-matter is always produced at the same time and because the energies needed are huge. So you will never seea hunk of matter that was produced this way, you can see the tracks of the particles that have been.
152594
It is true that nanotechnology is about creating things smaller than the eye can see, they don't necessarily have to be machines in the traditional sense.\n\nNanotechnology, rather, has become a scientific buzz-word used to describe phenomena on the nanoscale, 0.000000001 meters. What is this small? Well, atoms are generally 1/10th of a nanometer... So if you put a bunch of atoms together, you've got a nanometer.\n\nSome people think of nanotechnology just as making teeny machines (with gears and all), but the field is so much broader than that. Researcher of biological proteins often call their work nanotechnology. Really anything that involves surface interactions or self-assembly is nanotechnology.\n\nAnyway, check out quantum dots. According to Wikipedia, they've made it into Playstations.
657067
Yes! in the Sub Atomic particle. Photons behave the same way.