I just completed a new (much better) scanning head in preparation for final build and testing, but how do you know if the head is actually moving back and forth?
The answer I came up with is to use reflected laser light to amplify the movement of the scanning head.
To test the new head, I mounted a small mirror (actually a sequin, they’re lighter) in the needle mounting point, shined (shone?) a laser at the mirror to see if I could see movement in the reflected laser point as the scanning head moves back and forth. What I saw was a little movement, but the laser reflection was so diffuse and the movement was so much smaller than the laser reflection that the movement didn’t show well on the video I shot, so you’re going to have to put up with still photos until I acquire better mirrors and/or a more focused laser.
Laser and sequin
Diffuse, reflected laser light
I’ve been wanting to upgrade the storage in ChemHacker central for a while – but I haven’t found a good, sturdy storage unit that is large, can handle holding a lot of weight, and is chemically resistant.
Until now.
I found this old Faygo-labeled shelving unit in a nearby alley:
After a (lot of) cleaning, here it is holding tools and a wide assortment of chemicals in the underground ChemHacker Lab:
Now that I have Faygo-themed shelving, perhaps I should look into teaching Juggalos some f’ing Science?
A while back, I decided that I wanted to make all the amazing things in chemistry I never got to learn in school. First on this list is making a ferrofluid.
A ferrofluid is a liquid with the mesmerizing ability to respond to magnetic fields. Descriptions do no justice – videos and images are the best explanation:
[video and more details after the jump] Read the rest of this entry »
Bare main board, stuffed main board, and a microscope head board.
As I mentioned in yesterday’s radio interview, I’ve been working diligently on a DIY Scanning-Tunneling Microscope (STM).
The device I’m building will be significantly cheaper than the $15k a student level machine would cost, and will hopefully reach that range of performance. I’m certainly not expecting to build a device that can have the accuracy to do real research for only a few hundred dollars, but I’m hopeful that we can achieve modest results.
Right now, I’m basing the design on the work of John Alexander, but we (my electrical engineering and software gurus and I) will be extending and improving this design for microprocessor control and trace capture. I’m also contacting some of the recent builders of this class of device to hear their opinions and advice. I really am standing on the shoulders of giants here, and by basing my work on that of a lot of (very) brilliant people, I hope to be able to achieve success.
[Project goals, current, and future state after the jump...] Read the rest of this entry »
Last night, I had the honor of an interview with David Dolphin and Gareth Eason from ITFreely, an Irish radio show on science and technology. We discussed hackerspaces, my current experiments, and the current state of garage experimentation.
It was a lot of fun, but listening to myself, I really wish I was more erudite and less stuttery – the final question was especially bad on my part – he asked me about the effects of an STM on drug manufacture, and I gave a true, but somewhat lame answer – that an STM really isn’t helpful for making drugs. Here’s basically what I wish I had said (I came up with this hours later, of course):
The truth is that people like me have much more to fear from society than society has to fear from us basement chemistry tinkerers.
The irrational fear that everyone with a chemistry set is making methamphetamines or bombs has caused a lot of unfounded raids and arrests. This stifles innovation and experimentation. Every time I mention that I have a chemistry lab in my house to anyone, that person immediately jokes about drugs or bombs, and that’s a little scary considering my country’s raid first, ask questions later mentality for chemistry. Hence the tagline I use on my website: Chemistry is Not a Crime.
In my case not only do I not know how to make meth, I honestly have no desire to make pharmaceuticals. Or explosives – both are way too dangerous, not to mention illegal. Turning $1.50 of household chemicals into $30 worth of nanoparticles sounds more than lucrative enough to me, and it has a much lower legal risk.
IT Freely Season 2, Episode 15: Eating the Elephant
In my current job, I don’t do research, and I miss it. This is partially why I started the chemhacker project – it’s a way for me to take some fun chemical projects, research them, develop my own processes for making a few things, and maybe even make some new things.
Over the past few months, I have been slowly working on a process for making ferrofluids by making magnetite nanoparticles, then adding surfactants, and suspending them in a liquid. Starting only from (mostly) readily available household chemicals.
I started with a process that I know works, but has a lot of problems – the end product isn’t very good, and there are unnecessarily dangerous intermediate steps, but it works. I successfully ran through the bad process, listed all the problems I found, and prepared to move onto my new, safer, more efficient, better process.
And then it happened.
Read the rest of this entry »
