Bullet point summary on microscopes.Stop the diagnosis of disease. Microscopes don’t work. All enlargement makes the image less clear because it stretches the original. A ‘cell’ magnified 10,000 times would not be recognisable. Standard accounts of magnification are inaccurate but hint at the truth. With lenses, we don’t view the object directly but see a reflected image. This is because the lens, or light leaving the lens, cannot stretch the image. Nor can it improve projection, since the image is not located beyond the object itself. If there is projection back into the microscope, then this will be limited. This is because the apertures and lens tubes are very narrow and short. With a magnifying lens, you soon get problems enlarging, such as upside down images and multiple images, as well as blurring, distortion and loss of visibility. These indicate that reflection is taking place as well as the limited nature of lens magnification. Reduction is likely to happen because the image is reflected within the lens at the same angle at which it reaches the lens and so at a certain point switches from enlarging it to reducing it. An upside image is likely to happen because the edges of the object are no longer in our direct vision as we raise a convex lens but are displaced and therefore reflected at an angle (as when we look through a glass of water). Reflection also explains why a speck on a slide would not be stretched to the width of the lens: we are normally reflecting a much larger area than a speck. Reflection also seems likely to be what enlarges an image if we consider that a spoon held in a glass of water appears magnified, whereas a penny dropped to the bottom of a glass will look the same size. Similarly if we look beyond a glass of water, things slightly to the right of our vision will appear reflected inside the glass on the left. Put simply, if we use a camera we can see objects as if we were closer to them with zoom lenses, but we soon get blurring - we could not see an ‘electron’ moving at 2,200 km/s. We can see very small things with the eye alone, and things that are invisible to the eye – such as ‘viral cells’ - are unlikely to exist even if cylinders, projectors and lenses aid focus. The traditional microscope, upon which the diagnosis of disease was originally based, cannot magnify more than about 3 times and, although we may see a wash of the stain on the slide, depending on how the microscope is lit, the more complex image we see looking into the cylinder is likely to be a hidden object projected and reflected at low magnification, resembling the structure of the lens of an eye. Microscopes are difficult to take apart or break and so this is difficult to prove Diseases were probably invented to alter the population of the world and to alter behavior. If you doubt that science is fiction, think also about whether birds would be able to fly against a 1000 m/ph wind or travel simply by hovering above the earth’s axis. The truth about disease, and the alternatives in terms of sustainable living, should be made public. louiseorrock@gmail.com 8.7.16

Stop the diagnosis of disease.     Microscopes don’t work

• All enlargement makes the image less clear because it stretches the original.
• A ‘cell’ magnified 10,000 times would not be recognisable.
• Standard accounts of magnification are inaccurate but hint at the truth.
• With lenses, we don’t view the object directly but see a reflected image.
• This is because the lens, or light leaving the lens, cannot stretch the image.
• Nor can it improve projection, since the image is not located beyond the object itself.
• If there is projection back into the microscope, then this will be limited.
• This is because the apertures and lens tubes are very narrow and short.
• With a magnifying lens, you soon get problems enlarging, such as upside down images and multiple images, as well as blurring, distortion and loss of visibility.
• These indicate that reflection is taking place as well as the limited nature of lens magnification.
• Reduction is likely to happen because the image is reflected within the lens at the same angle at which it reaches the lens and so at a  certain point switches from enlarging it to reducing it.
• An upside image is likely to happen because the edges of the object are no longer in our direct vision as we raise a convex lens but are displaced and therefore reflected at an angle (as when we look through a glass of water).
• Reflection also  explains why a speck on a slide would not be stretched to the width of the lens: we are normally reflecting a much larger area than a speck.
• Reflection also seems likely to be what enlarges an image if we consider that a spoon held in a glass of water appears magnified, whereas a penny dropped to the bottom of a glass will look the same size.
• Similarly if we look beyond a glass of water, things slightly to the right of our vision will appear reflected inside the glass on the left.
• Put simply, if we use a camera we can see objects as if we were closer to them with zoom lenses, but we soon get blurring - we could not see an ‘electron’ moving at 2,200 km/s.
• We can see very small things with the eye alone, and things that are invisible to the eye – such as ‘viral cells’ - are unlikely to exist even if cylinders, projectors and lenses aid focus.
• The traditional microscope, upon which the diagnosis of disease was originally based, cannot magnify more than about 3 times and, although we may see a wash of the stain on the slide, depending on how the microscope is lit, the more complex image we see looking into the cylinder is likely to be a hidden object projected and reflected at low magnification, resembling the structure of the lens of an eye.
• Microscopes are difficult to take apart or break and so this is difficult to prove.
• Diseases were probably invented to alter the population of the world and to alter behavior.
• If you doubt that science is fiction, think also about whether birds would be able to fly against a 1000 m/ph wind or travel simply by hovering above the earth’s axis.
• The truth about disease, and the alternatives in terms of sustainable living, should be made public.

louiseorrock@gmail.com    8.7.16

Only posts by Louise Orrock are those on medical science