One O'Clock Daily - A Prize For Layman Science

Note - Please see bottom of post for new edits!

----- ----- ----- -----

Science today is rapidly approaching a new crossroads. The past hundred years have increasingly seen science become the domain of specialists cloistered in ivory towers and government laboratories. And the result of this is that science is falling from grace. Gone are the days when engineers were heroes, and when setting fire to the living room rug with his chemistry set was a child's god given right. Instead, we live in an age where science is to be avoided, and where those who pursue it spend an extra decade in school, only to be paid worse than construction workers until they secure an ever-elusive professorship (and most PhDs do not).

Let's face it. Science today fails to capture the public's imagination, and as.a result, science, and the public both, suffer. No other human endeavor brings with it such possibilities and promises—that the future actually can be better than today—and so no other human endeavor should be so cared for. And all because science has grown divorced from the lives of people.

There is a painting of a horribly cruel thing that illustrates my point. The painting is from the 19th century, and depicts a family at home with a bell jar. Inside the jar is a bird, and the apparatus is connected to a primitive vacuum pump. The father and son watch to observe what is about to happen as the mother covers her eyes. Now, I'm not condoning the wanton killing of animals, but instead I'd like to point out that this painting, of a family in the 19th century depicts them as owning both a bell jar and a vacuum pump. Seriously. How many families today can say the same thing?

Instead we live in sanitized houses and cities, where fireworks are banned for their danger and the closest thing to science that happens in most households is putting mentos into bottles of diet coke. How many people today have shattered a hot dog after dipping it into liquid nitrogen? How many people today have zapped themselves with a home made battery? Hell, how many people today have ever performed an experiment, just to see what happens? It's no wonder that most people don't care about science at all—they don't even know what science is!

The solution, then, must be to reintroduce the tools of science to people's lives. If we can make the tools of scientific inquiry sufficiently widely available, then people will have the chance, and the means, to be curious. They will explore the world they live in, and so doing, discover for themselves what science is.

To this end, I'd like to propose four vital pieces of technology that, if they were made available in a cheap form—say, less than $100 each—would make all manner of scientific experimentation available to the layman.

First, we require a device capable of producing liquid nitrogen at the rate of at least 100mL an hour.

Secondly, we require a vacuum system capable of pumping down a volume of at least 10cm x 10cm x 10cm to, and holding a vacuum at, 0.01 atm (with pressure measurement).

Thirdly, we require the ability to view objects of small scale with up to 1000x magnification.

Finally, we require a functioning oscilloscope, capable of measuring at least two signals at once, and with multimeter capability, accurate in all measurements to within 1%.

If each of these pieces of technology could be made available for a total cost of $100, or less, a piece, then all manner of modern science could be conducted in garages. An interested person would be capable of doping his own semiconductors, of experimenting with crystal lattices, of examining all manner of things. I would even go so far as to say that alongside an alcohol lamp or Bunsen burner, there are no more important pieces of technology for layman experimentation than those I have described here today.

To bring science back into people's lives, we must give them the ability to once again do science. To this end, I'd like to establish a $100 prize for each of the above technologies. If someone can demonstrate and provide a complete set of instructions (sufficient to allow another to duplicate the effort for $100 or less) for any of the technologies above, contact me, and upon verification, I'll write you a check. It's that simple. Now, let's bring science back into living rooms and garages.

----- ----- ----- -----

P.S. - Sorry about the delay in the post. There was a mishap with the Typepad mobile browser and scheduling this post.

----- ----- ----- -----

Edit (10-11-09):

Hey guys, I'm really surprised at the attention this has gotten, and so I'd like to clarify some good points that were brought up in the comments.

First, there were some questions about the specifications.  I've updated all of those below to hopefully clarify any missing points (my apologies for the lack of specificity in the original post, I wrote it from my android phone on a bus to Boston...).  After that, some people have expressed interest in contributing money to the prizes.  I'm currently on the road to Portland, OR (set to arrive later this week), but I'll look into setting that up ASAP when I arrive.  I think it's a great idea, and I'd love to see it happen.  Finally, there were some suggestions for other pieces of scientific equipment.  Once I get the donations set up, I'd like to open some of the suggestions up for people to donate prize money to if they'd like, to help create incentives for work.

Before I get into the specifications, though, I'd like to say a word about the philosophy behind this competition.  I'm a big believer in open source work, and I really suspect that for many of these things, the only way to get them in at $100 or less is by "donating" your own time to build them.  I think that there are a lot of clever ideas out there for repurposing different forms of existing equipment in pursuit of amateur science, and I'm really hoping that we'll see some very clever ideas that people can implement on their own to construct these devices for themselves.

Now, on to the specifications!

The Terms of the Layman Science Contest 2009:

When: Entries will be accepted until the last moment of the year 2009, PST (that's December 31, 11:59:59pm, PST, though I reserve the right to stretch the deadline by fifteen minutes or so if necessary).  Any prizes not claimed this year will be made available again for entries into the 2010 contest (possibly augmented by more technological goals).

What: Right now, four technologies are being requested.  Each request comes with a $100 prize.  (This will be updated when I set up a system to accept donations).  The requested technologies, and their requirements, are specified below.  I'm not responsible for any injuries you may sustain while pursuing one of these described devices (you do so at your own risk).  Please be safe, and don't do anything you're not comfortable with!

Technology #1 - Liquid Nitrogen Production Device

Requirements - We require a device capable of producing liquid nitrogen at a rate of 100mL in an hour.  This should be measured by final produced volume (boil off from initial liquid contacting a warm vessel is not counted).

Technology #2 - Vacuum System

Requirements - We require a vacuum system capable of pumping down a volume of at least 10cm x 10cm x 10cm to, and holding a vacuum at, 0.01 atm.  This system should include a pressure measurement gauge capable of measuring all pressures between 1 atm and the desired 0.01 atm.

Technology #3 - High Power Magnification

Requirements - We require the ability to view objects of small scale with up to 1000x magnification.

Technology #4 - Oscilloscope

Requirements - We require a functioning oscilloscope.  The oscilloscope must be able to measure at least two channels, with provision for an external ground.  The oscilloscope must have a bandwidth of at least 100MHz.  The oscilloscope must allow for an external trigger.  Finally, the oscilloscope must also allow for the measurement of voltages, currents, resistances, capacitances, and inductances with +/-1% accuracy.

Of course, all designs must be designed to be constructed for $100 or less.  In the case of multiple submissions by the Dec 31 deadline, one solution will be chosen to win, on the basis of simplicity of design, reliability, and ease of construction/implementation/use.

I also want to clarify that I do not construe this competition as a transfer of IP of any sort.  I'm not interested in anything except helping make decent scientific instruments cheaply available.  If this competition inspires you to come up with a patentable design that has the potential to change the world and make you a millionaire, please go patent it, enter production, and make a ton of money.  The world will be a better place with your invention out there, one way or another.  Otherwise, leave a link in the comments, or send me an email with details of your idea.  You should include enough detail for someone else to duplicate the device for $100 or less.  Let's make real science more accessible to everyone!

Comments

[www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=539133805]

Your vacuum system may already be here.
Pumps used for removing CFCs from automobile
air conditioning systems have better specs
than you ask for, and are in the $114 price
range. Mine was $99 a year ago, and came
with a vacuum gauge.

You can get 3 cubic foot per minute two stage
pumps for about the same price as 1.5 CFM
single stage pumps. Just Google for those
terms.

A 5 channel portable USB PC oscilloscope
is $67. Parallax sells one for $140. The
PoScope Basic2 is 99 Euros.

Microscopes are better defined by the power
of the objective lens, since you can get any
magnification you like by using too high an
eyepiece magnification. A 100x objective
can be found on microscopes in the $190
range. But take just the objective lens,
and glue it onto a web cam, and you have
the microscope you're looking for.

A liquid nitrogen generator for $100 is
a problem. But if you want liquid nitrogen,
almost all cities have local merchants who
deliver it to dermatologists in small
quantities for between $1 and $4 a liter
(smaller quantities cost more, since there
is a lot of waste when decanting it into a
hot Dewar).

Simon Quellen Field
http://scitoys.com

[macegr]

The scope spec is easy to meet, if you're willing to get a used 100MHz analog scope. Throw in a $10 pocket multimeter instead of making it part of the scope, it'll be way more useful. Alternately, Seeedstudio just released (and promptly sold out) a $70 pocket digital oscilloscope; only one channel, but definitely getting there: http://www.seeedstudio.com/depot/beta-testmicro-digital-storage-oscilloscopedso-nano-p-512.html

[Dr K]

Michael - excellent idea. I would like to donate to the cause, to increase the prize money available. Post a note on how to do thids, if you think this is a good idea,

[Jim Lund]

Four is basically available already. Oscilloscope cards for PCs are available, here's one for $140:

Multimeters cost almost nothing, under $10.

[jor]

got to be able to be made for less then a hundred people. Why we gots to buy all our toys?

[Gil]

I think we should add a centrifuge to that equipment list. All sorts of interesting experiments require centrifuges. Creating a lab grade centrifuge from household items shouldn't be too hard.

[Tony]

If you only need to measure signals with a low frequency (<20khz) there's a fine oscilloscope in your PC soundcard line/microphone input. Otherwise check ebay, there are plenty of analog scopes up to 100mhz or more for $100.

[Tom T.]

This is an awesome idea; thank you for offering monetary incentives to get people interested.

[Mathew]

Simon Quellen is correct about the microscope; here are some directions for an approximately 8000X microscope using an inexpensive model, a telescope's objective lens, and a webcam.

http://www.carnicom.com/scope2.htm

[Gil]

Ok I've found out a bit about making liquid nitrogen. The main problem is getting regular air compressed to 3000psi! Anything that's even close to that costs several thousand dollars.

[CH]

Or this -> http://www.seeedstudio.com/depot/digital-storage-oscilloscope-with-panels-p-514.html

[Ilija]

In regards to the liquid nitrogen, the problem with making it for under $100 are the safety issues, as 3000+ psi pressures are required to liquify atmospheric nitrogen. This could theoretically be done by buying an old scuba tank to hold 2000-3000psi (>$30 on ebay) and then pressurizing it, either with your own equipment or by going somewhere that offers scuba tank filling. I've heard that the fire department will do this for free if you are certified to dive. After the air inside the tank reaches ambient temperature, using proper hosing, the air could be released through some coils where it will depressurize down to the point where it will form a liquid. But again, that would be EXTREMELY dangerous and I atleast would not be willing to work with high pressure in that range.

An alternative to liquid nitrogen that can be used for layman purposes of shattering hotdogs is readily available for a fraction of $100, it just involves purchasing dry ice, which is only a few dollars a pound.
In this process, a large soda bottle and smaller bottle are cut to form cuplike containers. The small container is placed inside the large one. Dry ice is then cut up into small pieces and placed in the large container to surround the small container. Isopropyl alcahol is poured in both the outside container and inside container. The result is supercooled alcohol in the smaller container which can be used for dipping various materials to the point of shattering, with the temperature I believe being close to that of dry ice, in the range of -70 degrees Celsius. Making this is much safer than making true liquid nitrogen, although direct contact with any solids, gases, or liquids used in this process could cause damage to tissue.

For the microscope, ebay offers $130 microscopes for sale that have 1000x magnification. I am also working on a homemade camera based microscope that I will share if it works.

I would add to the list of essential equiptment a spectrophotometer capable of producing light of a specific wavelength from the UV through the near infrared range, which could then be adapted to use any camera and a computer program to measure absorbency by a material. This machinery has many uses in chemistry, physics, and biology.

[twitter.com/notexactly]

What happened to the basic, non-technical stuff? I'm thinking of things like an optical bench, beakers, accurate weights, carts, etc. Most households don't contain these.

[Gil]

You could try air liquefiation: http://www.gizmology.net/liquid_air.htm

Seems more DIY than the standard industrial process used to make liquid nitrogen

[iain]

Being a scientist myself I would say there are other devices with alot of use too!

UV/Vis Spectrophotmeter (I cant spell though!)
High.Pressure.Liquid.Chromatography (not just the pen blots on filter paper!)
Inducively.Coupled.Plasma (argon or any inert gas really!)

but yeah......Great idea mate....

[snowdruid]

i think some people here are missing the point why get a low quality industrial item for high cost if we as engineer/hacker could build oure own med/hi quality tools with low cost.
also ist would be nice for you to set up a paypal account so people can participate and improve on the award money..

[jacques]

FTW
LAst year,i did post a usb scope for less than 10$

look at here
http://yveslebrac.blogspot.com/

so i do submit it for your contest

[www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=534792284]

The O-scope is easy if you don't care about measuring high frequencies. However lots of the interesting stuff happens at high frequencies.

[Michael Woods]

To everyone!

Thank you all for your interest! I've added an edit to the bottom of the original post, with additional details where requested (so go check that out). I'm currently driving across the country (getting into Portland on Friday), but I'll do my best to continue answering questions as they come up!

[Michael Saunby]

It's already possible here in the UK to pick up many types old lab equipment for free or next to nothing. So anyone wishing to get started on a limited budget can already do so. The low prices suggest that either few people wish to or have the skills even to get started.

I'm wondering what particular areas of science are most suited to this set of low cost tools. Are you planning to build your own electron microscope? Wouldn't it be more cost effective to buy time on one? Maybe community labs are required, with supervision, rather than cheap home kit. Though I must admit to having my own lab/workshop.

[Matthew Pare]

So I see a lot of posts here about cheap ebay this ebay that. While these claims are very true they seem counter to the nature of this request/challenge. If I bought a $100 used Tektronix scope I don't know that I would feel comfortable or knowledgeable in repair or modification and I've completed a fair amount of EE schooling. Also there is something valuable in the "Science" you learn while making these devices, even if your only following instructions of someone else who designed it. You built it and with the help of the provided documentation you would probably feel more so comfortable with repairing it and making desired modifications.

I can't speak on behalf of Michael but I would imagine that when he made this post that he probably shared parts of my concerns.

In addition ebay is really susceptible to supply and demand qualities. While the cheap mass produced products may be available constantly the nice "hell of deals" may only come around once in a blue moon. But by designing devices that are built from commonly available and "current" parts the turn over cycle of reproduction is increased to a length that would allow for incremented revisioning and enhancements possibly at the community level. I would love to see these devices and the accompanied documentation follow under some GPL like licensing where the/a community could and hopefully would adopt and enhance their value.

These are just thoughts off the top of my head and even though I used Michael's name above, we have had no correspondence and I cannot speak on his behalf. I'm merely speaking off my open source and community experience and the desire to see these product requests met in a sustainable and reproducible fashion.

-Matthew Pare

[Craig Montuori]

I'm working on the button thing for Mike. We'll try and get it posted as soon as he arrives in Portland, where he conveniently knows an accountant. Taxes for a gift prize like this would be bad :)

We'll keep everyone posted and welcome to IP!

[Matthew]

So regarding the scope specifications: 100MHz BW is a hefty goal, but modern ADC chips make this realizable for pretty cheap. The trick though are the various networks which must be connected to the chip to handle different voltages above the chip's input range which is usually less than 5V, and the effect of the frequency-dependent impedances of these networks. It will require a lot of processing power though to handle the data throughput (probably at least 50MSPS, much more if you want full direct sampling), either a digital signal processing chip or even better an FPGA. Those can be expensive and a lot harder to DIY than microcontrollers usually. To meet the price spec it will probably have to be computer connected, as screens, buttons, and cases all add to the price.

The "voltages, currents, resistances, capacitances, and inductances with +/-1% accuracy", that 1% spec is going to be incredibly hard to meet, since it will require tuning and/or calibration which a home DIYer will be unable to perform (at 1% accuracy) themselves, especially at 100MHz because the frequency response of the system will become rather important. 5% is the strictest goal I'd consider setting for a $100 DIY scope, 10% would be even better.

I'm also not sure about using an oscilloscope to measure resistors, capacitors, inductors or current. It has little applicability to a resistor, although you could measure a resistor with a scope if you really wanted to. And you certainly can measure an inductor or capacitor with a scope and a function generator, but only by setting up a divider network and measuring voltages with a given sine wave source, which I suppose would actually be a nice if unconventional feature. Same for measuring current: you don't measure current directly with a scope, only voltage, but you could add the necessary parts to do it if you really wanted.

I think that it will be very hard to meet these specs for the $100 price point, but good luck to those who attempt it.

[www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1782497991]

I have been interested in building my own microscope and have collected a couple of useful how-to links:
An April 1991 article from Science PROBE! http://www.science-info.net/pages/Roger_Baker/homemade-microscope.pdf
Some useful links at the bottom of this article on grinding lenses http://www.microscopy-uk.org.uk/mag/artoct07/jd-lens.html
They have some very cheap and low tech ways of grinding lenses. In one of the articles, the author collects sand from a local beach, pulverizes it and then uses levigation to separate out the different grades of grinding powders used to grind the lens.

[Mark]

I was interested in a computer-attached digital oscilloscope for a while, but I found that they are a poor substitute for the real thing; most have a low sample rate and low resolution.

For digital acquisition, the sample rate must be many times higher than the frequency of the input signal. Otherwise the captured data will be useless as it won't reproduce the input waveform accurately.

You may have heard of the Nyquist frequency; this is the bare minimum, and will only tell you the frequency of the input signal, *not* what it looks like (which would include the waveform (sine, sawtooth, square, etc), ringing, etc).

In other words, most (or all) cheap scope hardware that is available performs very poorly. To get a good look at a 10MHz waveform, you need at least 10 samples per cycle, or 100MS/s. I haven't seen anything <$100 that meets these requirements.

Like others have said, the heck with ebay. These items should be simple enough that the person who wants it can assemble it and troubleshoot/repair/modify it. A used Tek is certainly nice, but it cannot be assembled, troubleshooted, repaired, or modified by the end user. As such, the Tek won't be a learning experience for it's user.