"PRACTICE IS THE CRITERION OF TRUTH " (principle of objectivity)
"IF YOU CAN EXPRESS IN NUMBERS WHAT YOU SAY, THEN YOU CERTAINLY KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT IT" (Lord Kelvin)
Truth often becomes the victim, but falsehoods are buried for ever, as truths ultimately prevail in what constitutes genuine human progress
--------------------------------------
Proviso:
If you have arrived at this page from the Commercial ESEM or related web pages about ESEM, then you probably know the context in which it is written. If you have arrived from another search route, this page may not be for you. For those who are interested, the purpose of it is to help establish the facts about the environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM) both from a technical and a historical perspective. This is not an easy task especially when we have to overcome prejudice not only on technical matters but also on human relationships. Many will be left untouched, but it is hoped that even if only a few can see the righteousness of the case, they may be able to counterbalance all the negative influence pulling progress backwards. Those who wish to be positive in the field are encouraged to study the works published and available for downloading from Danilatos. Unless there is a good understanding of the technological context, the material below may appear out of place, but it is only an early attempt to iron out the record and it will be enriched gradually with time.
-------------------------------------
Case 1
The article relating to the subject of Raising the Pressure: realizing room temperature/high humidity applications in ESEM by Stokes generates the following observations:
High pressure work in ESEM has been reported in numerous works by many authors prior to this article. For example, the entire works by Danilatos have been done exactly on and for high pressure ESEM, and beyond up to atmospheric levels of gas pressure. However, not one single reference is attributed to Danilatos (or to anybody else on the matter) in this article, which is, by publication rules, improper. Specifically, it is a fact that room temperature and high pressure (much higher that the article in question claims) was reported in 1979, as well as in all subsequent papers by Danilatos. The exact method of a membrane, under which specimens can be kept wet in a vacuum SEM, was actually applied many years earlier by RA Lewis and GL McKenzie, in Micron and Microscopica Acta, Vol. 16, pp 33-38 (1985). Needle detectors and cylindrical geometry (wire) have been previously surveyed and reported in great detail elsewhere, together with proposals for environmental scanning transmission electron microscopy (ESTEM, see also latest patent #11 ). Several forms of ESTEM have actually been practiced by scores of other workers spanning several decades, and bibliographies/reviews have been produced by Danilatos. The characteristics of water vapor pressure much talked about in the article is trivial knowledge casually found in any technical-constants-book or at the fingertips over the Internet.
Further, attention is drawn to the apparent liaison of science with the commercial world as vividly displayed in this article. This in itself is not a violation of science rules but it must be born in mind when one examines the very contents and claims of this and related papers (listed in the article and others) with commercial ESEM developments. Again the readers may scrutinize all the facts in unison and come to their own conclusions.
Case 2
The paper entitled Consequences of positive ions upon imaging in low vacuum scanning electron microscopy by Craven et al. reports a grid device placed between specimen and detector in order to control excess positive ions and enhance the image in the ESEM.
However, many years before the above paper, another major paper by Danilatos on the Theory of the gaseous detection device was published explaining in great detail the workings of the detector and providing for multi-electrode detection configurations for the control of various signals. For any worker in this area, the paper is an indispensable starting point. One should peruse carefully the entire paper, but on the point raised here and for convenience one can immediately jump to page 64 . More specifically, an even more general multi-electrode detection configuration encompassing the above device by Craven et al is contained in the U.S. PATENT No. 4,897,545, filed October 14, 1988 (priority date October 16, 1987, Australia PI4918). Electron detector for use in a gaseous environment by G.D. DanilatosFurthermore, Danilatos lodged an even more specialized provisional patent application entitled Charge and signal controller of the gaseous detection device in the environmental scanning electron microscope in 1991. This was to solve a problem of Japanese company Nikon who were developing a line-width measuring ESEM for wafers. Nikon had sublicensed the detector from ElectroScan and Danilatos was acting on behalf of ElectroScan. ElectroScan did not pursue this patent and did not renew the Danilatos contract shortly afterwards. However, ElectroScan included the same claim in another patent by another author later. Danilatos has not been able to reconnect with the commercial developments ever since. All his attempts have been turned down, on the grounds that his work was not relevant to the commercial developments!
Strikingly, the Craven et al. paper does not reference the Danilatos "Theory...", but only one other short paper by Danilatos first announcing the gaseous detector device in 1983 . However, Craven et al. critically quote Danilatos from his "Theory..." with reference to space charge effects, which indicates that they had read the Danilatos "Theory..." but failed to list it! In fact, some of the same coauthors have listed a few Danilatos papers, including the Theory, in several of their other publications prior or concurrently to this case. It is clearly inexcusable that they ignore Danilatos when they see fit (e.g. when there is a serious overlap about a new development as in this case).
Clearly, the facts above individually and in combination constitute an improper case.
There are other related papers by Danilatos never to be listed by this group of workers (no need to present all those works here). Also, some serious technical misconceptions publicized by the same group will be dealt with separately in due course.
Notably, two of the coauthors are also coauthors in the paper On the role of electron–ion recombination in low vacuum scanning electron microscopy (Toth et al.). The "acknowledgments" herewith should be noted carefully. FEI company has funded this development more that a decade after it was first submitted to them by Danilatos (see Story of ESEM below, for relevance).
Case 3
An introduction chapter of a book entitled "Principles and Practice of Variable Pressure: Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (VP-ESEM)" by Debbie Stokes has appeared on the Internet by the publisher . Reading through this chapter alone, any knowledgeable or skilled person in the science of electron microscopy and in particular in the ESEM will be left wondering about the purpose of this book. To scrutinize all the material provided in this chapter could only be done by writing an alternative chapter of comparable length. For sure, one conclusion is that there is a need for a proper ESEM book, a task which is not easy, one that cannot be done lightheartedly and with politics rather than science in mind. Only a few points will be brought to the surface herewith:
The author attributes to Robinson this: "A solid-state backscattered electron (BSE) detector was used, with reasonable resolution up to a magnification of 2000x". However, Robinson did not use a solid-state detector, as he always used a bulk plastic scintillator one (see page 6 of the book). This is not the first or only error.
On the same page, she also states " Lane demonstrated the use of an aperture-limited chamber for SEM, described in a relatively obscure, but detailed, conference paper (Lane, 1970)". However, Lane never used a single aperture differentially pumped specimen chamber as anyone skilled in the area of environmental microscopy would understand by reading the words of the author of this book; unless one has to decipher the cryptic message, since the actual paper by Lane describes something else by his environmental stage. It is of no less concern that Debbie Stokes considers the conference in which the paper was published as "obscure". However, the " Proceedings of Scanning Electron Microscopy, IIT Research Institute, Chicago, IL, 60616" constituted one of the main and for a long period the only main annual American meeting (in the USA) where full works were routinely published by the most notable authors like Wells, Pfefferkorn, Reimer, Boyde, Joy and many other renowned scientists from around the world including Japan and Europe, for about three decades or more. If Debbie Stokes was still at school or not born during this great era of electron microscopy, she should have taken all the time that is required to go through all these Proceedings and many others well before she decided to give us a "Brief Historical Overview" let alone before she embarked on explaining to the world the principles and practice of ESEM. Certainly, she is in no position to judge those Proceeding as obscure . Can we then rely on the technical and other information provided?
Previous attempts to rename ESEM having failed, there is now a renewed effort to somehow retain and justify one of many duplicate/alternative commercial terms like "variable pressure" without any need and justification whatsoever. This only creates more confusion to the scientific community as ESEM is already a variable pressure instrument. Any attempt to re-write the well recorded ESEM history is doomed to fail. Clearly, such a disservice to science may be guided by some obscure agenda.
The Foundations of Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy in Advances in Electronics and Electron Physics, Academic Press, Vol. 71:109-250 by Danilatos, G.D. (1988) is a chapter with 141 pages of condensed material information and may be considered effectively the first book-chapter written on ESEM. However, no reference is provided to this work in her historical overview. Instead, the author sees fit to extensively refer (in detail) to a "post " submitted to a MicroscopyListserver on the Internet in 1996 wherefrom she gathers information and relies upon for writing on the history of ESEM. In particular, the author refers extensively and in detail to certain claims Robinson has made in that "post". Therefore, one may wonder why the official publications by Robinson were not sufficient for her to support her technical statements on ESEM. If she had room in the "Brief historical overview" for such detailed and unverifiable claims, then she should have given at least one mention to a most thorough work above by Danilatos. For sure, she has made a total of 5 references to Danilatos but one may also note that she has given 6 references to herself (probably all that she had) and probably all the references she could find of her colleagues and other preferred authors that suit her own version of ESEM. Even the Danilatos ones are mentioned only briefly or superficially whilst the majority of novel material contributions by Danilatos are silenced. Such an arbitrarily selective " brief historical overview" is biased and deplorable. This approach of writing a book has to be addressed by somebody, of course, in due course. The "post", in particular, referred to in her book, has already been addressed in kind in a response to Robinson .
One more warning: On page 10, we read that "This growing body of emerging observations prompted a series of ‘roadmap’ meetings in Australia (1999 and 2001 – Figure 1.3) and the USA (2005), aimed at gathering some of the most active members of the community together, in the interests of understanding and advancing this new technology and its applications " This poses one question: What the people shown in Figure 1.3 represent and whom they are working for. Clearly, this may provide some explanation of the state of development of the commercial ESEM. One thing is certain: Danilatos who has been most active in ESEM since 1978 lives in Sydney and the Blue Mountains is a picnic ground for Sydney.
Case 4
Almost invariably, each of the publications by the same author above constitutes a separate case for a critical review. A glimpse at just one more bibliography can be quite revealing.
Any serious reader and any genuine scientist will have to go through the historical literature of the development, theory and practice of ESEM. When the boundaries between commercial companies and academic institutions (including famous ones) are blurred, this task may not be easy, and especially when the literature is impregnated with heaps of commercialism. However, the task is certainly achievable as it must be.
Case 5 (to be continued)
Related links: scientific misconduct, fraud and ethics , plagiarism, plagiarism.org, editorial policies, statement, examples ,
.................
.............................
An outline of the history of ESEM has already been presented. More details will be provided here gradually, as the full story is long and complex.
January 1978
Danilatos takes up the post of a "professional officer" in an electron microscopy laboratory at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. His newly completed PhD Thesis was on a different topic for the study of Dynamic Mechanical Properties of Keratin Fibers.
The immediate task given was to make routine the imaging of wet specimens at the freezing point of temperature. Up to then, some images could be "fluked" (literally, per brief given) by splashing the entire microscope with liquid nitrogen for an hour or so in order to lower its temperature, then rush and record an image before the electron gun was automatically cut-off by the gas leak, wait for some time to reestablish working conditions and then try and fluke another image of the wet specimen. By midyear, Danilatos achieved much better, over and above, than routinely operating the microscope at the freezing point of temperature: He managed to operate it at room temperature without the need of any cooling of the microscope itself or any ancillary cooling device whatsoever. The results of this achievement were published in a joint paper:
Danilatos, G.D., and Robinson, V.N.E. (1979) Principles of scanning electron microscopy at high specimen pressures. Scanning 2:72-82.
More on this relationship has been presented in a "response to Robinson". However, the "problem" with this achievement was that it went far beyond his brief of employment and he was bluntly asked to leave before the expiration of his project term. Danilatos had no tenured position, he was funded by a government grant and his work was under annual review. He felt that he should be commended or promoted rather than be penalized for the fact that he attempted proper quantitative experiments on the subject of his brief and he managed to exceed and surpass the initial goal set for him. As a result, he resisted this unfair treatment and he managed to gain independence to continue his work on another external grant offered by the Australian Wool Corporation (AWC). That gave ESEM a respite for a few years, until the School Management "needed" the space of the ESEM prototype for some other project and he was asked, again, to terminate his work. Luckily, the funding organization (AWC) were very satisfied with the results produced by ESEM and offered to transfer Danilatos together with all his equipment to an alternative organization, at their expense.
Mid-1983 to 1986.
Danilatos transfers his ESEM laboratory to the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) by also transferring his funds by AWC, on a yearly review.
During this period he attempts to find a permanent position at universities around the country all the way from Sydney to Perth, and from Newcastle to Hobart, including a strenuous effort to have CSIRO make ESEM a major development for the country. The problem was that Danilatos was seeking a dual goal, namely, a position for himself and for his ESEM program. However, that goal proved unwinnable. In a sense, this is very strange since some of the places (and people) where he had applied for a position actually purchased the commercial version of an ESEM a few years afterwards.
By mid-1986, CSIRO Management indicated that it would not allow continuation of ESEM work on its premises despite the fact that the funding organization (AWC) were still very satisfied with the application results of ESEM to wool fiber research and were still offering continuation of funding for the project including promotion of Danilatos to the next CSIRO level of research scientist. That was another strange event, since Danilatos was working actually in the Textile Physics division of CSIRO. Luckily at this point in time, once more, Danilatos was called by a USA venture capital company to assist them in commercializing his ESEM technology. CSIRO gladly gave up the entire ESEM facility out to Danilatos.
Mid-1986
ElectroScan in the USA accepts the Danilatos ESEM technology. They offer funding to Danilatos to transfer his entire ESEM laboratory to private grounds in Sydney from where he could act as their Chief Scientific Adviser. Danilatos has now the opportunity to devote all his time to the ESEM machine and produces some of his best publications.
Under his guidance, ElectroScan develops and sells the first commercial ESEMs by 1989. Danilatos works on ESEM independently and for ElectroScan for seven productive years.
Mid-1993+ to this day
ElectroScan seeks buyers to take over the company and does not renew its contract with Danilatos.
Nikon sublicenses the ESEM technology.
Philips buys ElectroScan.
Danilatos helps LEO to make their variable (but low) pressure SEM operate at real high pressure and secondary electron mode.
FEI succeeds Philips.
Danilatos has continued full time work on ESEM from his private ESEM Research Laboratory in Sydney to date.
Despite numerous attempts to enter into new contract agreements, Danilatos remains separate from commercial developments . Manufacturers' main argument is that there is not enough market demand for operation of the ESEM at room temperature and they are satisfied to offer the relatively low pressure range. None of the other many innovations and improvements seem to have an impact either. The commercial ESEM is practically reduced to operate at the freezing point with the aid of a cooling device as the standard mode of operation . That is a return to the pre-1978 era (if we may call it the prehistoric "ice-age" of ESEM). Soft tissues and other sensitive specimens seem to be blasted with high kV and beam current mercilessly, when these defects can be easily avoided. Numerous complains are regularly received. Twenty years later, young scientists rediscover the Danilatos developments, they now wish to operate the ESEM at room temperature, they want to be able to use low kV while they can still obtain high clarity and high resolution images...
(To be continued)
.....
.........
...................
Science is the frontier of human endeavor, where the mind uncovers the inner workings of nature and society, of inanimate and animate worlds, of objective reality and of the mind itself. No single individual can accomplish this enormous and open task, although a few individuals have towered above everybody else, like Aristotle's giant mind. It is through the collective knowledge and cooperation that more knowledge is generated. The brilliance of this endeavor seems to come in leaps and bounds through history. The culmination of ancient wisdom was succeeded by a millennium of darkness to be succeeded, in turn, by the Renaissance. The 20th century appears to be a culmination of the renaissance, as the 21st century is showing signs of decay and backwardness, once more, but not in the same way of the old word barbarism. The present day barbarians often wear the cloaks of politician, investor and company CEO or salesman and use economic "profit" as the modern measuring stick for success. All this is not to say that in prior times righteousness was guaranteed. This is only to say that the new value rules can more easily allow impropriety, even with official approval of various entities (institutions, societies, organizations, journals, companies, etc.).
Commercialism is fast taking over science. The very same principles of scientific objectivity and science ethics are pushed aside so long as they stand in the way of profit making, or in the way of unscrupulous careerists at the service of the profit making machine. The greatest achievements of the human mind in the 20th century were achieved by the self propelled inquisitive human mind unfettered by today's barbarians. Now, we experience an ever increasing number of incidents of counter progress in science and steps must be taken urgently to arrest this backward trend. The Internet (one of the twentieth century greatest achievements) is the main force available to the people of the world today to keep the barbarians under control.
There is no special need for a big "conspiracy theory" since a small one is sufficient to explain many wrongdoings given that there is a "chemical affinity" among wrongdoers. The situation can become quite scandalous.
The topic above is immense, but the scope of this page is to narrow down on particular events in the specialized field of electron microscopy , which is just one area of science. Even in this special area, it is not easy to expose and tackle the many problems that have emerged, in the general context outlined above. Therefore, a draft form is started herewith aiming to continually improve as time goes on. First, we provide the raw material on facts. The reader then should decide if the science of today adheres to the very principles on which it is founded. Axiomatically, these principles are to be unbiased and objective, to report facts, fraud, misconduct, fudging and plagiarism (camouflaged theft) are strictly prohibited. Knowledge and acknowledgement of related prior works are imperative in reporting new findings. These are just a few elements of science ethics, which every scientist should uphold under oath.
The cases selected above are based on the feeling that there is at least something improper about them, as is stated with each case. However, the characterization and degree of impropriety is left for the reader to decide, ranging on a scale from zero up to any maximum grade of transgression that the reader can think of.