Scientific Instruments

Gosh, there are downsides to everything we do. With appropriate controls in place, all of this can be minimized. Costs may be higher, but if it's worth it, is that a problem? Malfuntions can be predicted, or at least observed, and compensated for. Errors will always creep in, and if left undetected, be a problem, but that's why we have checks and balances in good systems. Difficulty with contaminants is already a field of study all its own. Maybe there really IS nothing new under the sun... That said, there's almost always some level of hyperbole associated with any new or new-seeming technology. As a political scientist friend of mine is fond of saying: "Beware of Low-Flying Panaceas"!

Is not political scientist a contradiction in terms ?

Yes, and Yes! For both on advancement and precision.

I have to take my analogy from a field, where it is already accomplished: electronics. The nature of its components did not really change much in the last 30 years. BUT, the technique of calibration and corrections using computer power increased their precision by an easy two magnitudes, and increased the ease of use markedly too.

Since the same techniques are applicable to chemical analysis, the same advancements will be available in that field, soon. If you want to know, what is coming, check out, how your water sample from your well is tested. It is an eye opener!

Ahhh, But the down side (speaking from a technical salesman's position) is that, although the manufacturing costs may be higher, customer's generally believe that "smaller" should be "cheaper". So the latest and greatest and SMALLEST is sometimes a harder sell.

jfetejr@neo.rr.com jfetejr"at"neo.rr.com

Ah, reality intruding again. Can't you just skip a couple years commission and wait until the cost will come down?