In 1665, Hooke published the book Micrographia which included pictures of objects which he studied through a microscope he built himself ("Robert Hooke"). His book was a phenomenon of thin films using the microscope. The plenty of fundamental biological discoveries such as his observations on mineral, animal, and vegetable kingdoms illustrated the importance of a microscope when dealing with biological science ("Robert Hooke"). Hooke developed many scientific ideas but because he lacked the technical ability to develop the comprehensive theories, many scientists such as Newton and Huygens claimed them as part of their comprehensive theories ("Rob: Hooke").
How does this affect me?
If Hooke didnít illustrate the significance of a microscope, would scientists be using it today? Would I be using one in my microbiology class? I donít think people in our society would go as far as we have gone in the world of microscopes and microbiology if Hooke did not accomplish what he did. I probably would not have the knowledge I have gained from previous science classes if it were not for Hooke especially since it was his work that allowed other scientists to form their comprehensive theories.
(image from http://kmoddl.library.cornell.edu/biographies/Hooke/Hooke.jpg)