|
Post by principled on May 23, 2011 18:59:17 GMT 1
Nick, Stuart and Marchesa, I am reluctant to hijack Nick's OP by introducing Tinnitus into the debate about frequencies, so if Joanne thinks this post off topic, I'm happy for her to pull it. My tinnitus actually started around Xmas, here in the UK. I was woken by what sounded like a load noise not too dissimilar to the noise you get when you misdial a number and get a fax machine. The noise was so loud, I ran around the house trying to locate it! Eventually, I realised it was in my head. Very disconcerting. At first I put it down to a "cold", having been working on a DIY project in a very cold garage for several weeks. Over the next two months the noise gradually subsided, but during that period I slept very little. I am now left with a continual ringing akin to that which one gets on leaving a loud music festival or a pub with live music. The difference being it never goes away. As a result, the pleasure of sitting somewhere quiet has now all but gone because silence just makes one notice the ringing more. Anyway, back to the science. Nick, I was in Canada visiting my daughter for the past 6 weeks and never noticed any change in the ringing (although with grandkids running amok I didn't notice it much either). However, at a children's dance festival I noticed that when I clapped the ringing got worse. This is also the case with an old TV I have that from time to time emits a low level, high frequency ring (suspect a component is failing), this seems to aggravate the condition. So Stu's and your idea of electro-pollution is interesting. One of the things in common between my daughter's house in Canada and mine in the UK is that both have wifi. So tonight I'm going to turn it off and see what happens. Marchesa: I'm not sure if Tinnitus is on the increase, but when I mentioned it to one of the "in-laws" family they rolled off a list of people in their family who suffered the condition! P
|
|
|
Post by nickcosmosonde on May 23, 2011 19:28:44 GMT 1
Nick, Stuart and Marchesa, I am reluctant to hijack Nick's OP by introducing Tinnitus into the debate about frequencies, so if Joanne thinks this post off topic, I'm happy for her to pull it. No no, my OP was about just this topic, naturally occurring frequencies and how we respond to them - the cat thing was just an exmple I happened to notice. I don't give a damn about cats. That's another curious coincidence. The frequency of a typical fax machine is 2130 Hz, as is a caller ID signal, as is a typical telecoms alarm used in the Western world. I asked a telecoms communications engineer why this was so, and he didn't have a clue. I've tried to find out, but there seems no reason for it that anyone has chosen to document. 2130 Hz seems to be the tone that people are attracted and most responsive to. Try googling it - you'll find dozens of electronic communciations applications that just happen to use that frequency. I'm sorry for your trouble P, it sounds ghastly. It does sound very much like electropollution to me. There's a lot of concern about wifi.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on May 23, 2011 20:48:23 GMT 1
From Yahoo Best Answer - Chosen by Asker The problem is normally caused by the ferrite core of the fly back transformer (FBT) some times called the line output transfomer which sings because the two halves of the core are no longer firmly bolted/glued together.The singing sound is caused by the frequency at which these two halves resonate which is 15625 Hz,the line frequency used in the extra high voltage generation circuit.(non crt,s do not require the EHT) I suffer from 'ringing' initially caused by bomb blast [oh no, I'm sounding like Dad's Army] but it has left my ears 'weakened' so that a few years ago I used an angle grinder after some welding, and the screech gave me real pain, funnily enough when working for an F1 team the engine noise gave me no problems. --------- cable frequency for Virgin is around 402750000 Hz and the other 37500000 Hz high pitched squeals/noise from hardisk rotation see wiki here
|
|
|
Post by nickcosmosonde on May 24, 2011 5:15:15 GMT 1
Oh yeah, I forgotten about that, last time it was mentioned, they still didn't really know but surmised that is was an attempt at 'over the horizon' radar. It seemed a lot of hard work for not much return in the defence field. Radar at 10 hertz? What sense does that make? What information could possibly be extracted from any return signals at such a long wavelength? No, whatever they were up to, it wasn't radar. Trying to make the whole of Western Europe sick and neurotic by entraining our alpha rhythms, or interfering with our natural synchronisation with the Schumann resonances, perhaps. And, if so: who's to say it didn't work, to some immeasurable extent? One possibility is that they were actually transmitting to their cosmonauts, trying to overcome the seemingly insuperable problem of how to prevent calcium efflux and bone depletion during lengthy periods deprived of reception of the geomagnetic field zeitgeber[/i.] That seems fairly plausible to me. They solved that problem long before NASA did, and as far as I know no one's quite clear how.
Thanks for the papers.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on May 24, 2011 7:16:52 GMT 1
Nicko, "The radar was observed using three repetition rates: 10 Hz, 16 Hz and 20 Hz." "Transmitting on frequencies variouly reported as being between 3.26 and 17.54 megahertz and 4 to 30 MHz," "Researchers suspect the root cause of bone loss in space is weightlessness." science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast01oct_1/Cheers, SruartG
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on May 24, 2011 13:44:32 GMT 1
Except MRI scanners use a tuned RADIO frequency em field to do the job!
Let's look at some numbers. In 1Tesla magnetic field, Larmor frequency for hydrogen is 42.57 MHz.
Earths magnetic field between 30 and 60 micro Tesla. Factor of 10^-6. Hence putting that together, the Larmor frequency of hydrogen in the earths magnetic field would be somewhere between 1277 Hz and 2554 Hz. Okay, 2130 Hz is within there, but are we REALLY going to believe that audiofrequency precession can be CAUSED by sound waves?
And given the RANGE of human hearing, not such a surprise that Larmor frequency for water in earths field lies SOMEWHERE within our frequency range.
So, that's it really, an accidental frequency match. But in terms of physics? We have the essential difference between exciting spins via a radio-frequency em field as in an MR scanner, and the supposed suggestion you can do it with sound waves via a cat's purr...........
In basic terms, can we get phonons (quanta of the collective excitations of a crystal lattice) coupled to nuclei. Well, if you take specific magnetic materials (antiferromagnetic insulators to be precise), there seems to be theoretical link via phonon coupling to spin-waves, and spin-wave decay then flipping nuclear spins. But you are talking about taking coherent elastic energy in a crystal lattice, coupling that to these spin waves, then an extra step to get a nuclear spin-flip out of that. Possibly experimentally observable under careful lab conditions with carefully prepared materials.
But just with ordinary sound waves inside a CAT! We KNOW how sound waves attenuate in such materials, and it isn't going to be by nuclear spin-flip!
Hence we just have dodgy numerology, and no plausible physics, hence what was the point? Any idiot can do that!
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on May 25, 2011 18:40:01 GMT 1
Poor 'ole pussy, gettin the blame again. I can see the mis-understanding, it's happened before. I happened to see 'en passant' mention about MRI scanners and their modulation. It said something about [to the effect] mixing the carrier with an audio frequency in the 2kHz region. That's not trying to mix it with sound waves, but em waves at that frequency. To do it with a pussy cat, You'd need to fit him with a throat mike. StuartG
|
|
|
Post by nickcosmosonde on May 28, 2011 9:32:08 GMT 1
Nicko, "The radar was observed using three repetition rates: 10 Hz, 16 Hz and 20 Hz." "Transmitting on frequencies variouly reported as being between 3.26 and 17.54 megahertz and 4 to 30 MHz," Where are you quoting from Stu? I'm not sure if those figures refer to sweep rate or a modulation for some reason - highly dangerous if so. 16 Hz causes induced efflux of calcium from neurones. The point is though, Woodpecker didn't use a carrier frequency, did it? That causes it too, over a long period, of course - but relatively easy to solve. There's a more fundamental reason which is far more difficult to solve; though not, apparently, for the Soviets.
|
|
|
Post by nickcosmosonde on May 28, 2011 10:30:51 GMT 1
Except MRI scanners use a tuned RADIO frequency em field to do the job! Of course. A scanner uses its own magnetic field, typically at just over 1 tesla these days. We use the geomagnetic field. Yes? Yes, alright, taking the average field strength of about 50uT. Sound waves? No, they're obviously transduced into em field fluctuations. Every cell in the body has an enormous field gradient across its membrane and will, due to their highly stressed internal and external tensegrity structures, vibrate in resonance with an applied mechanical frequency in the appropriate range - the observed limits of which so far stretch from at least a thousandth of a hertz to the infrared. I don't think it's a coincidence that the Larmor frequency for water in the average geomagnetic field strength is exactly the same as the central point of sensitivity of the range of human hearing. I doubt there's anything accidental about it at all. The body is an exquisitely sensitive bio-energetic machine. Every protein, cell and process within it work bio-electronically, and life has developed in order to exploit the energy and information within the natural environment since the first amino acid. Yes. The fact is the required frequency range to precess the body's water's protons just happens to be generated as a marked peak by a cat's purr. For some reason. No, you're going down a blind alley. No. Look at the frequency analysis in the cat's purr. The required frequency to precess its water (unless its at the poles or the Namibian dip, granted). This isn't "numerology", dodgy or otherwise. Now, it might be a coincidence, as you assert with your usual closed-minded dogmatic over-confident assertion of unwarranted certainty; but given the equation of bio-energetic coherence with health and a sense of well-being (as, for example, when the brain's DC field produces co-ordinating Alpha rhythm at the Schumann frequency) I don't think there's anything coincidental about it at all. You take your self-appointed role as the sole authoritative arbiter of "plausible physics" a little too zealously, if you ask me. In particular, you appear to know very little about biology, and how physics is applied by life. Any idiot can do that too.
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on May 28, 2011 17:13:25 GMT 1
I'm sorry Nicko, I replied to this earlier, but it hasn't appeared, [what did I do?] "Where are you quoting from Stu?" radio4scienceboards.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=gab&thread=908&page=1#11288 my previous post. "Transmitting on frequencies variouly reported as being between 3.26 and 17.54 megahertz and 4 to 30 MHz, with the actual frequency depending on the maximum-usable-frequency (MUF) for propagation. Typically, at dawn the transmissions were between 14 and 22MHz and by 3 PM. they were at 14MHz or lower. The radar is variously reported as having output power between 20 to 40 MW [though some sources suggest rather less plausibly a power level of 2 MW]. The signal is pulse-modulated at a rate of several times a second [most sources state 10 pulses per second], sounding like a woodpecker. The radar was observed using three repetition rates: 10 Hz, 16 Hz and 20 Hz. The most common rate was 10 Hz, while the 16 Hz and 20 Hz modes were rather rare. The pulses transmitted by the woodpecker had a wide bandwidth, typically 40 kHz." www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/steel-yard.htm knol.google.com/k/the-russian-woodpecker#a nice footnote ... This 'steelyard/woodpecker' setup was finally beaten [in a small way], it had been a pain to radio amateurs across the N. Hemisphere... "Wayne Green, publisher of the ham magazine 73, in a recent editorial urging hams to "attack" the problem, described the process: "If you want to screw up a radar signal, all you have to do is send a return signal on its frequency which blocks out the echos. Hams, from the earliest woodpecker days, have been driving the monster off their bands by getting on the frequency and sending properly spaced dots back. The screen somewhere in Russia blanks out and the operators utter some Russian oaths and change the frequency to get rid of the interference." It works, too, say many hams who have tried it, although it greatly helps if several hams in different locations "gang up" on the radar's frequency. Green advocated better organization for doing just that. Hams in Texas have tried such tactics and dubbed their group The Russian Woodpecker Hunting Club. Robert Haviland, a Daytona Beach amateur, has heard "woodpecker hunting" on the air. There are several difficulties, he said, with transmitting on exactly the right frequency and sending the dots at exactly the right speed to interfere with the radar. However, if it's done right, he said, "a shift in frequency of the woodpecker comes very quickly." And an American ham operator has just won a one-on-one match with a massive Russian radar installation." StuartG
|
|
|
Post by nickcosmosonde on Jun 6, 2011 1:27:28 GMT 1
Thanks Stu, that's interesting. I still don't understand how it can possibly be radar, though? The carrier frequencies couldn't possibly tell them anything, being far too long. Unless they were looking for a massive first strike, possibly. But then why modulate it at ELF? They'd receive that back, but with no possibly useful info the carrier frequency might convey, of course.
More likely, I think, is that this was a primitve submarine underwater transmission system. The carrier frequency bounced around by ground or surfaced submarine transmitters, the ELF modulation being the genuine signal. Such a makeshift system could well have emulated the current US underwater submarine transmission system, which also works in the 10Hz range (as whalesong does, for example).
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Jun 6, 2011 1:37:42 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Jun 6, 2011 2:11:42 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by nickcosmosonde on Jun 6, 2011 2:14:46 GMT 1
Thanks Stu. So you're saying their receiver would have been, what, across the Bering Stait? That's possible, I suppose, if they had some sort of advance knowledge of Stealth developments in the late 60s and early 70s. But why modulate at ELF?
|
|
|
Post by StuartG on Jun 6, 2011 2:42:15 GMT 1
'But why modulate at ELF? ' Because the Carrier is at ELF, otherwise the modulation would be quicker than the carrier, then the modulation would be the carrier, and the carrier......! StuartG
|
|