Why etc
My humble opinion:
I think we mix up two things here:
Sound is a vibration in of a certain wavelenght, using air to propel itself.
Light is a vibration of a certain wavelength, using electromagnetic waves to propel itself (not sure if "propel" is the right term, but you'll get the point. Eventually
).
In the sense that they use totally different mediums, they can never be the same.
BUT, sound frequencies can also be transmitted as an an electromagnetic wave (as in the post some time back on ELF transmitters for comms with submerged submarines). In this sense, sound and light are similar phenomena. The only reason we can not see sound in its electromagnetic form is that our eyes give up below a certain frequency.
I just reread the above, and now I'm not sure how this helps the original poster. But it sure sounds (huh?) impressive
Jan Didden
My humble opinion:
I think we mix up two things here:
Sound is a vibration in of a certain wavelenght, using air to propel itself.
Light is a vibration of a certain wavelength, using electromagnetic waves to propel itself (not sure if "propel" is the right term, but you'll get the point. Eventually
).In the sense that they use totally different mediums, they can never be the same.
BUT, sound frequencies can also be transmitted as an an electromagnetic wave (as in the post some time back on ELF transmitters for comms with submerged submarines). In this sense, sound and light are similar phenomena. The only reason we can not see sound in its electromagnetic form is that our eyes give up below a certain frequency.
I just reread the above, and now I'm not sure how this helps the original poster. But it sure sounds (huh?) impressive
Jan Didden
Actually sound is not a transverse wave, it is a compression wave. Sound is a shockwave. To visualise the difference take a slinky and stretch it out and fix one end to something. If you swing the free end back and forth you generate a transverse wave. To generate a compression wave you pull and push on the slinky.
Sound and Light are very, very different beasts.
The sound you hear from a flourecent light is the same sound you hear from most AC powered equipment. Try putting your ear to an electrical box, or a small wall transformer. You can hear it standing outside of an electrical substation and even from some high tension transmission lines. They will all generate the same 60Hz tone (If you live in North America). Since standard AC power is generated at 60Hz (the current flow in the wire reverses 60 times per second), it can cause certain components (such as transformers) to vibrate at that same frequency, generating a sound.
Using sound to generate light is possible, but not through direct means. By focussing insense beams of sound (really shockwaves) you can use it to compress a medium (such as water), since when you compress an object it heats up, you can use shockwaves to generate extremely high temperatures, temperatures in the 1000's (and even higher) of degree's hot enough that the medium itself will begin to glow.
Sound and Light are very, very different beasts.
The sound you hear from a flourecent light is the same sound you hear from most AC powered equipment. Try putting your ear to an electrical box, or a small wall transformer. You can hear it standing outside of an electrical substation and even from some high tension transmission lines. They will all generate the same 60Hz tone (If you live in North America). Since standard AC power is generated at 60Hz (the current flow in the wire reverses 60 times per second), it can cause certain components (such as transformers) to vibrate at that same frequency, generating a sound.
Using sound to generate light is possible, but not through direct means. By focussing insense beams of sound (really shockwaves) you can use it to compress a medium (such as water), since when you compress an object it heats up, you can use shockwaves to generate extremely high temperatures, temperatures in the 1000's (and even higher) of degree's hot enough that the medium itself will begin to glow.
Anyone interested in some other mind-blowing stuff?
A 380 Million dollar project to find gravitational waves.
www.ligo.caltech.edu
I work at the observatory in Livingston, Louisiana.
I thought that some might be interested.
-Dan
A 380 Million dollar project to find gravitational waves.
www.ligo.caltech.edu
I work at the observatory in Livingston, Louisiana.
I thought that some might be interested.
-Dan
EM Theory
Hi tomasro,
Sound = Transfer of energy via mechanical disturbance (requires a physical medium).
Light = Transfer of energy via magnetic disturbance (no physical medium required).
Rate of disturbance = frequency.
Sound disturbance (physical disturbance) can occur up to many Mhz frequency and is reliant on the properties of the physical conductor.
Magnetic disturbance (field disturbance) can occur up to extremely high frequency.
In both cases the resonant (reactive) properties of the load dictate the ratio of energy transferrance to energy reflection.
A resonant recieving radio aerial is a resonant energy sink hole (attractant) in the ether (surounding fields).
A resonant transmitting radio aerial works due to the fact the rate of change of the magnetic disturbance travelling in the aerial conductor is faster than the rate of collapse of the previous cycle induced magnetic field surrounding the aerial conductor.
This causes two like polarity magnetic fields repulsion, and consequent expulsion of the first cycle magnetic disturbance in to the ether (space).
This travelling magnetic disturbance will induce into a suitably reactive remote conductor (admittance), and will be reflected (impedence) by a non frequency suitable load (conductor).
The speed of transfer of this energy is at light speed in space and at a lower speed in a transmission line.
This normally accepted physics.
Tesla spoke of using electric field disturbance to transmit energy instantaneously and without loss.
He also argues that Einsteins theory explains only one special case, and gives a rebuttal.
Don't they teach classical physics at school anymore ?.
Radio guys please feel free to add further info..
PS - If you strip a car ignition coil down to the secondary only, (many thousands of turns on an iron rod) you have a very sensitive magnetic field disturbance transducer.
If you connect an oscilloscope or a portable preamp/speaker amp across this coil you will pick up (and view or hear) all manner of magnetic disturbances.
If you hold this coil exactly inline with a speaker driver pole piece, you will pick up an audio magnetic disturbance many feet away.
Is your listening position at the focus of two magnetic (L&R) disturbances ?.
At a friends place that was 150m from an electric rail line, by the sound of the radiated magnetic field, I could monitor trains starting and stopping at remote stations, and compare this to the published time table !.
Given time I will add more appropriate info.
Regards, Eric.
Hi tomasro,
Sound = Transfer of energy via mechanical disturbance (requires a physical medium).
Light = Transfer of energy via magnetic disturbance (no physical medium required).
Rate of disturbance = frequency.
Sound disturbance (physical disturbance) can occur up to many Mhz frequency and is reliant on the properties of the physical conductor.
Magnetic disturbance (field disturbance) can occur up to extremely high frequency.
In both cases the resonant (reactive) properties of the load dictate the ratio of energy transferrance to energy reflection.
A resonant recieving radio aerial is a resonant energy sink hole (attractant) in the ether (surounding fields).
A resonant transmitting radio aerial works due to the fact the rate of change of the magnetic disturbance travelling in the aerial conductor is faster than the rate of collapse of the previous cycle induced magnetic field surrounding the aerial conductor.
This causes two like polarity magnetic fields repulsion, and consequent expulsion of the first cycle magnetic disturbance in to the ether (space).
This travelling magnetic disturbance will induce into a suitably reactive remote conductor (admittance), and will be reflected (impedence) by a non frequency suitable load (conductor).
The speed of transfer of this energy is at light speed in space and at a lower speed in a transmission line.
This normally accepted physics.
Tesla spoke of using electric field disturbance to transmit energy instantaneously and without loss.
He also argues that Einsteins theory explains only one special case, and gives a rebuttal.
Don't they teach classical physics at school anymore ?.
Radio guys please feel free to add further info..
PS - If you strip a car ignition coil down to the secondary only, (many thousands of turns on an iron rod) you have a very sensitive magnetic field disturbance transducer.
If you connect an oscilloscope or a portable preamp/speaker amp across this coil you will pick up (and view or hear) all manner of magnetic disturbances.
If you hold this coil exactly inline with a speaker driver pole piece, you will pick up an audio magnetic disturbance many feet away.
Is your listening position at the focus of two magnetic (L&R) disturbances ?.
At a friends place that was 150m from an electric rail line, by the sound of the radiated magnetic field, I could monitor trains starting and stopping at remote stations, and compare this to the published time table !.
Given time I will add more appropriate info.
Regards, Eric.
A ha!
now, if sound requires a medium, and light is a transference of magnetic waves, couldn't the medium for the sound waves be magnetic? This is really stretching it, but worth a shot.
Now if speakers were to operate on AC power instead of DC, they could have a current of electrons to thrust it outward, and then a reverse current to pull it back just as far. The coil of the spaeaker would exhibit 2 magnetic polarities: one attractive, and one repulsive. I think this makes for a wave. And since the wave would be based on a sound frequency, the Hz that the speaker would be operating would also that of a light wave if they were to so match up. I wish I knew more math and physics to back this up.
Thanks guys
now, if sound requires a medium, and light is a transference of magnetic waves, couldn't the medium for the sound waves be magnetic? This is really stretching it, but worth a shot.
Now if speakers were to operate on AC power instead of DC, they could have a current of electrons to thrust it outward, and then a reverse current to pull it back just as far. The coil of the spaeaker would exhibit 2 magnetic polarities: one attractive, and one repulsive. I think this makes for a wave. And since the wave would be based on a sound frequency, the Hz that the speaker would be operating would also that of a light wave if they were to so match up. I wish I knew more math and physics to back this up.
Thanks guys
...fundamental physics just changed...
Light AND sound are both transverse waves are they?
That's strange they must have changed the laws of physics since I finished my A-level course, thanks for informing me though I can now go away and polarise some sound waves...
...I think now somehow.
Fundamental physics!!
Vivek said:
Light AND sound are both transverse waves are they?
That's strange they must have changed the laws of physics since I finished my A-level course, thanks for informing me though I can now go away and polarise some sound waves...
...I think now somehow.
Fundamental physics!!
If sound waves were magnetic then they... well... wouldn't be sound waves.
Speakers are powered by AC, the whole purpose of an amplifier is to take the DC produced by the power supply and convert it to an AC signal the corresponds to the input signal of the amplifier. If you ran DC to a speaker it would simply pop out (or in) and stay there motionless (DC on the output terminals of an amplifier is bad).
Now you are correct in that a speaker does produce EM radiation, however it has nothing at all to do with sound waves. The voice coil in the speaker is fed the output from the amplifier and generates a fluxuating magnetic field which interacts with the speaker magnet to move the voice coil and procuce sound. You can however use a microphone to produce an electrical signal from sound (and thus EM radiation). However no microphone could ever convert multi TerraHz sound waves (since they are mechanical devices), even if air could support sound waves of that frequency (which it can't)
I'm not sure what exactly it is you're trying to accomplish?
Speakers are powered by AC, the whole purpose of an amplifier is to take the DC produced by the power supply and convert it to an AC signal the corresponds to the input signal of the amplifier. If you ran DC to a speaker it would simply pop out (or in) and stay there motionless (DC on the output terminals of an amplifier is bad).
Now you are correct in that a speaker does produce EM radiation, however it has nothing at all to do with sound waves. The voice coil in the speaker is fed the output from the amplifier and generates a fluxuating magnetic field which interacts with the speaker magnet to move the voice coil and procuce sound. You can however use a microphone to produce an electrical signal from sound (and thus EM radiation). However no microphone could ever convert multi TerraHz sound waves (since they are mechanical devices), even if air could support sound waves of that frequency (which it can't)
I'm not sure what exactly it is you're trying to accomplish?
Hi Kelly,
"Now you are correct in that a speaker does produce EM radiation, however it has nothing at all to do with sound waves."
The magnetic radiation is in sympathy with the applied audio, and is to be as considered as a loss wrt electrical input power/acoustic output power (transduction).
Eric.
Ask Mr Groman about self induction.
"Now you are correct in that a speaker does produce EM radiation, however it has nothing at all to do with sound waves."
The magnetic radiation is in sympathy with the applied audio, and is to be as considered as a loss wrt electrical input power/acoustic output power (transduction).
Eric.
Ask Mr Groman about self induction.
Could you guys imagine a world filled with light? Created from every sound? Simply turn on your radio, and the term mood music wouldn't be all that false. If you were having a down day, the music would be slow and mellow, not unlike indigo. And if you were having an up day, the light would be more towards the other end of the spectrum: Red-yellow.
It's just an idea, hopefully one I can fulfill in time. Thank you all for your continued interest.
Mr. G, thank you for your complements. People say I am weird, I say I just think different.
Peace
It's just an idea, hopefully one I can fulfill in time. Thank you all for your continued interest.
Mr. G, thank you for your complements. People say I am weird, I say I just think different.
Peace
tomasro:
You are right. You need to quit thinking.
This is just another example of a stupid question and subsequent replies which are a waste of time.
I've seen some of your other posts and your advise and comments are marginal at best.
There are some shining stars on these forums, a lot of people that want to know, some people who know a little, a lot of people who think they know but don't and way too many nut cases.
Fortunately, one of my bags is critic and, boy, do I love this place. It is only equalled in real life.
Or is this real life?
What a horrible thought.
You are right. You need to quit thinking.
This is just another example of a stupid question and subsequent replies which are a waste of time.
I've seen some of your other posts and your advise and comments are marginal at best.
There are some shining stars on these forums, a lot of people that want to know, some people who know a little, a lot of people who think they know but don't and way too many nut cases.
Fortunately, one of my bags is critic and, boy, do I love this place. It is only equalled in real life.
Or is this real life?
What a horrible thought.
Jeez, some people just fail to come to the right conclusions.
Someone here thought that sound was a magnetic wave, then, think if you are unsure, does a person's voice generate magnetic waves??? It all comes down to common sense guys.
Of course, one of my thoughts about light and the way we think about it is that we say we know how it works, and then say "um well, we think it's a wave, and we think it's a particle, so we call it a wavicle, but we're totally unsure exactly...?... People make so many assumptions thinking about such simple subjects and thus complicate them to unimaginable levels.
However, I belive this topic is quite interesting and will continue to lead infinitely to more meaning and knowledge but never reach completeness as we think of it. It's interesting to understand that
light can be caused by a chemical reaction, and most generally is, but that it can also be created by heat or ionization of certain gasses.
To think of it in a sort of philosophical way is what we are doing, but too many people don't have open minds (Gromanswe has got a very very good point here!) too many people believe that they know for sure how things work and decide not to learn anymore.
Our concept of light as we think it is perfect and also fails miserably simply by our arbitrary standards of thought and decision. I believe that part of the human inability to simply understand things is because of how flawed communication between us can be(and is) and that since we think something is right, it is proveable in at least one way. Mathematics is one of these distinctly flawed concepts of thinking. Of course, it's only flawed by human standards if they happen to consider it so, since it has been proven that any wrong thing could be proven right mathematically. For example, not many people would think that you could get closer and closer to a hole and keep doing so and never reach it no matter how long you move. But persons who have learned calculus know this. Technically, anything you could possibly say has a way of being proved right or wrong, even if you think it's definitely one or the other. In this concept, I'm saying that anybody could technically know everything and nothing at the same time and either know of that or not or know of knowing so or also not, which leads to limitless possibilities. It's like not knowing the question to the answer, which could also occur more than the vice versa if one decided that was so, but only because of what we think ans what we think we know and what we think we think we know, which is never for sure, or may be, but then what's the use of my conversation. Which leads me to another thought, everything I just typed could, by human standards, be proven absolutely correct if such a thing were desired or carried out. Also, it seems to prove that anyhting a person says really means nothing, it is of no consequence, if you will... Does anybody get the idea???? By my own thoughts, I could keep typing till I die and state my point over and over in infinite ways, or simply get nowhere, wich some may think are different, but I think I know are indifferent completely. In believing in this system of flawed concepts, my mind stays perfectly open, or as I think, and I learn infinitely and so does anybody else, but no one ever reaches totality.
Does this make any sense?????
P.S.: Gro should understand all of that perfectly, or so he should think (heehee )
In my own concept, still trying to keep into the realm of what humans think is logic, I must say that that concept may change someone's mind completely, if they think they understand it. Or maybe it's what fried minds of people like Gro in the first place...
Who knows???
Of course, I already know the answer to that question, and you
should too if you do the flawed math to figure it out
So..... so much for the concepts of light and sound eh??
Someone here thought that sound was a magnetic wave, then, think if you are unsure, does a person's voice generate magnetic waves??? It all comes down to common sense guys.
Of course, one of my thoughts about light and the way we think about it is that we say we know how it works, and then say "um well, we think it's a wave, and we think it's a particle, so we call it a wavicle, but we're totally unsure exactly...?... People make so many assumptions thinking about such simple subjects and thus complicate them to unimaginable levels.
However, I belive this topic is quite interesting and will continue to lead infinitely to more meaning and knowledge but never reach completeness as we think of it. It's interesting to understand that
light can be caused by a chemical reaction, and most generally is, but that it can also be created by heat or ionization of certain gasses.
To think of it in a sort of philosophical way is what we are doing, but too many people don't have open minds (Gromanswe has got a very very good point here!) too many people believe that they know for sure how things work and decide not to learn anymore.
Our concept of light as we think it is perfect and also fails miserably simply by our arbitrary standards of thought and decision. I believe that part of the human inability to simply understand things is because of how flawed communication between us can be(and is) and that since we think something is right, it is proveable in at least one way. Mathematics is one of these distinctly flawed concepts of thinking. Of course, it's only flawed by human standards if they happen to consider it so, since it has been proven that any wrong thing could be proven right mathematically. For example, not many people would think that you could get closer and closer to a hole and keep doing so and never reach it no matter how long you move. But persons who have learned calculus know this. Technically, anything you could possibly say has a way of being proved right or wrong, even if you think it's definitely one or the other. In this concept, I'm saying that anybody could technically know everything and nothing at the same time and either know of that or not or know of knowing so or also not, which leads to limitless possibilities. It's like not knowing the question to the answer, which could also occur more than the vice versa if one decided that was so, but only because of what we think ans what we think we know and what we think we think we know, which is never for sure, or may be, but then what's the use of my conversation. Which leads me to another thought, everything I just typed could, by human standards, be proven absolutely correct if such a thing were desired or carried out. Also, it seems to prove that anyhting a person says really means nothing, it is of no consequence, if you will... Does anybody get the idea???? By my own thoughts, I could keep typing till I die and state my point over and over in infinite ways, or simply get nowhere, wich some may think are different, but I think I know are indifferent completely. In believing in this system of flawed concepts, my mind stays perfectly open, or as I think, and I learn infinitely and so does anybody else, but no one ever reaches totality.
Does this make any sense?????
P.S.: Gro should understand all of that perfectly, or so he should think (heehee
)In my own concept, still trying to keep into the realm of what humans think is logic, I must say that that concept may change someone's mind completely, if they think they understand it. Or maybe it's what fried minds of people like Gro in the first place...
Who knows???
Of course, I already know the answer to that question, and you
should too if you do the flawed math to figure it out
So..... so much for the concepts of light and sound eh??
Why etc
Hey Bill, loosen up!
Life is supposed to be fun, even after all those experiences to the contrary.
Sure, you hit the mark precisely. But, like anything in life, participating in DIYAUDIO is a matter of give and take. Some seem to give, some seem to take. So be it.
I like your posts, don't desert us!
Jan Didden
Bill Fitzpatrick said:
Hey Bill, loosen up!
Life is supposed to be fun, even after all those experiences to the contrary.
Sure, you hit the mark precisely. But, like anything in life, participating in DIYAUDIO is a matter of give and take. Some seem to give, some seem to take. So be it.
I like your posts, don't desert us!
Jan Didden
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.