I am still here. Izzy didn't blow hard enough and I made errors in
the choice of a client...
I for one think that the people that published this information about
b flats should be called in for their lies.
I don't believe for a second that they observed sound. Nor did they
see any motion of these waves during their 53 hour observation of a
place that was 250,000,000 light years away.
I also don't believe for a second that their math is anything other
than fiction in deciding it was a B Flat vs a B when changing the
calculation over 57 octaves in a medium that they have no clue about
what would be the transmission speed and did not define.
I further did not see an explaination of how these particles travel
by compression in a near vacume without collisions with other nearby
Maybe some time in the future someone will understand theses rings
that are seen. But we already observe rings around large objects
with compression between bands. Such as we see around Jupiter and
Saturn and these are not sound waves.
So to me this is all bs.
--- In Dan Dugan <> wrote:
> Scott Shepard wrote:
> >If you define sound as periodic rarefications and compressions of
> >medium, then this is not a sound. What has been detected, over
> >distance and time, is electromagnetic radiation. By the same
> >signals traveling through your audio cables are not sound. They
> >electrical signals ANALOGOUS to a sound event. Takes a transducer
> >as a microphone or speaker to convert between the two.
> >It's easy to confuse them, I remember some confusion about it
> >in my electroacoustics class in EE school. The point of the
> >think, is that the frequency of the electromagnetic signal
> >such that, if it were a sound, it would be the pitch indicated.
> >very precise scientific journalism, calling it a sound.
> You misunderstand the original evidence. No super-low-frequency
> electromagnetic signal has been detected. What has been seen
> (visually) is waves of compression and rarification in interstellar
> gas. From the photographs the speed and wavelength has been
> calculated. Compression waves in gas are properly described as
> -Dan Dugan
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/