[Top] [All Lists]

5. Re: Anthropophony redux

Subject: 5. Re: Anthropophony redux
From: madl74
Date: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:54 pm ((PDT))
> it is also important to consider that "sound" is usually considered what
> humans can hear, thus limiting the frequencies of sound to say 50 to
> 16000Hz and naming infra- and ultra- sounds the frequencies beyond those
> limits. However, as biologists, we also can consider "sound" all acoustic
> events that can be received and perceived by a living being.


There is concern that infrasound from ships may be disturbing the long
distance communications of whales across hundreds of miles of ocean. These=

low frequency sounds cannot be heard by the human ear, but are they not
still anthropophony?

BTW, I can hear down to around 5Hz. Does that make me a whale? :-)

David Brinicombe

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • 5. Re: Anthropophony redux, brini <=

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU