It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
“You begin to wonder whether it’s you, your ears, but my husband said he could hear it too, and he doesn’t usually notice it.
“My neighbours have been aware of it too, several people say they have heard the same thing.“It’s a very low, almost melodic sort of sound.
“You wake up and thought it was something in the house. You can’t say it’s loud, but it’s a nuisance.
“We don’t hear it in the daytime, only at night.”
Daisy Rose said: “I hear it mostly at night when it’s quiet and I’m watching TV.“I have to keep pausing it because it’s so annoying. It does sound electrical in a way. Strange!”
Fabrice is convinced the water holds the answer. He has said it's down to the pressure of the waves on the seafloor that "generate seismic waves, which cause the Earth to oscillate."
Fabrice's theory is that continuous waves produce sounds that last up to 300 seconds at a time. The sound is picked up by people sensitive to low frequencies.
"We have made a big step in explaining this mysterious signal and where it is coming from and what is the mechanism," Fabrice said of the study, which was published in Geophysical Research Letters, a journal of the American Geophysical Union.
Microseismic activity, recorded everywhere on Earth, is largely due to ocean waves. Recent progress has clearly identified sources of microseisms in the most energetic band, with periods from 3 to 10 s. In contrast, the generation of longer-period microseisms has been strongly debated. Two mechanisms have been proposed to explain seismic wave generation: a primary mechanism, by which ocean waves propagating over bottom slopes generate seismic waves, and a secondary mechanism which relies on the nonlinear interaction of ocean waves. Here we show that the primary mechanism explains the average power, frequency distribution, and most of the variability in signals recorded by vertical seismometers, for seismic periods ranging from 13 to 300 s. The secondary mechanism only explains seismic motions with periods shorter than 13 s. Our results build on a quantitative numerical model that gives access to time-varying maps of seismic noise sources.
The GRL paper did not seem to give explanations for audible acoustic frequency (15-60 Hz) waves in atmosphere---it was on much slower waves not audible, but only visible to global seismographs.
I'm not convinced the Bristol paper particularly asked the author whether his theory explained the audible signals. The 'mysterious signals' described by the author were seismograph measurements, not hums.