The Sound Connection

Originally posted by Frosty
Alright, show me a picture of this amazing phenomena. Is this just another bs run around to where I ask to see a picture and none can be produced?

No . This is another thread about a hypothesis, Dulcimer has .

Hard to show you pics of the theory , you'll just have to read the thread.

[edit on 13-7-2005 by lost_shaman]

I cant say that I believe crop circles are created by UFo's or not - my tendency is to discount them all out of hand as fraud. However I do agree that sound waves and in particular sine sound waves have an ability not greatly understood nor implemented in current technology. Sound waves being used to move heavy objects has been dicussed in rather great length before , especially pertaining to the construction of the pyramids and other large ancient monuments and I tend to believe that there is more to the subject than out there in the main stream.

Some finer points:

Sound is a waveform that travels through matter. Although it is commonly associated in air, sound will readily travel through many materials such as water and steel. Some insulating materials absorb much of the sound waves, preventing the waves from penetrating the material.

A sound wave has characteristics just like any other type of wave, including amplitude, velocity, wavelength and frequency

The amplitude of a sound wave is the same thing as its loudness. Since sound is a compression wave, its loudness or amplitude would correspond to how much the wave is compressed. It is sometimes called pressure amplitude.



The speed or velocity of sound in air is approximately 344 meters/second, 1130 feet/sec. or 770 miles per hour at room temperature of 20oC (70oF). The speed varies with the temperature of air, such that sound travels slower at higher altitudes or on cold days

Wavelength is the distance from one crest to another of a wave. Since sound is a compression wave, the wavelength is the distance between maximum compressions

The frequency of sound is the rate at which the waves pass a given point. It is also the rate at which a guitar string or a loud speaker vibrates. Frequency is also called the pitch of a sound. It is called the note in musical sounds


Sound is a mechanical wave ( unlike an electromagentic wave like light or radio waves ) and thus requires a medium of some sort ( of particles of matter ) to travel through ( ie . air , water , rock , steel etc - you get the idea ) Sound waves will not travel through a vacuum - so in space sound is of no real utility - in atmospheres and in water or soil / rock - sound can be utilized .


Now my basic theory:

It is not just sound waves that where utlized by the ancients to move these huge stones ( sorry to go off topic a tad ) but rather a combination of a self propagating sound wave and its accompanying shock wave.
"Unlike ordinary sound waves, the speed of a shock wave varies with its amplitude. The speed of a shock wave is always greater than the speed of sound in the fluid and decreases as the amplitude of the wave decreases. When the shock wave speed equals the normal speed, the shock wave dies and is reduced to an ordinary sound wave."
The ratio of the speed of a moving object (v) to the speed of sound (c) in a fluid is known as the Mach number in honor of Ernst Mach (1838-1916), the Moravian physicist, psychologist, and philosopher who studied sound and ballistics.

The Mach number is a dimensionless measure of speed common in aerodynamics. Mach 0.5 is half the speed of sound, Mach 2 is twice the speed of sound, and so on. Speeds less than the speed of sound have a Mach number between zero and one and are described as subsonic. Those greater than the speed of sound have Mach numbers greater than one are a described as supersonic. Speeds approximately equal to the speed of sound have Mach numbers approximately equal to one and are described as transonic.

The shock wave from a supersonic object is a cone composed of overlapping spherical wavefronts. As any one of these wavefronts forms, it propagates radially outward at speed c and acquires a radius ct. At the same time the source, traveling at speed v moves forward vt. These two displacements form the leg and hypotenuse, respectively, of a right triangle and can be used to determine the Mach angle at the vertex of the shock cone.
When an object travels slower than sound, the ratio in this equation is greater than one, and the equation does not have a real solution. This makes absolute sense as there is no shock wave to speak of at subsonic speeds. Traveling at the speed of sound makes the ratio equal one and results in a Mach angle of ninety degrees. At transonic speeds the shock wave is a wall of high pressure moving with the object, perpendicular to its velocity. Above the speed of sound, the ratio is less than one and the Mach angle is less than ninety degrees. The faster the object moves, the narrower the cone of high pressure behind it becomes. Measuring the vertex angle is thus a simple way to determine the speed of a supersonic object.

Thus utilizing a supersonic device that radially exudes a cone of ever increasing pressure ( in proportion to its speed - faster the object - the more directed the cone of the shock wave ) I think it is entirely feasible to use sound to move objects .

What do you think - sorry to ramble

Sources:

www.hazelwood.k12.mo.us...

hypertextbook.com...

www.astronomynotes.com...

www.glenbrook.k12.il.us...

www.school-for-champions.com...

I like this "Sound" theory very much. If an extraterrestrial of superior intelligence actually did have the much hyped UFO's, it would be no surprise for them to be able to manipulate sound waves in such a direct way. It doesn't seem like an extreme advancement, but an extremely plausible one in those circumstances.

Alias Jones, thanks for the input on shockwaves, but if it were a sudden shock like you describe, the stalks would break. But the stalks that are found in "real" crop circles are not broke, but bent at the nodes as much as 90 degrees. Like these:





I still don't think it could be done with sound, at least not without breaking the stalks.

Tests have shown them to bend up to 60 degrees using only sound.

Im sure if someone did the research we could find images of the plants used in the sound experiments.

All I can think of is the mythbusters program, although those only grew larger, I did not notice any bending as the plants were peas.

Due to the bursting of the nodes, I speculate other peoples theories it may be, if not all together faked, microwave pulses that succumb the little buggers to bend without breaking and the nodes blown out.

Dallas

golem: 'The picture in your post is, of course, a fake.'
Dulcimer: 'Of course? Why not enlighten us with your vast knowledge.'



You saying it's a REAL picture of a crop circle?

I'm telling you it's a 'crop circle'. If you can't see why it's an obvious fake, then there is obviously little I can do to help you...

Real crop circles have numerous very distinct characteristics. Even from this small fragmentary view of the 'crop circle' it can readily be seen that it violates EVERY SINGLE ONE of these 'distinct characteristics'.

Dulcimer: 'It doesnt matter if its real or fake...'

Au contraire, my friend. Au contraire.

Originally posted by golemina

I'm telling you it's a 'crop circle'. If you can't see why it's an obvious fake, then there is obviously little I can do to help you...

You mean other than point out why its an obvious fake.

Real crop circles have numerous very distinct characteristics. Even from this small fragmentary view of the 'crop circle' it can readily be seen that it violates EVERY SINGLE ONE of these 'distinct characteristics'.

And what exactly are these " distinct characteristics " ?

'And what exactly are these " distinct characteristics " ?'

Hmm... Well maybe for starters you don't see several tracks of where people seem to haved walked thru it.

Yes, my answer is rhetorical and if that wasn't bad enough. Let me repeat myself...

'If you can't see why it's an obvious fake, then there is obviously little I can do to help you...'

Humans possess a fantastic visual ability. It gives you an almost unlimited potential to see and understand everything you will ever encounter in your environment.

The unfortunate problem is that other cognitive abilities filter/overrule the visual information and...

You get the picture?

golemina,

Are you saying that while fakes are obvious , you can't verbalize why they are obvious?

Are you saying that if we don't instictivly see what your seeing , that we just won't be able to see it, and that pointing things out will waste your time?

So no , I don't get it.

Plus I personally don't think any CC's are Real!

golemina, I never said if it was real or fake, but i never concluded on one side with no evidence of observation.

That is the difference, you come to the conclusion it is fake, but stumble around your proof. If you want to say such things, please go ahead and say why its a fake.

Again, please share your vast knowledge.

Everyone says they are searching for the truth or denying ignorance, the reality is most minds are closed, most are grinding an axe of some type, pushing an agenda, are EASILY mislead...

Nah. It's more along the lines...

of making your own reality.

What I'm saying to you is VERY subtle.

For instance, you make (an honest statement) something like...

'Plus I personally don't think any CC's are Real!'

how do you think that will impact your interpretation of the visual stimulation?

We are not there yet... Need more specificity.

2nd attempt...

It's more along the lines of making your own self-realizing perception of your own reality.



'Are you saying that while fakes are obvious , you can't verbalize why they are obvious?'
Nah. I can verbalize it just fine.

'Are you saying that if we don't instictivly see what your seeing , that we just won't be able to see it, and that pointing things out will waste your time?'
No. But getting closer.

What I'm saying is that if a person is interested and takes to the time to go look at the wealth of crop circle info/pictures, you will fairly quickly be able to distinguish between the real and faux circles. Of course, excluding the retouched/manipulated pictures.

What I'm saying is that if a person is a 'true believer' (for either/any viewpoint) any real discussion is really pointless.

But in terms of breaking down the contents of the pictures... It's easy to do. Anyone can do it. It's all obvious. It's all right there.

All it takes is a little perception, some attention to detail.

All I am asking you to do is to show me why the picture I used in my canola example is "obviously fake".

Please do not dodge around the question, just point out why you believe that image is a fake.

Originally posted by golemina
What I'm saying is that if a person is interested and takes to the time to go look at the wealth of crop circle info/pictures, you will fairly quickly be able to distinguish between the real and faux circles. Of course, excluding the retouched/manipulated pictures.

So what should I be looking for when deciding if a crop circle is fake or real? Can you provide some examples of the ones YOU think are fake, and perhaps a few examples of the ones you think are real? Please help this thread to be more constructive golemina by providing evidence...I don't doubt your talent for 'crop spotting' but around these parts we like people to prove themselves worthy to make such claims

Originally posted by golemina
Hmm... Well maybe for starters you don't see several tracks of where people seem to haved walked thru it.

I expect the person taking the photo probably walked around the circle to inspect it.

golem: 'Hmm... Well maybe for starters you don't see several tracks of where people seem to haved walked thru it.'
Jimi: 'I expect the person taking the photo probably walked around the circle to inspect it.'

Sure... and typically true. However, doesn't fit with this particular picture.

Where were we? Maybe a different mindset is required...

Think of it more along the lines of preserving a 'chain of evidence'.

A good analogy might be that of the curious contaminating a crime scene.

If you think about it, crop circles are an artifact. So it really all depends if on what your attitude is about crop circles... If you are a circlemakers.org type pinhead, you'll probably take a different approach then a more serious/interested/seeker of the truth might...

For instance, if you come upon a crop circle and you suspect it is a real crop circle, the last thing you want to do is walk thru it.

You best bet is to walk away from it without attracting anyones attention. And quietly make arrangements to get some quality aerial shots of it.

If thats not possibly then try to have some associates keep onlookers from venturing into the field. If you are dealing with uncooperative folks, then try to try to buy the time/negotiate a temporary reprieve for the site until you can document it as found.

Jimi: 'So what should I be looking for when deciding if a crop circle is fake or real? Can you provide some examples of the ones YOU think are fake, and perhaps a few examples of the ones you think are real? Please help this thread to be more constructive golemina by providing evidence...I don't doubt your talent for 'crop spotting' but around these parts we like people to prove themselves worthy to make such claims'

What makes you think I am any type of authority? I am just a pinhead with an opinion and a keyboard!

I've already commented substantially on this subject. You can naturally find my comments with 'find posts' icon attached to this message. However, EarthSisters posts on this subject are better...

Now as to 'providing evidence'...

That kind of sounds like a strange question coming from a guy who claims to have witnessed crop circles being formed as well as claiming to make 'crop circles' himself... Even 'around these parts'...Don't you think?

Dulcimer:

>'That is the difference, you come to the conclusion it is fake, but stumble around your proof.'
You sure you're not pushing an 'it's real!' point of view?

>'All I am asking you to do is to show me why the picture...'
Is fake? Fair enough! Think of it as lacking anywhere near the precision required. Any help?

Is it your turn to share? Tell us more about the picture...

I see no point in arguing with you as you cannot come to any sort of conclusion in your arguements.

Anyways, heres another example from the same site. Yes they do investigations. What do you think of this one?






Circle in cattle corn, 27 metres (89 feet) diameter; plants flattened radially outward from centre to outside edge (never seen before in a corn formation).

Location (nearest town or landmark): Noyan, Quebec
Date First Reported or Discovered: August 24, 2004
Crop: cattle corn (9-10 feet tall)
Shape: circle
Size: 27 metres (89 feet) diameter
On-site investigation: CCCRN Quebec (Denyse Aita), BLT Research Team (Nancy Talbott)

Found August 24 by farmer. Later reported September 11 in Le Canada Francais newspaper. Offset centre. Plants flattened radially outward from centre to outside edge, never seen before in a corn formation. Cavities / splits in some stalk nodes. Additional photos and diagrams coming soon.

Plenty more photographs here: www.cccrn.ca...

So what did this to the corn? I cannot see sound doing this..

That is some serious quality trampling!

Good post, Dulcimer. Got an opinion on this one also. You want to hear it? If you don't like my opinion/doesn't agree with yours, you not going to get POed at me, are you?

Why does it take you more than one post to say what you want. I dont care what you say !


No need, I already know what you are going to say.

Cool!

And it's really too bad that a dissenting opinion basically gets you really POed.

>I dont care what you say !
That is actually a good attitude. Because the reality is if you are seeking knowledge, caring what other people think is a huge handicap. If you are affected by what people think, you just make yourself just that much more easy to manipulate. You have to let the facts guide you, not any type of groupthink, or the need for some type of group consensus.

As a researcher it is critical in trying to get started of setting an unimpeachable framework. It serves as a basis, a springboard, what have you to conduct further research, experiments, in YOUR pursuit. But it HAS to be based in truth...

Thank you for hijacking the thread and derailing it into oblivion.

Now if anyone else wants to talk about the sound connection, go ahead.