It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

HAARP Active @ 7.406Mhz Shortwave

page: 12
82
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
What ever it is, it buzzes on my computer speakers constantly.

My computer speakers actually start buzzing also with a peculiar feed back about 2 seconds before my cell phone rings.

I literally know because of them when I am going to get a call before I get a call.


Now, that actually happens. What's happening is that the tower is telling your cell phone to increase its output power just before it links the call. The cell phone's transmitter is being picked up on your speaker leads. There's a negative feedback loop on most audio amps from the speaker side, the RF from the cell phone can ride in on the speaker leads and end up "detected" into audio by protection diodes in the amplifier's front end, resulting in that buzzing sound.




posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic
reply to post by rufusdrak
 


No I see electro magnetic energy turned into light and sound. What did you think? You can theoretically turn sound into radiowaves, and in turn oscilate these radiowaves into light given you add enough energy. Visible light is made by the exact same type of particles as other types of EM radiation. It's all photons. Visible light belongs to a narrow part of the total "effects" if you like, of electromagnetic waves like I showed in the spectrogram earlier in this thread. Gammarays are made of the same stuff as radiowaves, only they contain way more energy and work at different frequencies and wavelengths. If you have to bully me in evey damn post you make here, I do suggest you get your things straight. Dismissing the obvios is quite silly. I'd rather get a billion ideas that turned out to be wrong than dismissing a single one that would turn out to be true. The light we see is infact just a very narrow part of the whole specter. EM radiation in the radio or MW range is also light, but we just can't see it. Same goes with X-rays which makes sense since we can use it to produce images the same way as with regular light.


When are you going to stop posting inaccurate and fatuous garbage? The video does not in any way shape or form show electro-magnetic energy forming sound. The video is showing PLASMA SPEAKERS. Do you even research your own garbage that you post?
Do you even know what plasma is, kid???? Have you ever opened a science book. I mean seriously, JUST STOP. Are you reading any of the other posts in this thread? Did you read Bedlam's posts where he clearly states that sound and light/EM radiation HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH EACH OTHER?
You keep talking about 'spectrums' like you're saying that sound is part of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum. Newsflash: IT'S NOT! Sound has never been and will NEVER be part of the LIGHT SPECTRUM. Get your head out of your arse buddy seriously this is starting to get sad when you don't even know what your own videos are about that you posted. It had zero to do with EM radiation. Do some research...jesus you are truly sad. There are half a dozen credentialed and extremely sagacious people in this thread outright saying sound and EM radiation/light have NOTHING TO DO WITH EACH OTHER yet instead of learning something you go off and say that sound is on the EM Radiation spectrum.
I can only "face palm" myself when I see your posts.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by pondrthis
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 


But let's fuel the stupidity fire of this thread a bit more...

"Wait! You can produce images with sound, too, right?! That's what ultrasound is! It's like x-rays, higher frequency but we just can't hear it! Therefore sound is light because we can make images!"

Let that wrack your brain for a bit.


Exactly, just give up on that guy. He's seriously deluded and refuses to see the "light" no pun intended.


He honestly thinks that sound is just light at a different frequency so that if we had eyes that could see the 20-20khz "sound spectrum" we'd be able to "see" the sound.


Kids these days....wow. How far education has fallen. Stick to your chemical brothers concerts pal, you're way out of your depth here.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by rufusdrak
 

Enough Rufus, you're just making yourself look like an ass.

If there's any misconception remaining at all, it's that RADIO is LIGHT, not SOUND.

A household (well, car... who has a radio in their house that's not on an alarm clock?) radio takes in "radio waves"... light or EM waves... and emits sound waves, which you then hear. It converts the signal, in a sense.

There. It's been said. So shut up already, Rufus.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prime-Vector

Radio waves can definetly cause vibrations in the earth.

Think about it like this, The governemnt uses 25 watts to find oil, natural gas, elements in the ground etc. They beam 25 watts straight into the ground and they get a sound after. by doing it so many times they can identifty any element in a second because it always gives off the same frequency.


No, not at all. You're confusing sound and radio, like a lot of people on the thread. They're not even vaguely related. I'm not sure from what you posted if you're talking about magnetotelluric detection or GPR, but in either case, you don't get "sound" back. Each element does not have a distinctive "sound". At any rate, neither MTD nor GPR give you elemental composition.



Haarp uses a billionw atts of frequency, so if it was sent into the ground not only would it shake the ground violently but could cause massive earth quakes.


Watts aren't frequency. HAARP doesn't have a billion watts output anyway, but that gets into the difference between ERP and total power, and if you think radio is sound, the explanation on that one's going to be tough.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Oh, but THEN you cut-n-pasted to add this:


But wait there's more...

1981 Apr 12th Shuttle Columbia STS1 The Columbia was accidentally destroyed by 7 Super Heavy Cosmospheres
..........

1981 Nov 12th Shuttle Columbia STS2 Supposedly carried Astronauts Joseph Engle and Richard Truly. In fact there were no human pilots aboard. It was shot down by Russian TU-144 jet airplanes using beam weapons, over the White Sea Finland.




Did you actually read all of that garbage, before posting it?


What's worse is EvolvedMinistry and Donnie wanting me to provide a detailed point-by-point refutation to 30 seconds of copypasta from a chemtrail site, or "I've been eaten alive" by it. And if I spent 4 hours to do it, they wouldn't read it anyway.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Link;

www.sovereign-publications.com...

Quotes from the site regarding Atomic Dielectric Resonance




The scanning process is based on assessing the transmission, reflection and absorption image properties of objects in ultra-wide bands at invisible light frequencies (radio-wave, micro-wave, sub-micro-wave and thermal infra-red wave-bands). These waves, when passing through materials, cause the electrons within the atoms or molecules to resonate.


Notice 'resonance'.

Another, perhaps more in line with the discussion;



The resonance exhibited by any given material has been found to differ from all other materials. By typecasting and building a library of such resonance responses, ADROK aim progressively to detect a wide variety of materials.


Notice the article essentially states that differing materials have differing resonance profiles? And that a library of materials and their resonance factors, is or has been compiled.

This may go some way to explaining why Hams seem to intuitively suspect the signal seems to be 'hunting'. Hunting for the correct material to resonate would seem logical.

Further;



The waves can operate at close range or long-range, and can operate through air, water and rock. It has, for example, a proven ability to operate through rock at a depth of 4km from the ground surface, and potentially can go much deeper. The equipment can be used from a static or moving platform either on the surface of land or water or, potentially, from airborne platforms. The equipment itself is light, compact and readily transportable.


So, we have an RF based system, with a library of 'resonance targets', that can penetrate deeper than 4km into the Earth...
The system as described is ultimately a LOW power system...which of course, doesn't mean for a moment it cannot become a HIGH powered one.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by Prime-Vector

Radio waves can definetly cause vibrations in the earth.

Think about it like this, The governemnt uses 25 watts to find oil, natural gas, elements in the ground etc. They beam 25 watts straight into the ground and they get a sound after. by doing it so many times they can identifty any element in a second because it always gives off the same frequency.


No, not at all. You're confusing sound and radio, like a lot of people on the thread. They're not even vaguely related. I'm not sure from what you posted if you're talking about magnetotelluric detection or GPR, but in either case, you don't get "sound" back. Each element does not have a distinctive "sound". At any rate, neither MTD nor GPR give you elemental composition.



Haarp uses a billionw atts of frequency, so if it was sent into the ground not only would it shake the ground violently but could cause massive earth quakes.


Watts aren't frequency. HAARP doesn't have a billion watts output anyway, but that gets into the difference between ERP and total power, and if you think radio is sound, the explanation on that one's going to be tough.


Pondrthis just read this post. You're saying "enough" but it's obvious that we're trying to establish some factual understanding here at least at a fundamental level because the discussion of HAARP can't move along until everyone is on the same wavelength (no pun intended again...). There's a couple people here that seem to think that sound and radio waves are the same thing. BEDLAM as you can see is just as nonplussed at this idiocy as I am and we can't have an accurate discussion of HAARP'S capabilities as long as people keep saying that HAARP is putting out "ELF SOUND WAVES" (:@@
.
Neo Christian Mystic you need to read this previous post by BEDLAM and get it through your head already...sound and light are NOT on the same spectrum, and have NOTHING in common. They are completely separate phenomena as different as night and day.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:13 PM
link   
reply to post by pondrthis
 



....radio takes in "radio waves"... light or EM waves... and emits sound waves, which you then hear. It converts the signal, in a sense.


Rudeness sometimes begets rudeness....but, I shall attempt to curb my impulses.

However....."radio 'takes in' ... light or EM waves..."


Are you seriously going to stand by that, whilst insulting another ATS member?

Please, tell us what brand radio can receive "light" (and, no...fiber-optics don't count! Not in the way you stated it, there...) and then interpret it, to re-modulate and reproduce sound.

EDIT IN, stand by...~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(Is this thing on?) [tap, tap....]
OK....that didn't come out as clearly as I'd like. I am well aware that what we call 'light' is merely a very narrow portion of the extant EM spectrum, and our Human eyes are only sensitive to the frequencies from just above infrared to just below UV (give or take, that's not exact, but you can look up the exact frequencies online).

BUT....the frequencies of 'light', and their mode of propagation are NOT conducive to carrying information, in the way that radio EM radiation can. Except, of course, in fiber-optics, as I mentioned....BUT, that is also misunderstood by many people. Using light in optic cables is a DIGITAL method of conveying information electronically. Just as you can use electricity too....but electrical impulses can also be modulated in an analog format.

Look, I'm certainly not an electrical engineer, just a layperson. BUT, even I seem to have more of a basic understanding than some who are posting, here today.

Why do you suppose that is?

EDIT OUT, and over.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I am sorry, but unless you believe in a magical nature inside your radio, your claim is just hogwash, and completely misunderstands the science of radio transmission, reception, and reproduction...of the recording, of the original source.

I also found it very puzzling when you mentioned no one has a radio in their home, except for the clock radio!


Do you not own a stereo system? You know, a sound system --- the one you can blast your CDs, MP3s, and DVDs through (for that 'theater-like experience'?). One with an AM/FM tuner built in? Just about every upper-end unit (and even most low-end) nowadays still includes radio components.

I am just gobsmacked, here. Really. Gob. Smacked.

:shk:



[edit on 5 April 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   
I think most of the people on this thread are now arguing whether or not light can be used to produce sound... which is silly. OF COURSE IT CAN!

Light and sound are not the same thing. They are, for all intents and purposes, equivalent to electric potential and kinetic energy. It's not all that hard to turn one into the other, and nature has a few ways it can happen.

If you've ever been around a powerful laser, you know that it makes sound not only from the flashlamp (which is noisy) but also from the target of the laser. Now, I don't mean a cheesy movie laser sound, I mean a little "pop". That's an explosion kiddos. Explosions are the very sources of sound. It just so happens that a rapid expansion and collapse meet the requirements for the wave equation QUITE well.

So... duh, kids. It CAN be and is OFTEN done. But radio is light, not sound. I think we all (except one or two, maybe?) agree on these points. Let's talk about HAARP.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by deadred
HAARP does not use an antenna, it uses a gigantic antenna array that allows focusing of the RF signal almost to a point. When you're talking about megawatts of signal, a lot of propagation is not needed. Radio Engineers do a fine job of predicting conditions accurately enough that Tropospheric Ducting can be used to places you wouldn't expect them. There are proven examples of this phenomenon as low as 160 meters. The concept they are using to achieve some of these effects is resonance. Resonance is that point where the capacitive reactance in the circuit is equal and balanced to the inductive reactance of the circuit. Resoanace at megawatt power could do some amazing things, things we might not consider possible otherwise. If a properly modulated voice can break a glass to pieces, what might a properly modulated, resonant, focused mega-watt RF energy break?


You know, up to the last two sentences, parts of that are almost accurate if they pertained.

You can't focus RF "to a point", you're limited to a spot about two wavelengths across even with a parabolic, with a phased array it's not that tight. But at 10MHz, that's a couple hundred feet of "point".

You also left the "R" part out of your LCR. IF we were discussing tuned circuits, then you're right, resonance is achieved when the capacitive and inductive reactances are equal. The reason that transmitters with tuned outputs (and many are) don't just explode, is the ESR in the output tank capacitor, and the series resistance in the output tank inductor. Together, they form what we like to call dissipative elements, which transform the resonant energy into heat, and set a limit on the amplitude of the resonance. Otherwise known as "q'.

Not that a propagating radio wave exhibits resonance with objects like the ionosphere or the ground. So that doesn't really pertain. And you left out the "square law" bit about the power density vs distance.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Honestly this thread is just pure hilarity at this point. Weedwhacker, I will ATTEMPT to curb my own rudeness at the sheer idiocy of your post.

What radios take in light you say? Um how about EVERY RADIO EVER CREATED SINCE THE DAWN OF MANKIND.

You see LIGHT IS RADIO. Didn't know that did you? Of course you didn't, otherwise you wouldn't have made that hilarious previous post.



Here's the same image someone else posted previously. You see this Electro-magnetic radiation spectrum? Ah yes. You see radio AND light are both just pieces of the spectrum. I.E. they are identical in every way other than having a different frequency and wave length. So when that old granny clock in your bedroom is playing KISS FM station it's actually technically taking in LIGHT i.e. radio waves.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


No, I don't own a stereo system with radio capabilities.

And by "takes in", I simplified the concept of antennas. Radio waves are light waves, and these enter the box via the antennas. Using a translated-inverse Fourier Transform algorithm, the signal is then converted into a signal focused around the channel desired by the listener. This signal is then sent into the air via a peizoelectric transducer attached to a membrane. This is all for analog radio, but digital radio isn't all that different.

What would you have your radio do? What magic do you know, friend?



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Neo Christian Mystic

Because the Earth itself emmits sound, at a frequency just above seven Hertz. This is called the Shumann frequency,


Nope. Not at all. The Schumann frequency is nothing more than the resonance frequency of the earth-ionospheric waveguide. Basically, you look at the ionosphere as one conducting surface, and the ground as the other, and you calculate a sphere-within-sphere waveguide with an air dielectric. That will give you a number in the 7 Hz range, but since the ionosphere varies in height with a number of factors, and because it and the Earth aren't exactly spheres, there is a cluster of resonant frequencies that extend up to about 70Hz and vary with what's going on in space, primarily with solar weather, although if you get a real strong GRB like we had a year or two ago, it too can alter the resonances for a while.

And that's a radio wave resonance, not a sound. Sound is not radio, radio is not sound. They're not related at all.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by rufusdrak
 



I will ATTEMPT to curb my own rudeness at the sheer idiocy of your post.


Are you sure you're talking to me, dude?


Read again, if you please....



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by rufusdrak
 


And how do you suppose that plasma is made? Just like regular speakers is electromagnetic energy turned into sound the plasma speaker is working due to ONE thing: Electromagnetic energy. Stop this nonsense. What are you getting at. My language may not be the best in the world, but the bloody energy you take out of your wall to boil water on the stove is electromagnetic energy. The plasma you see there produce EM radiation as visible light damnit. Leave your stove on on full and wait. Even when cold it emmits light (unless it's at zero Kelvin) but as the temperature rises and the iron becomes red the electromagnetic energy emmited reach an energy where it glows off in the visual range. Damnit. This nonsense has to stop. There is invisible light too you know, and all EM radiation even Radiowaves is light. Invisible, but still it is photons which does the trick.Have you ever tried on night goggles? There you turn this invisible to the eye light into visible light. For fun when you have them on, take a look at the stars. It's quite amazing....

[edit on 5/4/2010 by Neo Christian Mystic]



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by rufusdrak
 



I will ATTEMPT to curb my own rudeness at the sheer idiocy of your post.


Are you sure you're talking to me, dude?


Read again, if you please....




Yes I'm talking to you. You were aghast at the notion that radios take in light.


I guess you're like the other guy who doesn't know that radio IS light. They are the same thing just on different parts of the electromagnetic spectrum so yes radios take in LIGHT and we're not talking about fiberoptics. We're talking about radio waves. Radio waves ARE LIGHT. But neither of them are SOUND which is what the few of us who know what we're talking about have been trying to explain for the past 5 pages to no avail of some stubborn people who refuse to educate themselves and just go do the research.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by rufusdrak

p.s. have you ever heard of a PHOTON? is there a sound particle?? perhaps a soundton? Jeezus you people.


Not to muddy the water for the others, but actually, there IS a sound particle, in a sense. You use phonons to take into account some aspects of solid state physics. I never had to deal with them outside of device design classes though, but it's a big deal in solid state physics, and in some aspects of sonar.

I'll have to pick up on the little bastidges again if I do the sonar doctorate. You can actually design with them, you get SASERs that way.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Bedlam
 


Not wanting to get into with you guys, since you appear to have your 'own thing' going on, but...

Since Radio waves are a facet of the EM spectrum, of which Light is a part, essentially light and radio are the same thing...ok.

You say;



You can't focus RF "to a point", you're limited to a spot about two wavelengths across even with a parabolic, with a phased array it's not that tight. But at 10MHz, that's a couple hundred feet of "point".


And while it's is not quite what you were saying above..

Laser light, as used in fibre optic communications and transmissions, can also essentially be thought of as radio wave propagation, very TIGHTLY focused.

So, in this sense at least, you can indeed focus RF to a very small point.



posted on Apr, 5 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvolvedMinistry

Show us information that agrees with the statement that you just made. I need to see hard facts, not just some guy saying..."Hey, listen to me. I know more than you."


You're actually debating that sound is radio? You need proof? It boggles the mind.



new topics

top topics



 
82
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join