Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup tuning Re: MUSIC OF THE SPHERES: Wavelength vs. Frequency , Part II(Correction)

Message 40396
From: "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...>
Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 6:47 am
Subject: Re: MUSIC OF THE SPHERES: Wavelength vs. Frequency

--- In tuning@y..., Bill Arnold <billarnoldfla@y...> wrote:

> According to the HyperPhysics website: the WAVELENGTH of a sound or
> note of 100 Hz is circa 3.45 meters, and a sound or note of 2000 Hz
> is circa 18 cm."

"wallyesterpaulrus" wrote: yup! in some particular air conditions.

> My question is: is the WAVELENGTH which is referred to as 3.45
> meters or 18 cm, is that the DIAMETER or the RADIAN?

"wallyesterpaulrus" wrote: neither! it's the distance from one crest
of the wave to the next crest, or from one trough to the next . . .
waves travel in straight lines . . .

=========================================================================

I accept that WAVELENGTH is from crest to crest, or trough to trough,
and I think you would agree: it can be from node to node, if we are
talking about an AC WAVE in any EMF sitation, or in any similar A/C WAVE
with positive/negative wave characteristics? [See below]

Thus: I ask is WAVELENGTH in music like the following:

Let me define: in the case of the SUNSPOT cycle, traditionally the data
was measured since the time that Galileo first counted them in pulses of
data circa 11.11 Earth years in length. Since some point, researchers
found out that the polarity on the Sun reverses every HALF WAVE,
and therefore the WAVELENGTH is really circa 22.22 Earth years in length.
This is defined as a tradtional EMF [Electro-Magnetic Force] wave [I did
discuss this at length in my ON THE SPECIAL THEORY OF ORDER paper, and
now wish to relate it, specifically, to musicology].

The circa 11.11 Earth year wave was incorrectly viewed as a DC wave,
(Correction: this is the proper link)
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/sun/activity/solar_cycle.html
with all the pulses moving in the same direction, and the circa 22.22 Earth
year wave is AC, and now considered the proper way to view the data. That
is: Direct Current and Alternating Current; the latter AC WAVE considered
proper to describe the SUNSPOT full-wave circa 22.22 Earth year cycle.

In addition, the BUTTERFLY PATTERN shows interesting characteristics,
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/sun/activity/butterfly.html
and aides astrophysicists in SEEING the statistic distribution pattern
of the data more clearly.

In summary, I ask: do musicologists talk of the WAVELENGTH as a DC pulse
type wave, or an AC positive and negative wave? On the Hyper-Physics
website, there is a suggestion that by WAVELENGTH musicologists mean an
AC positive and negative wave, as follows:

Traverse Waves
and
Longitudinal Waves:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html

Am I correct to conclude, then, that when WAVELENGTH is discussed in
musicology it is as you say:

See LONGITUDINAL SOUND WAVES IN AIR:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html

and thereby I note, I hope accurately, that it has an AC characteristic,
the positive ( + ) phase when it exhibits increased pressure and the
negative ( - ) phase when it exhibits decreased pressure in air?

If so: then we should also be agreed that LONGITUDINAL SOUND WAVES IN AIR
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
can be measured in WAVELENGTH from note to node as well, that is, three
ways altogether: from (1) node to node, from (2) crest to crest, and
(3) trough to trough?

Lastly, for now:
Have the physical parameters of the WAVELENGTH of a sound been so
studied, similarly to SUNSPOTS and DIFFRACTION PATTERNS OF ATOMS?
http://www.hcc.hawaii.edu/hcconline/sci122/Programs/p28/p28.html
http://www.molecularuniverse.com/mile/mile1.htm

Sound Waves In Air:
Scroll Down to:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
and
Butterfly Pattern:
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/sun/activity/butterfly.html

Have they attempted to map a sort of PATTERN for sound
similar to the BUTTERFLY PATTERN or the DIFFRACTION PATTERNS of
Ernest Rutherford's and Niels Bohr's work on atoms?
http://www.molecularuniverse.com/mile/mile1.htm

Recall from above, as described according to the HyperPhysics website:
"the WAVELENGTH of a sound or note of 100 Hz is circa 3.45 meters,
and a sound or note of 2000 Hz is circa 18 cm."

If the SOUND WAVES IN AIR PATTERN were shown for each NOTE,
i.e., 100 Hz at circa 3.45 meters or 2000 Hz at circa 18 cm,
one at a time, all NOTES which musicologists talk about in terms
of frequency but less so in terms of WAVELENGTH, then it appears
each would show a distinctive unique PATTERN which would radiate
out SPHERICALLY from the source and be MAPPABLE?

Has such been done? Is there an URL that is known online?

Thanks in advance,
meant kindly,

Bill Arnold
billarnoldfla@yahoo.com
http://www.cwru.edu/affil/edis/scholars/arnold.htm
Independent Scholar
Independent Scholar, Modern Language Association
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"There is magic in the web" Shakespeare (Othello, Act 3, Scene 4)
-------------------------------------------------------------------

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

🔗Bill Arnold <billarnoldfla@yahoo.com>

Message 40418 From: "wallyesterpaulrus" <wallyesterpaulrus@y...>
Date: Thu Oct 31, 2002 2:52 pm
Subject: Re: MUSIC OF THE SPHERES: Wavelength vs. Frequency , Part II

--- In tuning@y..., Bill Arnold <billarnoldfla@y...> wrote:

> I accept that WAVELENGTH is from crest to crest, or trough to
> trough, and I think you would agree: it can be from node to node, if we
> are talking about an AC WAVE in any EMF sitation, or in any similar A/C
> WAVE with positive/negative wave characteristics? [See below]
> Thus: I ask is WAVELENGTH in music like the following:
>
> Let me define: in the case of the SUNSPOT cycle, traditionally the
> data was measured since the time that Galileo first counted them in
> pulses of data circa 11.11 Earth years in length. Since some point,
> researchers found out that the polarity on the Sun reverses every HALF WAVE,
> and therefore the WAVELENGTH is really circa 22.22 Earth years in
> length.

wallyesterpaulrus wrote: "years is a unit of time. wavelength has units of
distance. so a wavelength can't be measured in years!"

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Of course, you are correct. I apologize for a slip of the tongue, as I
expressed myself incorrectly. The point is immaterial at this point :)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Am I correct to conclude, then, that when WAVELENGTH is discussed in
> musicology it is as you say:
>
> See LONGITUDINAL SOUND WAVES IN AIR:
> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
>
> and thereby I note, I hope accurately, that it has an AC
> characteristic, the positive ( + ) phase when it exhibits increased
> pressure and the negative ( - ) phase when it exhibits decreased
> pressure in air?

yes.

> If so: then we should also be agreed that LONGITUDINAL SOUND WAVES
> IN AIR http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
> can be measured in WAVELENGTH from note to node as well, that is,
> three ways altogether: from (1) node to node, from (2) crest to crest,
> and (3) trough to trough?

(2) and (3) are correct. (1), i believe, with give you half the
correct wavelength.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Of course, correct again. In my papers I had a drawing or illustration
to show I meant for a DC WAVE every node, and for an AC WAVE every other
node, as you so correctly corrected me. Sorry. I am more than glad to
stand corrected, in the interest of finding that astrophysicists and
musicologists do speak the same MATH and PHYSICS I always thought they did,
and apparently, as I am finding out, do! Bravo; and thanks :)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> Lastly, for now:
> Have the physical parameters of the WAVELENGTH of a sound been so
> studied, similarly to SUNSPOTS and DIFFRACTION PATTERNS OF ATOMS?
> http://www.hcc.hawaii.edu/hcconline/sci122/Programs/p28/p28.html
> http://www.molecularuniverse.com/mile/mile1.htm

i understand these websites, but i don't understand your question.
sound is very well-understood.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Great: then it IS just ME again in my inability to express myself,
and I apologize but will strive to find the words and images to do so.

See remarks below:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> Recall from above, as described according to the HyperPhysics
> website: "the WAVELENGTH of a sound or note of 100 Hz is circa
> 3.45 meters, and a sound or note of 2000 Hz is circa 18 cm."
>
> If the SOUND WAVES IN AIR PATTERN were shown for each NOTE,
> i.e., 100 Hz at circa 3.45 meters or 2000 Hz at circa 18 cm,
> one at a time, all NOTES which musicologists talk about in terms
> of frequency but less so in terms of WAVELENGTH, then it appears
> each would show a distinctive unique PATTERN which would radiate
> out SPHERICALLY from the source and be MAPPABLE?

if the source is a point, then yes, the waves would radiate outward
spherically from it. you have a spherically propagating sine wave in
the case of a pure tone. that's all there is to map!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Precisely so, and agreed: if, say, a tuning fork for 100 Hz were
in a test environment which satisfied your parameters of methodology,
and placed properly, it would discern in the REAL world a spherically
shaped wave which would be according to the laws of musicology,
with a WAVELENGTH of 3.45 meters, and for for 2000 HZ, with a
WAVELENGTH of 18 cm?

A number of questions come to mind:

(a) If a receiver, human or mechanical, is outside the distance of the
WAVELENGTH, I assume the SOUND can still be perceived, and thus it would
be a SECOND WAVELENGTH, or more, which REACHES the perceiver? Thus,
a SERIES OF WAVES at the SPECIFIED WAVELENGTH RADIATE outward in the
experiment, agreed?

(b) If a receiver, mechanical, records the PATTERN of the SOUND WAVE,
inclusive of a WHOLE WAVELENGTH,
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
*Scroll to Sound and Hearing
**Scroll to Traveling Waves
***Click on Longitudinal Waves
****Click or Scroll to Sound Waves In Air
*****Discern the Motion of Air Molecules Associated With Sound in the
Direction of Propagation

wouldn't it show a concentric pattern in terms of viewed on an oscilloscope
or properly designated device, with the FIRST HALF WAVE OUT of INCREASED
PRESSURE, and the SECOND HALF WAVE OUT of DECREASED PRESSURE?

Thus, if successive FULL WAVES were viewed, it would look similar to the
Rutherford/Bohr DIFFRACTION PATTERNS for certain, simple atoms?

Perhaps, they would ALL look the SAME except if DONE to SCALE would only
be DIFFERENT in SIZE?

And, if all NOTES were so VIEWED, a VISUAL INDEX OF PATTERNS OF NOTES
would be created, and I wonder if such has already been done; if so,
IS the data, WAVELENGTH included, and VISUAL PATTERNS online, in books?

Perhaps, they would ALL look the SAME, except if DONE to SCALE would
only be DIFFERENT in SIZE? If that is so, it might explain why I have
never seen it. However, I would relish seeing such a PATTERN in not
only its two-dimensional but three-dimensional form, the LATTER would,
it true, be appropriate for something like the Sonic Arts Website,
I would surmise.

Maybe it might be useful for TWO or MORE notes intereacting? Has that
been done? Would you deem it useful for musicologists, building note
systems?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Thanks in advance,
meant kindly,

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/

🔗wallyesterpaulrus <wallyesterpaulrus@yahoo.com>

--- In tuning@y..., Bill Arnold <billarnoldfla@y...> wrote:

> Precisely so, and agreed: if, say, a tuning fork for 100 Hz were
> in a test environment which satisfied your parameters of
methodology,
> and placed properly, it would discern in the REAL world a
spherically
> shaped wave which would be according to the laws of musicology,
> with a WAVELENGTH of 3.45 meters, and for for 2000 HZ, with a
> WAVELENGTH of 18 cm?

if the humidity, temperature, and air pressure were just right, yes.

> A number of questions come to mind:
>
> (a) If a receiver, human or mechanical, is outside the distance of
the
> WAVELENGTH, I assume the SOUND can still be perceived, and thus it
would
> be a SECOND WAVELENGTH, or more, which REACHES the perceiver?

you must be misunderstanding something. the waves propagate outward
at the speed of sound, theoretically to an infinite distance. there's
no "second wavelength".

> Thus,
> a SERIES OF WAVES at the SPECIFIED WAVELENGTH RADIATE outward in the
> experiment, agreed?

they are separated from one another by the specified wavelength.

> wouldn't it show a concentric pattern in terms of viewed on an
oscilloscope
> or properly designated device,

only if the device could measure the vibration at every point in the
surrounding three-dimensional space.

> with the FIRST HALF WAVE OUT of INCREASED
> PRESSURE, and the SECOND HALF WAVE OUT of DECREASED PRESSURE?

and so on, alternating for as long as the sound continues . . .

> Thus, if successive FULL WAVES were viewed, it would look similar
to the
> Rutherford/Bohr DIFFRACTION PATTERNS for certain, simple atoms?

this is a superficial similarity. for one thing, the diffraction
patterns do not have spherical symmetry, but only circular symmetry.

> And, if all NOTES were so VIEWED, a VISUAL INDEX OF PATTERNS OF
NOTES
> would be created, and I wonder if such has already been done; if so,
> IS the data, WAVELENGTH included, and VISUAL PATTERNS online, in
books?

this seems so trivial i don't know why you'd expect to find it in a
book. concentric spherical wavefronts, separated by the given
wavelength. that's all there is to it!

> Maybe it might be useful for TWO or MORE notes intereacting? Has
that
> been done?

see the websites on interference that i posted (was it last week)?
some of them show the pattern of vibration caused by *two* sources
playing the same pitch. this of course applies to any wave
phenomenon, not just sound.

> Would you deem it useful for musicologists, building note
> systems?

not particularly.

> Thanks in advance,
> meant kindly,
>
> Bill Arnold

kindest regards,
paul