I thought there was no sound in space?

Saiph · Jul 23, 2004

you're defining a phenomena by the detector. It's an arbitrary and unneccessary distintion. Such a bias can color scientific inquiries, because it denies a valid connection and relatioinship. It's the same as saying light is only light if it can be detected by the eyes. X-rays, radio, and infrared are then erroneously thought of as entirely different creatures. Besides, sound (or as you call it, the physical process that is sound) travels better through liquids, and very well through solids. There is less attenuation, and better transmission (smaller fluctuations needed for detection). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

Saiph · Jul 23, 2004

Sound is caused by vibration, it is (as I said several posts back) a longitudinal wave (a compression wave in this case). These exact same waves can exist in liquids and solids, and so SOUND (since it is these waves) exist there. The mechanisms the ear uses for detection of these compression waves is identical in all cases, so even your biological definition falls apart. Voice "detection" is a processing aspect. It takes a sound and runs it through another part of the brain. It's more analogous to picking out a specific object from a group, rather than just detecting the group. We define a physical process by the most common factor. That way any extra trappings are gone. If you mention sound, in water, you know it acts the same way as sound in air, or in a solid. With light, it is the electromagnetic wave, and so we know how it behaves. The way you are defining it puts in arbitrary limits, it suggests a different set of mechanisms work for "sound" in air and in a liquid, which isn't the case. Our eyes are nothing but instruments. Sure, they're integrated, but instruments nontheless. They work the same way as photographic film, or CCD technology. You're focusing on a distinction between biological and physical that isn't there. They are also not the only way of detecting light. It is the most common way of doing so, and the most common way to represent it (in pictures and such). But you can use other ways (by measuring radiative heat transfer for instance), and get a pile of numbers. It's detected, recorded, and the information is still there (and meaningful). The real illusions and mistaken impressions are created during data processing (either in computers, by paper, or in your head). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

spacechump · Jul 23, 2004

http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gs2.cgi?path=../multimedia/videos/movies/PIA06410_480x360.mov&width=480&height=360&&type=movie http://cassini.physics.uiowa.edu/plasma-wave/cassini/objectives.html "The objective of the RPWS investigation is to study radio and plasma waves in the vicinity of Saturn and during the flight to Saturn. This objective includes studies of * Radio emissions * Plasma waves * Lightning * Dust impacts * Plasma densities and temperatures * Plasma density fluctuations Regions investigated include * Saturn's magnetosphere * Titan's ionosphere * Solar wind * Jupiter's magnetosphere * Earth, Venus, and Asteroids " http://www1.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/pia06410.html

newtonian · Jul 23, 2004

Steve - Look at page one of this thread. Sound is, of course, vibration. It is also, of course, pressure waves. Vibration can cause pressure waves. Pressure waves can cause vibration. Isn't that how the ear operates? The theme of this thread naturally begs the question as to whether this can occur in the 'vacuum' of space. It is NOT a complete vacuum. And at one time it was much more dense. "Scientific American" recently published evidence from the Sloan digital sky survey that supports the model of sound causing the structure in our universe. The sound waves of the big bang are theorized to be fine tuned to allow the structure, and these sound waves have resonances at other frequencies which are fine tuned to allow this outcome. Try a search at sciam.com under Stradivarius. Guess why!

tom_hobbes · Jul 24, 2004

Anyway steve, I reckon there's 33 angels dancing on the head of this pin, but my mate reckons there's 34 gyrating. What do you think? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I wish I could remember But my selective memory Won't let me - Mark Oliver Everett </div>

newtonian · Jul 24, 2004

You all - That would be the February 2004 Scientific American, article entitled "Cosmic Symphony." It is the beautiful (awesome) harmonious overtones of the sound which causes our universe to be compared to a stadivarius violin.

Saiph · Jul 24, 2004

I've already said it is merely a compression wave. You're limiting the phenomena by what the ears are "meant" to detect. Do you see the arbitrary limitation there? <blockquote>In reply to:<hr />We cannot build eyes<hr /></blockquote> No, we can't. We can build things better than eyes. We understand how they work. We can't grow them, sure, but we can build instruments that are conceptually the same (CCD's) though not bioligical. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

bobw · Jul 25, 2004

I thought there was sound in space. Now you've all got me confused again. I read the term supersonic in astronomy stuff all the time. Quasar jets, planetary nebulae, new stars in the Orion nebula, solar wind, the heliopause; why would all the astrophysicists talk about supersonic bow shocks if there's no sound in space? Look here: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~hrm/R/heliosphere.html <blockquote>In reply to:<hr /> The Bow Shock is the line where the interstellar plasma is decelerated from supersonic to subsonic velocities. Whether or not the interstellar medium is supersonic is an open question, and consequently is the existence of the bow shock. The supersonic Solar Wind terminates at the Termination Shock where it becomes subsonic, shock-heated, and starts flowing tailward to the heliotail. A contact discontinuity, the Heliopause, separates solar wind plasma and interstellar plasma. <hr /></blockquote> Do they all mean it WOULD be supersonic if we could really hear it? Or is it truly supersonic? I don't see how something can be supersonic if there's no sound. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

newtonian · Jul 25, 2004

Saiph - You are correct, btw. Here is the www.dictionary.com first entry under sound: Vibrations transmitted through an elastic solid or a liquid or gas, with frequencies in the approximate range of 20 to 20,000 hertz, capable of being detected by human organs of hearing. Transmitted vibrations of any frequency. The sensation stimulated in the organs of hearing by such vibrations in the air or other medium. Such sensations considered as a group. That would be from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Back to thread theme, and the 2/04 Sciam. article. The article shows that the early universe had sound waves propagated by trapped and bouncing photons, electrons and protons and resulting vibrations (Saiph) and compression waves (Steve). Here are a few tidbits (excerpts): “Our basic understanding of the physics behind these observations dates back to the late 1960s, when P. James E. Peebles of Princeton University and graduate student Jer Yu realized that the early universe would have contained sound waves. (At almost the same time, Yakov B. Zel’dovich and Rashid A. Sunyaev of the Moscow Institute of Applied Mathematics were coming to very similar conclusions.) When radiation was still trapped by matter, the tightly coupled system of photons, electrons and protons behaved as a single gas, with photons scattering off electrons like ricocheting bullets. As in the air, a small disturbance in gas density would have propagated as a sound wave, a train of slight compressions and rarefactions. The compressions heated the gas and the rarefactions cooled it, so any disturbance in the early universe resulted in a shifting pattern of temperature fluctuations.” -”Scientific American,” 2/04, p. 46 Now how did these sound waves end up as temperature variations in the CM

Saiph · Jul 25, 2004

that's faster than sound, in that medium. A few posts back I said there was sound, just not on the levels we're familiar with. The reason the supersonic and subsonic matter for jets and such is how the expansion/explosion develops. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

Saiph · Jul 25, 2004

thanks newtonian. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

bobw · Jul 25, 2004

OK thanks. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

Saiph · Jul 25, 2004

anytime! <img src="/images/icons/cool.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

newtonian · Jul 25, 2004

Saiph - your welcome! Any thoughts on that Sciam. model?

tom_hobbes · Jul 27, 2004

It's called irony Steve...<img src="/images/icons/rolleyes.gif" /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I wish I could remember But my selective memory Won't let me - Mark Oliver Everett </div>

Saiph · Jul 27, 2004

no, no! Give me my stick, I gotta take another.... (men in white coats drag off Saiph, foaming at the mouth, carefully preparing an extra-long sleeved jacket) <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

newtonian · Jul 27, 2004

Ok, you all, good sound posts! Sound good?

tom_hobbes · Jul 29, 2004

Resoundingly. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I wish I could remember But my selective memory Won't let me - Mark Oliver Everett </div>

rahul_shrivastava · Sep 8, 2005

how can sound waves travel in vacuum???ya electro magnetic waves can.

mrmux · Sep 8, 2005

Ah, joy... You all miss the point about human hearing (the term some mix up with 'sound' itself). It has evolved purely so that all beings can be imparted with steve's infinite wisdom...

contracommando · Sep 8, 2005

“how can sound waves travel in vacuum???ya electro magnetic waves can.” Sound only needs a medium to travel trough. Usually, you can’t hear anything in space due to the fact that such a medium does not exist (air). But sound can also travel through liquids and solids. It might be possible to put your ear (if the vacuum didn’t kill you) against a good sound conducting solid-like a small piece of sheet metal, bang on the other side, and then hear something. But even then, air is needed to move the eardrum; you still might be able to hear something- like when you tap on you forehead, you can hear it without air. I’ve never tried this (and don‘t intend to), so I can’t be totally sure, though.

Saiph · Sep 8, 2005

In a vacuum it can't. however there is no perfect vacuum anywhere. Space does have stuff in it, just not much. As such the intensity of sound is very weak, and travels very slowly. But it can travel as it agitates what little is there, and those eventually agitate the other few atoms near them. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

rahul_shrivastava · Sep 9, 2005

so that means your ears are not hearing sound through vacuum you hear it through metal.

igorsboss · Sep 9, 2005

CDs are sold in sealed containers to keep all the music from leaking out.

rahul_shrivastava · Sep 12, 2005

what was that???

I thought there was no sound in space?

Saiph

Guest

Saiph

Guest

spacechump

Guest

newtonian

Guest

tom_hobbes

Guest

newtonian

Guest

Saiph

Guest

bobw

Guest

newtonian

Guest

Saiph

Guest

Saiph

Guest

bobw

Guest

Saiph

Guest

newtonian

Guest

tom_hobbes

Guest

Saiph

Guest

newtonian

Guest

tom_hobbes

Guest

rahul_shrivastava

Guest

mrmux

Guest

contracommando

Guest

Saiph

Guest

rahul_shrivastava

Guest

igorsboss

Guest

rahul_shrivastava

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page