Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in

H.D.S<none@none.com> wrote in alt.atheism

Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote in

Tesla often went to great lengths in describing the effects of
infrasounds to newspaper reporters who, behind his back, scoffed
at the notion that a "little sound" could effect such
devastations. Yet, it was precisely with such a "little sound"
that Tesla nearly brought down his laboratory on Houston Street.
His compact infrasonic impulsers were terribly efficient. Tesla
later designed and tested infrasonic impulse weapons capable of
wrecking buildings and whole cities on command."
=======
If the above is true, why haven't we seen such weapons employed
today?

Selectivity. What good is a weapon that makes *both* armies puke
their guts out?

I was talking about the last sentence of the above. It sounds a
little fantastic to me... Sonic waves capable of taking down entire
buildings? Sounds as unbelievable as the Bible story about
people blowing horns and the walls of Jericho falling down. :)

It doesn't seem likely.
How could something capable of emitting such a strong and persistent
wave (with the ability to destroy a city) be able to withstand it
itself?

If it could be focused directly forward, and there were no reflected
waves that bounce back to destroy the source, then I think it might
work.
Consider pointing one at a communications satellite... Not much
chance of any reflected waves coming back to the source, is there?
Or pointing it at anything up in the air, for that matter... Pointing
it at buildings that might not be completely destroyed by the
wave and the majority of the waves bouncing back to destroy the
source is definitely a problem.
As far as pointing such a device at things in the sky, I think the
risks or feedback would be minimal, don't you agree?

Pointing it at the sky seems like it would be safe (for the emitter).

Although sound waves can be projected relatively well, I do not have
enough experience to decide whether projection of a sound wave, with
enough force to destroy a building, is feasible.
I guess if the technology isn't developed we will have our answer.

drift@lost.net wrote in alt.atheism

<snip>

Isn't it interesting that with all the technological advances, a
speaker is still a coil of wire, glued to a cone, suspended in a
magnetic field, as it was when first invented? Similar to a
microphone. Still electromechanical. All this digital technology and
the human ear is analog, as is sound itself.

That's because we rely on our ear drums to detect the sounds.
Can't very well get rid of them, can we? Even if we built robotic
ears, they'd still have to be able to detect sound waves. I don't
think it's possible to detect a sound wave with a computer chip,
is it?

And, the day that someone invents a computer to replace strippers, I
want to leave this planet. Yeah I know about avi, mpg, wmv, mov
files, etc but there's no substitute for human flesh, and at my age,
the introduction of Viagara. America's first legal recreational drug.

WOW from human destruction to sex in in four paragraphs! I guess my
next destination is in my mind: the titty bar.

If you've never seen the movie called "Brainstorm" then you should
rent it and give it a watch. There's one scene where a guy is hooked
up to a machine which is playing a digital loop of him having sex and
orgasming. He hooked it up into and endless loop, and someone else
had to pull off his headgear so the guy wouldn't starve to death while
sitting there experiencing one orgasm after another.

Here's an imdb link:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085271/

drift@lost.net wrote in alt.atheism

<snip>

Isn't it interesting that with all the technological advances, a
speaker is still a coil of wire, glued to a cone, suspended in a
magnetic field, as it was when first invented? Similar to a
microphone. Still electromechanical. All this digital technology and
the human ear is analog, as is sound itself.

That's because we rely on our ear drums to detect the sounds.
Can't very well get rid of them, can we? Even if we built robotic
ears, they'd still have to be able to detect sound waves. I don't
think it's possible to detect a sound wave with a computer chip,
is it?

And, the day that someone invents a computer to replace strippers, I
want to leave this planet. Yeah I know about avi, mpg, wmv, mov files,
etc but there's no substitute for human flesh, and at my age, the
introduction of Viagara. America's first legal recreational drug.

WOW from human destruction to sex in in four paragraphs! I guess my
next destination is in my mind: the titty bar.

If you've never seen the movie called "Brainstorm" then you should
rent it and give it a watch. There's one scene where a guy is hooked
up to a machine which is playing a digital loop of him having sex and
orgasming. He hooked it up into and endless loop, and someone else
had to pull off his headgear so the guy wouldn't starve to death while
sitting there experiencing one orgasm after another.

Here's an imdb link:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085271/

drift@lost.net wrote in news:t7t9h095ujreij3l3au66h5c00m9be0jum@4ax.com:

On Sat, 07 Aug 2004 00:16:21 GMT, Fred Stone <fstone69@earthling.com>
wrote:

drift@lost.net wrote in
news:k728h0t79flv9hpktm5g76th714p26v363@4ax.com:

On Thu, 05 Aug 2004 23:04:49 -0700, johac <jhachm@ixpresremove.com>
wrote:

In article <fud5h017pi6tpbe7ncnmid48h0d1dbj6lh@4ax.com>,
Elroy Willis <elo@airmail.net> wrote:

From:
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/6583/project458.html

"HE listened and closed his eyes as the rolling waves of sound

poured

over and through his being. Thrilling, intoxicating, the hysteria
of heaven, the enthralled and frightening flight of angels.

Electrifying.

Messaien's organ music signalled messages of meaning, titanic

foghorns

ululating among dimly perceived near-worlds. Olivier Messaien,

master

composer of musical expressionism, used the ground thrumming tones

of

great Parisian cathedral organs to evoke sensations which may only

be

called otherworldly. Masterfully macabre. Black foundations, blue
pillars, and rainbow ceilings.

[...]

"In one historic instance, Samuel Clemens, Tesla's close friend,
refused to descend from the vibrating platform. Tesla was sorry he

had

allowed him to mount it. After repeated warnings, Tesla's concern

was

drowned out by both the vibrating machine and Clemens' jubilant
exaltations and praises. Several more seconds and Clemens nearly
soiled his white suit, the effects of infrasound being "duly
recorded".

Tesla often went to great lengths in describing the effects of
infrasounds to newspaper reporters who, behind his back, scoffed
at the notion that a "little sound" could effect such
devastations.

Yet,

it was precisely with such a "little sound" that Tesla nearly

brought

down his laboratory on Houston Street. His compact infrasonic
impulsers were terribly efficient. Tesla later designed and tested
infrasonic impulse weapons capable of wrecking buildings and whole
cities on command."

=======

If the above is true, why haven't we seen such weapons employed
today?

The above link is pretty long, and I wonder how much of it is
really true. Anyone else around here tried to debunk any of it
before?

It seems that the Pentagon is in the process of developing non
lethal weapons, including 'Sonic bullets' and has used another sonic
weapon in Iraq to disperse crowds:

http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99991564

and:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/ptech/03/03/sonic.weapon.ap/

140 decibels at a high enough frequency so as to be directional
should certainly do the trick. Since an airplanes structure is
comprised of rounded surfaces, it would be rather immune to
"standing waves" which could be devastating to a structure.
drift

There was something not too long ago about the use of a phased pair of
ultrasonic carriers to deliver a highly directional and even
*distance* controlled beam of sound energy to a target. At low power,
they could talk to someone without his buddies on either side hearing.
At *high* power, they could drop him in his tracks.

Come to think of it, in my High School years, (late '60's) I was
messing with a transistor circuit connected to a tiny speaker. I got
that same "head" feeling that I noticed when I walked by the
ultrasonic alarm at the department stores jewelry counter. When I
touched the base lead of the transistor, I got the familiar 60 cycle
hum produced loudly in my head, and we're talking milliwatts!

I thought of improving it to actually transmit music but thought it
would ultimately produce major headaches and varying results for
individuals.

Isn't it interesting that with all the technological advances, a
speaker is still a coil of wire, glued to a cone, suspended in a
magnetic field, as it was when first invented? Similar to a
microphone. Still electromechanical. All this digital technology and
the human ear is analog, as is sound itself.

There are other speaker technologies, though they all have to eventually
get down to shaking air molecules. They make for a neat science-fair
project, some of them. The flame-ionic speaker is pretty dramatic: a
high-voltage audio signal is applied to two electrodes *just* far enough
apart that they don't spark. Then flick a bic and put the flame across
them and out comes the sound. Not what you'd call high-fidelity, though
at least one commercial outfit tried it for tweeters, IIRC.

Electrostatics are pretty common in headphones, I've even seen room-
sized models for lotsamoney. Magneplanars, piezoelectrics, I think there
was even a plastic-conductor design, I forget the name of that one.

And, the day that someone invents a computer to replace strippers, I
want to leave this planet. Yeah I know about avi, mpg, wmv, mov files,
etc but there's no substitute for human flesh, and at my age, the
introduction of Viagara. America's first legal recreational drug.

Well, there are these:
http://www.realdoll.com

Just order the robot skeleton and "prosthetute" programming (just
kidding).

WOW from human destruction to sex in in four paragraphs! I guess my
next destination is in my mind: the titty bar.
drift