UK Man "Foils" Ghosts

[zoobyshoe]

http://www.findarticles.com

Current Science, Jan 19, 2001
Ghosts Busted in Haunted Rooms

"Vic Tandy, a computer expert, was working late one night in a laboratory in Warwick, England, which had a history of being haunted. At one point, a cold sweat and a feeling of depression overcame Tandy. Then a blurry gray figure appeared out of the corner of his eye. As he turned to the ghostly figure, it disappeared!
By coincidence, Tandy, who is a fencing enthusiast, took his fencing foils to the lab with him the next day. He clamped the blade of one foil in a vise in order to oil it. Returning with the oil, he found the blade vibrating like a tuning fork.
Tandy figured that a fan in the laboratory had created an infrasound wave, one below the range of human hearing. The vibrations of the sound wave had caused the foil to quiver. Tandy measured the vibrations at 18.9 hertz (cycles per second.

Tandy also knew that the human eyeball shakes when exposed to a soundwave of about 18 hertz (Hz). Putting two and two together, he deduced that what he had seen was no ghost; it was simply blurry vision caused by the shaking of his eyeballs.

Later, Tandy took his instruments to a famous haunted cellar in Conventry, England, and tested for infrasound there. Sure enough, the instruments registered the existence of an infrasound wave in the cellar that peaked at 18.9 Hz. Another ghost busted!"

Here is a more comprehensive write up of the story:

Fortean Slips: Spooky Acoustics
Address:http://www.parascope.com/articles/slips/fs30_2.htm

Here's a report of his visit to another "haunted" site.

Address:http://iccoventry.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0100localnews/page.cfm?objectid=12722447&method=full&siteid=50003

Here's an E-Mail he wrote someone I found on google:

RootsWeb: ORCADIA-L Re: [ orcadia>] Vic Tandy
Address:http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/ORCADIA/2001-06/0993717998 Changed:12:46 AM on Thursday, June 28, 2001

I think this guy is very cool.

[Ivan Seeking]

I have been working on this one Zooby. I am having a bit of trouble finding the NASA tech note so I am making a post in the Astronomy forum to see if someone else can find it.

I am building a low freq source and testing this myself. I will let you know when I have it running...later this week I expect. If I have trouble this could take a couple of weeks or more, but I don't expect this to be THAT difficult.

Let's see if I can spook myself. If this is not too difficult, perhaps others here at PF can try this as well.

This seems to be outside of the normal response of most speakers and amps. I checked with an audiophile who started citing high end equipment as the solution...to the tune of a few thousand bucks, so I am contemplating other options for a high amplitude low frequency source; preferably with variable waveform shapes, amplitudes and frequencies.

My alternative hypothesis is that ghosts produce 18.9 Hz infrasound. [:D]

Really I find the subject very interesting; though I suspect it has been accepted a little to quickly since good sources of information on the effects of infrasound [IS] seem to be hard to find. Since I haven't looked for awhile I will be checking again for other sources. I find many wild claims associated with IS that appear to be unsubstantiated. These include the ability to cause loss of bodily functions, loss of consciousness, orgasms, any number of mental states of anxiety, euphoria, depression etc. Obviously to some degree these claims are true, but I question the energy levels required and the likelihood of the effects claimed in many specific circumstances.

Any links to good papers on IS and ideas for a sound generator are appreciated.

Edit: um, make that effects, not affects...let me see, one's a noun, one's a verb [g)]

[Evo]

Hey Ivan,

I'm really interested in this also, but I can't find anything either. This is the closest thing I found on infrasound that had tests on humans.

http://ntp-server.niehs.nih.gov/htdocs/Chem_Background/ExSumPdf/Infrasound.pdf

[zoobyshoe]

I'm not aware of any formal studies but I haven't looked for any.

What have you guys tried googling?

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
I am building a low freq source and testing this myself. I will let you know when I have it running...later this week I expect. If I have trouble this could take a couple of weeks or more, but I don't expect this to be THAT difficult.
If I were going to undertake such a thing I would go for a low tech approach that might more closely resemble what might naturally occur. I'd find a large diameter pipe, calculate the length needed for a resonant frequency of 18.9, then figure out the easiest way to "sound" the pipe. That might involve sticking a diaphram over one end and vibrating it at the resonant frequency with a solenoid, or even mechanically with a piston and a variable speed motor. The best way, though, would be to sound it by configuring one end as a whistle the way they design organ pipes and blow into it with a bellows. The big 16 foot base pipes on a church organ can make a window rattle with very little air pressure. (You'll need volume, though.) The difficulty would be tuning it. I don't know what kind of instrument you need to get accurate info on frequencies outside human hearing.

Zoob

[Evo]

I've googled the NASA Tech doc references, searched for them at the NASA website, nothing comes up. I googled on quite a number of things, but most are rather questionable sites, all claiming that NASA has done research that has supported Tandy's findings, but none ever give any details on the reports, including a paranormal website that is working with him & will be selling his "devices". So I've been looking for any research on infrasound and it's effects on humans. What I posted above was the only legitimate research I could find.

I think the infrasound theory might explain a lot, if it's true.

[zoobyshoe]

Well, I spent about an hour poking around and couldn't find anything that was online. I did find references to a couple studies in old journals. Outside Tandy, this doesn't seem to be a big topic for scientific studies.

There was alot of mention of the fact that elephants produce infrasound. Also, sperm whales kill their prey with it. A marine biologist messing around with a beached sperm whale was knocked back from the beast when it blasted him with a punch of infrasound. I also recall seeing a movie of a diver getting taken in the jaws of a baby sperm whale and then released. She said in a later interview she could feel it's infrasound signals throbbing over her body while it was checking her out before grabbing her.

[Ivan Seeking]

It is possible that due to the military applications for IS the original work has been classified. However, it seems that Tandy had access to this so I'm a little stumped right now. I know that a number of reliable sources of defense technology news, like America's Defense Monitor...no longer being produced but a great show, have mentioned IS weapons and their usage. I am going to email Tandy next and ask for help.

Thanks for the paper Evo; I will read later today...gotta work...darn those evil customers! [:D]

A sidebar: I played around with pulse jet technology some years ago. A wacko friend had a great interest in this.... Pulse jet propulsion was first developed by the Germans and was used on the infamous Buzz Bombs that rained down around London in WWII. The sound produced by these engines [which can be made with no moving parts by the way], is very loud and occupies a very broad spectrum of low frequencies. Some years ago some genius got the idea that this technology could be used for rice dryers. Since the rice can pass right through the combustion chamber with no ill effects, the efficiency and speed of the flash drying process seemed ideal for the application. So, they built a pulse jet of enormous size to handle the mass flow [of rice] required. The first time they fired up the engine it was so loud that a number of people threw up and passed out! Whoops! The project was abandoned.

Zooby, I agree, It would seem that a large flute is the best option. It seems that I must come up with 55 feet of large diameter pipe… Do you think the local farmers would miss their irrigation pipes if they disappeared overnight? [:D]

[Ivan Seeking]

I would like to have some idea of what level of infrasound intensity becomes dangerous. This is so that I don't do anything embarrassing when I turn it on; like poop my pants. [8)]

[zoobyshoe]

That's a fascinating story about the pulse jet. (I actually expected it to end turning out to be the way Rice Crispies were discovered, though.)

I do believe you are grossly exaggerating the size of the pipe you would need. The 16 foot base organ pipes I spoke of are already on the verge of infrasound. They are about 6 inches dia.

An interesting alternative would be two higher pitched pipes slightly out of tune such that they "beat" at 18.9 cps. Chroot is a whiz at accoustical phenomena. I'd check with him.

-zoob

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
An interesting alternative would be two higher pitched pipes slightly out of tune such that they "beat" at 18.9 cps. Chroot is a whiz at accoustical phenomena. I'd check with him.

-zoob

That's really a great idea! In this case I prefer that no audible frequencies are present to that I can crank up the volume and leave it running without any other annoying noise to contend with.

I wonder how my cats will react. We had to put down our last dog a few weeks ago so the puppy torture will have to wait. [:D]

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
In this case I prefer that no audible frequencies are present to that I can crank up the volume and leave it running without any other annoying noise to contend with.
Yeah, this wouldn't work then, since "beats" are always at a considerably lower frequency than the tones producing them. The tones producing them would have to be in the audible range, to "beat" in the infrasonic range.

I would imagine this is why industrial fans seem to be responsible for infrasound so often: two identical fans but placed such that there is more drag on one than the other causing it to run a touch slower such that an infrasound "beat" is produced. The fans, though, have to be making audible noise to begin with.

[dlgoff]

Have you thought of just using an audio amp with a subwoofer? Making a 18.9Hz oscillator and attaching it to the amp input would be easy. You will still get sounds from the walls shaking however. It may also shake something loose in you. My susgestion; turn if off when it hurts.

[zoobyshoe]

And I'm also curious as to what an infrasonic frequency detector would consist of.

Frequently here in San Diego I am conscious of a rumbling sensation that seems to be coming up from the floor and I always wonder if it is a mini-quake, the result of heavy traffic on a nearby highway, or extreme base from a sound system somewhere I can't directly hear.

It would be cool to have an infrasound detector to see if I could sort this out.

-Zooby

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
And I'm also curious as to what an infrasonic frequency detector would consist of.

I understand that fencing foils make nice detectors. [:D]

Really though, sympathetic resonance should be easy to produce in any properly constructed mechanical oscillator. Shouldn't be too difficult to make...I will pass along anything that I come up with. I will need a detector as well. I am told that a subwoofer is still down in the mud for producing sound at <20Hz; too much signal attenuation. Apparently the speaker will also cease to resonant properly due to the electrical characteristics of the coil. I am told that his will create a low impedance load that could overload the circuit. As I indicated, one can purchase equipment designed to operate at these low frequencies, but this gets too expensive for my purposes. I think this may work well the other way though. A large speaker and an O-scope may be good enough as a detector.

Also, I am wondering about our creek. It produces a lot of low freq noise. I also wonder about the examples of wind induced madness.

OK now I really have to work! [g)]

[mouseonmoon]

This is somewhat related- film crew from PBS at Radio Oservatory West Va.-

"One day, while our crew was working at Green Bank, something humorous happened. Our production crew was in the control room for the old 300 foot radio telescope -- which I believe was the largest in the world at the time. Either a scientist or technician was showing us a graphic print out of what the dish was picking up.
When we first began looking at the printout the technician explained how we were seeing random background noise. But the printout's pattern suddenly changed to indicate that a strong narrow band signal had just broke through the steady hash! The tech muttered something to himself -- howbeit out loud -- something like, "... That’s strange ..." Then -- while we were all still watching -- it happened again! Then once more! The technician obviously tried to contain his excitement, but he hastily called another person over to look at the printout. By this time our crew had also begun to watch the print out. And for a moment -- we hoped that perhaps we were watching history in the making. (picking up radio signals from ET)
Our crew’s photographer, who had been taking pictures (with the same Nikon I had tried to use before) around the control room, was now bug-eyed like the rest of us and clicking away. Then suddenly -- we noticed how the printout registered the strange signal every time our photographer snapped a picture and the electronic flash began to sing as it recharged its high voltage flash potential. Sure enough, the sensitive electronic radio frequency detection equipment had been picking up the strobe’s regeneration circuitry in the flash unit!"

=====

light 'flashing' at certain rate will produce 'hallucinations' and or physical effects-latest example was the Japanese cartoon show-- or driving along in a car with sun-light 'blinking' through trees can produce very disorienting effects....number of experiments with this-in a 'closet'-- and watching movies at different 'flicker rates'.....

i'm guessing 'sounds' may be able to cause similiar effects (note:not everything we 'hear' is coming through our ears .

[Evo]

Ivan, I think the paper I posted may give you an idea of safe parameters to work with. It also appears that you should not expose yourself to infrasound at low levels for very long?

[Ivan Seeking]

Hello Mr. Tandy,
I was trying to find the NASA Technical Report 19770013810 as cited as a source of information about the effects of infrasound. I have had no luck finding this and was hoping that you might provide a little guidance.

Many thanks,
******* [Ivan]
-----------------------------------------------------------

Hi ****** [Ivan]
NASA always have a job turning this up... tell them it was done by a
contractor. Contractor stuff is held in a different place it would seem.

Good luck

Vic
------------------------------------------------------------

Hello Vic,
Thanks for your response. Do you have a date, author, or title. This might help tremendously.

Many thanks again,
******** [Ivan]

[Njorl]

Bah! Everyone knows ghosts vibrate at 18.9Hz.
[;)]

Njorl

[Ivan Seeking]

Clearly this is why we feel anxiety when exposed to 18.9 Hz infrasound. This is an evolved trait. [:D]

I am after this guy just a little. To me his story doesn't seem to add up. I'm not convinced as such, but something about this claim strikes me as bogus. I was thinking at first that 19 Hz is too low of a frequency for a foil to resonate, but considering the flexibility of these rods I could be wrong. Next, the frequencies seem a little too specific for my expectations. For example, one article cites that someone noticed that reports of ghosts in one building increased with increasing room size. This would imply that all but one room had "real" ghosts, or these claims are bogus, and the properly sized room allowed for resonance, and the claims from this room were legit. Next, his lack of details in citing THE critical source of information bothers me as well. I bet that Evo has the same suspicions. However, my mind is open and I make no judgments. He could just be a little lazy about his sources.

This is why I want to try this myself. Besides, it could be very useful tool when dealing with clients...it might work even better than a big chair! [:D]

btw, that was just a joke. I would never expose anyone to something like this without their knowledge; or likely even with their knowledge. There is too much potential liablity.

[zoobyshoe]

What I gleaned from the search I did was that all the infrasonic frequencies have one bad effect or another. The 18.9 is what Nasa determined to be the frequency at which the human eyeball shakes.

In cases where the oscillations are being produced by machines and traffic or, who knows, some kind of plumbing vibration, the resonant frequency of the room wouldn't matter. The latter would only be important in cases where the room was being made to resonate by say wind. Then, some part of its resonant frequency would need to be in the infrasound range at a suitable amplitude.

Fencing foils are square in cross section and they taper from the hilt to the tip. I'm sure this geometry has an effect on how they vibrate in sympathy, although I couldn't begin to figure it out myself. I'm sure the steel used is quite unique and specifically tailored to its purpose.

-zooby

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
What I gleaned from the search I did was that all the infrasonic frequencies have one bad effect or another. The 18.9 is what Nasa determined to be the frequency at which the human eyeball shakes.

I agree about the effects of infrasound in general. I just want to determine that in fact NASA did reach this conclusion about the eye; and at what intensity levels. This is one of my concerns with this explanation: The levels needed could easily exceed those possible to produce naturally. I know that some IS weapons discussed in the past use phenomenonally high levels of energy...far beyond that produced by fans or wind [sound] chambers.

In cases where the oscillations are being produced by machines and traffic or, who knows, some kind of plumbing vibration, the resonant frequency of the room wouldn't matter. The latter would only be important in cases where the room was being made to resonate by say wind. Then, some part of its resonant frequency would need to be in the infrasound range at a suitable amplitude.

The correlation between room size and effect was indicated by the author as a lead to the IS explanation. This implies that the room is acting like a resonant chamber. This creates a problem for experiences in undersized rooms. Again though, these are really just points that I think need to be clarified.

Fencing foils are square in cross section and they taper from the hilt to the tip. I'm sure this geometry has an effect on how they vibrate in sympathy, although I couldn't begin to figure it out myself. I'm sure the steel used is quite unique and specifically tailored to its purpose.

Yes this is probably very difficult to calculate. I was thinking of making a run over to OSU; which I'm due to for a lunch next week anyway. I hope to have a look at some foils then. The resonant frequency is easy enough to determine with the foil in hand - TWONNNNG.

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
I agree about the effects of infrasound in general. I just want to determine that in fact NASA did reach this conclusion about the eye; and at what intensity levels. This is one of my concerns with this explanation: The levels needed could easily exceed those possible to produce naturally.
I have an old book of science effects. In one demonstrtion they lay a long, flat, metal bar horizontally on two supports placed about 1/4 to 1/3 from each end, and then drip water on the bar. Playing with the frequency of the drips will allow you to arrive at one which starts the bar vibrating vigorously.

Don't forget Tesla's favorite example of the small boy pushing the fat man on the swing. All the little boy has to do is add his tiny little push at the right time, just as the big fat man is on the verge of swinging away from him, for him to slowly build up a large amplitude. Timing is more important than force.
The correlation between room size and effect was indicated by the author as a lead to the IS explanation. This implies that the room is acting like a resonant chamber. This creates a problem for experiences in undersized rooms.
This is where we need Chroot. I think that based on the very low note you can get by blowing across the opening of a jug, and also by the relatively small volume contained inside a 16 foot window rattling organ pipe, you would find that the minimum sized room that could naturally resonate in the infrasound range in probably quite small.
I hope to have a look at some foils then. The resonant frequency is easy enough to determine with the foil in hand - TWONNNNG.
Foils turn up at the big swap meet here in San Diego now and then. People want alot of money for them. If I knew of a proven infrasound source I would just clamp a three foot length of.250 cold rolled in a vice and see if that worked just as well.

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
This is where we need Chroot. I think that based on the very low note you can get by blowing across the opening of a jug, and also by the relatively small volume contained inside a 16 foot window rattling organ pipe, you would find that the minimum sized room that could naturally resonate in the infrasound range in probably quite small.

Chroot is a very smart and knowledgeable guy, but this is mostly a first year college physics problem. I'll save Chroot for the hard problems. [:D] In order to create a resonance in a closed chamber, the wavelength cannot be longer than the maximum dimension of that chamber. The speed of sound in England [near sea level] should be about 990 ft per second. AT 18.9 Hz, this yields a wavelength of about 52 feet. Also, in any chamber, be it open, or closed on one or both ends, the effective chamber length must be an integer multiple of, or a specific fractional multiple of the desired wavelength. If none of the rooms had a maximum dimension of 52 feet then we might have a real problem. On the other hand, open doors and other "holes" in our chamber could complicate this scheme, but this would act to reduce the infrasound's intensity significantly...or nearly completely.

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
AT 18.9 Hz, this yields a wavelength of about 52 feet.
I have checked and this is true. Except I got more like 59 feet.
Also, in any chamber, be it open, or closed on one or both ends, the effective chamber length must be an integer multiple of, or a specific fractional multiple of the desired wavelength. If none of the rooms had a maximum dimension of 52 feet then we might have a real problem.
In the second article I posted note the references to long coridors, and chambers built with tunnel entrances.
On the other hand, open doors and other "holes" in our chamber could complicate this scheme, but this would act to reduce the infrasound's intensity significantly...or nearly completely.
I don't see why. The opening would be the means whereby the sound enters the chamber from a natural source to resonate.

[Ivan Seeking]

Crud. Maybe we should have got Chroot. [:D]

We can get a standing wave at wavelength = 2L i.e. we only need half the distance.

I almost forgot about the half wave mode. [:((] There is a quarter wave mode that could apply to corridors open on one end, but this wouldn't apply to a closed room. This does apply to your organ pipes though. My objection was based on the size of the rooms. At 27 feet this sounds much more reasonable. Now I can imagine that we have rooms with a ~27 foot axis. This helps his explanation in this regard.

I still have serious doubts about the intensity required though. I will need convincing. Also, I'm a little surprised that in his e-mail Tandy did not include the date, author, and title of the paper. This really concerns me right now. Still, I'm not trying to hang Tandy, I just need these questions answered.

Keep in mind that debunking is big money now. There is a book involved. This eye explanation is being touted here and elsewhere with no supporting, retrievable reference, other than Tandy.

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Also, I'm a little surprised that in his e-mail Tandy did not include the date, author, and title of the paper. This really concerns me right now. Still, I'm not trying to hang Tandy, I just need these questions answered.
I'm wondering if he ever read it. It's more likely that he ran across a summary of it in a science or technical journal and happened to recall the part about the 18.9 eyeball frequency because it was strange.

I wonder, too, to what extent NASA makes any effort to actually find any info for anyone who asks for it. I don't see where they'd be under any obligation to do so.

Did you try back with NASA with Tandy's instructions to tell them it was a contract job?

[Evo]

Here is another mention of the effects of infrasound on the human body, again no mention of affecting the eyes.

Abstract: Purpose: Within the context of a research project on ‘Non-Lethal Weapons,' an up-to-date review was required with regard to 1) the effects of infrasound on the health and functioning of human beings, and 2) the availability of adequate systems for the production of infrasound. ---- Methods: In a literature study, the existing information about infrasound effects was assessed and structured. Relevant auditory (including perception, hearing damage, physiological alterations, task performance, fatigue) and non-auditory (including vestibular functioning, respiration, body vibration) effects of infrasound (0.1-20 Hz) were determined as a function of sound pressure level and sound frequency. ---- Results: The threshold for audibility of infrasound is very high: for frequencies from 2 and 20 Hz, the threshold decreases from 125 to 80 dB. The threshold for aural pain is 40-60 dB higher than that for audibility, and the threshold for eardrum rupture is about 185 dB. Fatigue and drowsiness effects are first reported for sound levels between 120 and 130 dB. Decrements in task performance and vestibular functioning could not be found: for significant effects, levels higher than at least 140 dB are required. Physiological alterations (blood pressure, heart beat frequency) require levels higher than 130 dB at least. At present, adequate systems for the production of infrasound to be used as a non-lethal acoustic weapon are not available. ---- Conclusions: For significantly affecting human functioning by infrasound, sound levels higher than 130-140 dB are required. With sufficiently long exposure durations at these high levels, the occurrence of permanent hearing damage might be expected. For the production of infrasound at source-receiver distances up to a few hundreds of meters, severe problems have to be solved.

http://www.tm.tno.nl/publ/wn2001r.html

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
I'm wondering if he ever read it. It's more likely that he ran across a summary of it in a science or technical journal and happened to recall the part about the 18.9 eyeball frequency because it was strange.

Basic ethics requires that he can produce his source.

I wonder, too, to what extent NASA makes any effort to actually find any info for anyone who asks for it. I don't see where they'd be under any obligation to do so.

Did you try back with NASA with Tandy's instructions to tell them it was a contract job?

This information should be available. The NASA archives provide direct access to a great deal of material, but not all; mainly determined by the age of the document in most cases. I couldn’t find this document in the archives. A personal request may be needed but I was waiting for Tandy to respond. If he doesn't respond soon I will contact NASA directly.

As posted by Evo and as I quickly noticed, there are good sources that discuss some effects of IS on humans, but I couldn't find one good source to back up this claim about eye resonance. This raised a flag for me immediately. Still, if this work was done long ago, and if for some reason the information has remained obscure, or if I just happened to miss the good link, then it may just take a little more work to validate Tandy's claims. In spite of my hesitation regarding the claims made, I wouldn’t expect someone like Tandy to perpetuate a fraud, rather I am inclined suspect that he might have made a hasty conclusion. One or two examples aren't exactly overwhelming as evidence.

[zoobyshoe]

Hmmmmmm.

Tandy's frequency of 18.9 is specific. Why would any sound make an eyeball vibrate? Is it the size, shape, or mass? Wouldn't it really have to be somewhat different for each person?

Evo's post cites studies done on infrasound as a possible weapon. What was NASA doing the tests for? Probably because of the infrasound generated during launches - a different focus leading them to concentrate on different effects with very different study techniques.

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by Evo
Here is another mention of the effects of infrasound on the human body, again no mention of affecting the eyes.

One would think that this effect would be mentioned. This is becoming more of an issue. [g)]

Thanks for the help. After reading some of your material I am less inclined to build this device.

WHAT DID YOU SAY?

[zoobyshoe]

I just felt a great disturbance in the force.

[Ivan Seeking]

0dB the faintest sound we can hear
30dB a quiet library or in a quiet location in the country
45dB typical office space. Ambience in the city at night
60dB Martin Place at lunch time
70dB the sound of a car passing on the street
80dB loud music played at home
90dB the sound of a truck passing on the street
100dB the sound of a rock band
115dB limit of sound permitted in industry
120dB deafening

dB(A): A-weighted decibels The ear is not as effective in hearing low frequency sounds as it is hearing high frequency sounds. That is, low frequency sounds of the same dB level are not heard as loud as high frequency sounds. The sound level meter replicates the human response of the ear by using an electronic filter which is called the "A" filter. A sound level measured with this filter switched on is denoted as dB(A). Practically all noise is measured using the A filter. The sound pressure level in dB(A) gives a close indication of the subjective loudness of the noise.
source:
http://www.rtagroup.com.au/wizard/definition_acoustics.html

"Some Examples of Dangerously Loud Recreational Activities

Noise levels at video arcades can be as high as 110 dBA.

Firecrackers create sound levels from 125 - 155 dBA at an average distance of 10 feet.

Sound levels at live music concerts can be measured at 120 dBA and beyond.

The noise level of gunshots can be measured at 150 dBA -167 dBA and hearing loss can result from just a few shots of a high powered gun, if appropriate hearing protection is not worn.

Noise levels at movie theaters have been measured up to 118 dBA.

Sound levels in health clubs and aerobic studios can be as high as 120 dBA.

Personal stereo systems with headphones produce sounds as loud as 105 - 120 dBA if turned up to maximum levels.

Sound levels at a sporting event can be measured up to 127 dBA.

Motorboats emit sound levels ranging from 85 - 115 dBA.

Motorcycles have been measured at levels ranging from 95 - 120 dBA.

Noise levels of snowmobiles are as high as 99 dBA.

Many children's toys emit sounds which are measured at 135 dBA -150 dBA.

Noise levels from 'Boom Cars' have been measured at 140dBA and beyond."

Source:
http://www.lhh.org/noise/facts/recreation.htm

[megashawn]

Hey, I'm not sure if this will help you out at all, but I've got a bass cd at home that is meant to test the range that a subwoofer performs at.

I had this particular track on a cd and didn't realize it was playing, while driving down the road. I couldn't hear anything, but I could feel the bass, and at one point it got so bad that my eyes started shaking as was described in the story. Now I didn't see any ghosts, but I damn near ran off the road because I couldn't hardly see.

I'm not sure if this will help you out, but perhaps you would have an easier time using a frequency generator for a computer and a sub woofer or two. If interested, lemme know I'll find that cd and rip a mp3 of the particular track.

I also remember reading a story, I think on Newscientist, may have been a link in one of the pf newsletters, about a very low frequency bass that actually induced feelings of fear in people listening to it. It wasn't audible, but seems it was right along the same idea that you guys are working with.

[Ivan Seeking]

Thanks Megashawn, that's quite interesting! I have a few questions if you don't mind.

What kind of CD player, amp, and speakers do you have - ie make, model, approximate year of production...? I wanted to check the technical data.

What was the volume level set to at the time?

What is the name of the test track...or do you have any links on the specifications?

Has this ever happened since. Can you duplicate the effect?

Did this happen in the day or at night? If at night, how is your night vision?

I assume that the effect stopped when you stopped the CD?

[Ivan Seeking]

NateTG managed to dig up these two reports that relate to IS testing on humans.

19800007533, and 19730008358

So I guess the good news is that we do find IS research at NASA, but the bad news is that nowhere is the correct number seen. Also, these reports are not available online.

A total of 23 technical reports come up at the NASA report server when one searches "infrasound". Only these two are indicated as relating to human testing. This server may not include contractor work...dunno [g)]

I was still hoping to hear back from Tandy. I guess I will just contact NASA.

[Pergatory]

I've only seen one or two lines of car amplifiers that can output IS. I believe Alpine class-T amps can, and Chronic class-D and class-T amps. Anyway, even if they could, most subwoofers have such horrible response at IS frequencies that you'd have a hard time breaking 100db. Odds are that your eyes were shaking from the sheer amount of compression/decompression of air that was occuring, perhaps some sort of resonant frequency within your car. Competition steroes have been known to do that, even when they are driven by amps that can only produce a 60hz sine wave.

Anyway, a tool that you all might find useful for this study is SBaGen. http://uazu.net/sbagen/
It's a tool that was built to produce binaural beat frequencies (using the difference between two frequencies to create a common frequency). The interesting thing is that it plays one frequency on one speaker and the other on another speaker so you are actually separating the sources. Might allow for some interesting side-experiments.

[zoobyshoe]

Anyway, a tool that you all might find useful for this study is SBaGen. http://uazu.net/sbagen/
It's a tool that was built to produce binaural beat frequencies
Pergatory,

This sounds interesting. Have you ever tried this yourself? I didn't see mention of what the frequency the original tones might be and what range of the beat frequency it could produce. Infrasound?

[Pergatory]

I've tried it a little, with no definite results. Sometimes I feel strange or slightly euphoric somehow but nothing that seems extra-ordinary. Probably just my mind playing tricks on me.

The scope of the program is entirely unrelated to infrasound in theory, but happens to follow a mutual method. The intended use is to have headphones on so that the two sound waves are not actually intersecting but that the binaural beat is created in the brain waves after the sound has been interpreted by the ears, theoretically. As i said early, it doesn't seem to do anything and seems like an attempt to connect unrelated things. Fortunately for us, brain waves range from 0.5hz (delta) to 30hz (beta) so yes, infrasound is a primary function. Additionally, it lets you program your own tone sets so you can define exactly what base tone and beat frequency you want (among other things). Despite being a total failure, I think this program could be quite useful! :) Wish I had time to play with it on my own! I love stuff like this.

[megashawn]

What kind of CD player, amp, and speakers do you have - ie make, model, approximate year of production...? I wanted to check the technical data.

the head unit:
http://www.onlinecarstereo.com/CarAudio/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductID=13608

I can't remember exactly what brand the amp is, I'll get back to you with this info. I know its a 2 channel amp 300 w rms and I have it bridged pushing 12 12" MTX in a sealed box. The two speakers actually function as one the way the box is designed.

What was the volume level set to at the time?
I probably had the volume about 2/3 to max. The amp was set to just below max output.

What is the name of the test track...or do you have any links on the specifications?

This also I cannot remember. It had the Hz frequency ranges that it spanned through in the name of the track.

Has this ever happened since. Can you duplicate the effect?

Oh ya, I love tripping my friends out with it.

Did this happen in the day or at night? If at night, how is your night vision?

Either. I have 20/20 vision, night vision is fine.

I assume that the effect stopped when you stopped the CD?

Yes.


I don't know if the vehicle has anything to do with it, but it was in a 81 datsun 720 extended cab. I also have 2 pioneer 6x9 4 way speakers, and 2 5 1/4 3 way speakers. I doubt those speakers had any effect. The windows were rolled up, and the sun roof was closed, but does not latch. Other times I've noticed the sun roof opening and closing with the music, I never paid any attention during the twitching vision.

I'd also suspect Pergatory is correct. Thining back, I can remember feeling the air moving, and it being quite hard to breath. If you spoke, you get the voice through running fan effect.

I'm not suggesting my setup would produce the exact effect your looking for, but probably something similar. I know you can get software for a pc that can produce many different frequencys. Perhaps you could find one to produce the 18.9 your looking for.

If you have an old power supply for a computer around, you can use that to power a car amp pretty decently.

[megashawn]

Ok, so I was do a lil digging.

http://www.cyberartscamp.org/webdesign/2003/week5/xavier1/annoyances/infrasound.html

A short excerpt:

This annoyance is extremely effective, and is just plain mean in the wrong hands. It relies on the fact that infrasonic sound waves (sound just below the range of human hearing) cause strange effects in humans. At low volume, they can cause mild nauseau and uncomfortablness. At higher volumes, it can cause incontrollable vomiting. Be careful though, it can also break windows and pottery.

Not a whole lot there, just basically tells you to get a sub and a waveform generator, soft or hardware and hook the output of the generator to the speaker.

http://www.infrasonicmusic.co.uk/background.htm

Kind of backs up what Zooby was reffering to with organs.

I found a lot of sites for Infrasound by searching for "Infrasound Generator Software"

I might have to try to set one of these up myself. Imagine how much a Haunted house (the fake ones at halloween) could benefit from such a device.

[Evo]

Claims that infrasound adversely affects human performance, makes people "drunk," and directly elicits nystagmus,(a rapid involuntary oscillation of the eyeballs (as from dizziness), have not been clearly demonstrated in any experimental study.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1275832&dopt=Abstract

[Ivan Seeking]

WOW! Thanks Evo.
I am sending this to Tandy.

Also, no response from Tandy so far, and waiting for the NASA technical reports help desk to respond.

[zoobyshoe]

From the absract linked by Evo:

Caution is necessary in future research because artifacts produced by faulty experimental procedures can suggest genuine psychological or physiological effects.

It would be nice to get the complete text of this article to find out what the above sentence means.

When they maintain there is no "nystagmus" this doesn't necessarily mean there is no shaking of the eyeball. A nystagmus is a specific neurologically-caused kind of eye oscillation, which is not the same thing as a shaking caused by enharmonic vibration. The sentence I quoted makes me wonder if the article is making a distinction between what was wrongly assumed to be a neurological effect of infrasound and what proved instead to be a mechanical effect.

[Evo]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
A nystagmus is a specific neurologically-caused kind of eye oscillation, That's not correct. Apparantly the term nystagmus can be used for any "shaking" of the eyeball. Causes for chronic nystagmus are unknown.

Even dizziness can cause "nystagmus".

Merriam Webster dictionary

Main Entry: nys·tag·mus
Pronunciation: nis-'tag-m&s
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin, from Greek nystagmos drowsiness, from nystazein to doze; probably akin to Lithuanian snusti to doze
: a rapid involuntary oscillation of the eyeballs (as from dizziness)

a link on causes of nystagmus
"A number of ocular oscillations have been called "nystagmus", such as voluntary nystagmus or convergence retraction nystagmus. These do not have a true slow phase, but are composed of back-to-back saccades. They should be classified as saccadic oscillations (Table 2). Nonetheless, clinical usage has kept these oscillations in the nystagmus category and most will be discussed in the section: Special types of nystagmus."

The section - INDUCED NYSTAGMUS lists external causes of nystagmus. The only type of audio induced nystagmus listed is Audiokinetic nystagmus, it has nothing to do with infrasound, but the movement of the sound around the person or moving the person, interesting. Maybe if the infrasound was spun around the person it would cause nystagmus? But would it be the infrasound or the movement of the sound that is the culprit? "Audiokinetic nystagmus is a jerk nystagmus induced by sound. It is produced in darkness by rotating a sound source or by rotating a subject at constant velocity in the presence of a fixed sound source."

http://www.wfubmc.edu/neurology/lectures/nystagmus/nys.html#CONVERGENCE

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Evo
That's not correct. Apparantly the term nystagmus can be used for any "shaking" of the eyeball.
No, it is clear from the link you provided that it only applies to oscillations that are caused neurologically and effected via the sufferers muscles. When you say even dizziness can cause it, this is because dizziness creates the neurological conditions for nystagmus as a secondary symptoms. They even mention "voluntary nystagmus" - when someone is trying to fake a neurological disorder (in order to perform a differential diagnosis), and this, too, is neurological: it is initiated in the brain, and the brain causes the muscles of the eye to move.

All this is opposed to the mechanical shaking of the eye you would get, allegedly, from infrasound. The infrasound would be directly shaking the eyeball rather than causing a neurological event of some kind which has nystagmus as a symptom.

Look at it this way: if a person presses their head against a washing machine which is vibrating because the load is unbalanced it will shake their eyeballs. This is mechanical shaking, not nystagmus. Infrasound, being at the resonant frequency of the eyeball, would be doing a more elegant version of the same thing.

The abstract you linked to gives a hint in that last sentence I quoted that the actual paper may be making a distinction between former claims that infrasound produces nystagmus, meaning it affects the brain and/or nervous system, and the reality of mere mechanical shaking, in which the brain would not be affected.

This would be an important difference since the paper seemed aimed at evaluating safety guidelines that were in place concerning exposure to infrasound.

It is hard to say, though, from the abstract. It asserts that former claims are "exaggerated" without going into detail about what the former claims were.
Causes for chronic nystagmus are unknown.
I suppose it is possible they can't find the cause in some cases but it is well known that chronic nystagmus is associated with the lesions of multiple sclerosis in some people with that disease, and also that it happens in people with brainstem lesions from any one of a number of causes.

[Evo]

Hey zooby, Since the claims made are that infrasound causes "vibration" of the eyeball and from the context of the sentance "Claims that infrasound adversely affects human performance, makes people "drunk," and directly elicits nystagmus", it would make sense that they are using the term "nystagmus" to describe the "claimed" shaking.

Since there appear to be no "claims" of infrasound causing neurological symptoms of involuntary eye movement, it wouldn't make sense for them to try to disprove a claim that has not been made, would it?

I am sure that the paper is addressing the type of eye vibrations that Tandy claims. But, I cannot say 100%, I'm just going with the most logical explanation based on what the claims are.

Infrasound can cause internal vibrations, but seem to be in the chest and abdominal area.

"Caution is necessary in future research because artifacts produced by faulty experimental procedures can suggest genuine psychological or physiological effects." I can't tell what he means here either. I am looking into ordering the paper (can't find it online). I find this whole infrasound thing very interesting.

I've got to go, but I will post something else I found in a bit.

[Ivan Seeking]

Short on time right now so I will just pass this on. I haven't had time to do anything but a quick review but I am greatly encouraged by his response.

Hi ********[Ivan]

Thanks for the source.. I am worried about the low levels that seem to be involved in the link between infrasound and ghosts. Of course the laboratory tests are all very controlled so they don't take into account combinational factors. I say infrasound + spooky environment increases the odds of feeling a presence... in my view infrasound acts as catalyst. In the ghost in the machine I had no idea of amplitude because of the lack of proper testing gear. In subsequent tests, there seem to be effects at 40-50dB which I agree seems too low if the laboratory tests are correct. Of course within the bounds of what we are testing we could both be right. I would not recommend a change in standards based on my current work... there is more to be done. I would welcome your comments... are you doing research in this area?

More Detail on NASA stuff

"The Effects of Whole-Body Vibrations".

It was published by the Springer Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg 1986. The
authors are H. Dupuis and G. Zerlett.

This is the "Open Literature" report (19870046176 A), published
literature, available through university, public and/or corporate
libraries. Alternatively, you may wish to contact a commercial
document
delivery service. One service is listed below.

AIAA Dispatch
5109 Cherry Street
Kansas City, MO 64110-2498
Phone (800) 662-1545
Fax (816) 926-8794
E-mail dispatch@lindahall.org



DOCUMENT ID: 19770013810 N (77N20754) IM
Unclassified (Unrestricted - Publicly Available)

TI: Mechanical resonant frequency of the human eye in vivo; Ph.D.
Thesis
AU: Ohlbaum, M. K. (Aerospace Medical Research Labs.,
Wright-Patterson AFB,
OH, United States)
RN: AD-A030476/AMRL-TR-75-113
PJN: AF PROJ. 7222
DT: Thesis
LA: English
OS: Aerospace Medical Research Labs. (Wright-Patterson AFB, OH,
United States)
FS: Department of Energy (United States) [Other US Government]
PB: United States
PD: Aug 01, 1976
AV: Hardcopy - A06 CASI A06 (105p)/Microfiche - A02 CASI A02
(105p)
SC: 52 (AEROSPACE MEDICINE)

All the best

Vic

Comments?

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Comments?
Well, I'm glad he gave you the information about the NASA papers.

I thought his remarks were somewhat obscure. (What does he mean by "ghost in the machine"?)
It sounds like he's thinking of proposing that given a spooky environment, and no expectation of being artificially interfered with by infrasound, the effects happen at a lower decibel level.

I noticed that some of his sentences trail off with three dots. Was this in his original mail, Ivan, or did you delete anything?

Zooby

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Evo
Hey zooby, Since the claims made are that infrasound causes "vibration" of the eyeball and from the context of the sentance "Claims that infrasound adversely affects human performance, makes people "drunk," and directly elicits nystagmus", it would make sense that they are using the term "nystagmus" to describe the "claimed" shaking.
It is possible they are misusing the term nystagmus, yes. This is why I thought it would be good to read the whole paper.
Since there appear to be no "claims" of infrasound causing neurological symptoms of involuntary eye movement, it wouldn't make sense for them to try to disprove a claim that has not been made, would it?
We don't know if there are any such claims prior to that paper because they don't go into detail about the claims they are refuting. The last sentence of the abstract, which I quoted, gives the impression they weren't happy with the rigour of prior studies.
I am sure that the paper is addressing the type of eye vibrations that Tandy claims. But, I cannot say 100%, I'm just going with the most logical explanation based on what the claims are.
The abstract you linked to was published in 1976. It is unrelated to the NASA paper Tandy has been refering to. Since they use the word nystagmus and no mechanical terms, there is no reason to be confident they are refering to mechanical shaking.
"Caution is necessary in future research because artifacts produced by faulty experimental procedures can suggest genuine psychological or physiological effects." I can't tell what he means here either. I am looking into ordering the paper (can't find it online). I find this whole infrasound thing very interesting.
It would be nice to be able to read the whole paper. Abstracts have to be brief and all they do is summarize. There is no doubt that in the full paper they go into specifics about what studies they're seeking to refute. They will also include all info about those studies in a bibliography so that they can be tracked down and read.

Anyway, as far as eyeball shaking it looks like the NASA paper Tandy just identified is devoted exclusively to this phenomenon.

[Evo]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
It is possible they are misusing the term nystagmus, yes. This is why I thought it would be good to read the whole paper. I agree.


Originally posted by Zoobyshoe - It would be nice to be able to read the whole paper. Abstracts have to be brief and all they do is summarize. There is no doubt that in the full paper they go into specifics about what studies they're seeking to refute. They will also include all info about those studies in a bibliography so that they can be tracked down and read. I agree, I'm trying to get a copy.

Anyway, as far as eyeball shaking it looks like the NASA paper Tandy just identified is devoted exclusively to this phenomenon. [/B][/QUOTE] Have you found the paper? I'd like to read it.

I found another paper by the first authors and it's about whole body vibrations caused by sports like skiing, etc... not infrasound. Is the other paper to do with infrasound?

[Evo]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
Well, I'm glad he gave you the information about the NASA papers.

I thought his remarks were somewhat obscure. (What does he mean by "ghost in the machine"?) "Ghost in the machine" is the title of the paper he submitted to the journal of the Society for Psychical Research.

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
Well, I'm glad he gave you the information about the NASA papers.

I thought his remarks were somewhat obscure. (What does he mean by "ghost in the machine"?)
It sounds like he's thinking of proposing that given a spooky environment, and no expectation of being artificially interfered with by infrasound, the effects happen at a lower decibel level.

I noticed that some of his sentences trail off with three dots. Was this in his original mail, Ivan, or did you delete anything?

Zooby

First, I am glad to see what appears to be a valid reference. I like debating theories and claims; not attacking people [with the one exception of President Bush [:D]]. It always makes me feel a little sick when I catch someone who knowingly perpetuates a fraudulent claim...especially someone who appears to be credible. Also, I am not familiar with his "ghost machine" reference.

I have posted his response in total. I would only delete personal references that do not apply to the discussion or their public claims. In this case there were none. Also, to a certain extent I feel that people like Tandy are fair game for discussion and for posting as I have done here, but I also think it would be unfair to quote his emails any further without his knowledge. I am going to ask him to join in the discussion. If he doesn't then I guess we're on our own.

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by Evo
"Ghost in the machine" is the title of the paper he submitted to the journal of the Society for Psychical Research.

thank you. [a)]

I must have seen this but ignored the name. [g)]

[zoobyshoe]

Zooby:
Anyway, as far as eyeball shaking it looks like the NASA paper Tandy just identified is devoted exclusively to this phenomenon.

Evo:
Have you found the paper? I'd like to read it.

No, I haven't read the paper. Ivan just got all the info about it from Tandy. (See his post on the previous page of this thread) I say it looks like it is exclusively devoted to this phenomenon because of the title:"Mechanical resonant frequency of the Human Eyeball in Vivo."

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
First, I am glad to see what appears to be a valid reference.
Same here.
I have posted his response in total. I would only delete personal references that do not apply to the discussion or their public claims.
I didn't think you would delete anything without explanation, but I had to ask, because you said you were posting in a hurry. The peculiar "..." thing he does must be some kind of idiosynchracy, then.

[Evo]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
Anyway, as far as eyeball shaking it looks like the NASA paper Tandy just identified is devoted exclusively to this phenomenon. I don't doubt there is resonance, what I have yet to see is any evidence that the resonance is significant enough to cause "apparitions".

The paper is titled "Mechanical resonant frequency of the human eye in vivo" According to Tandy "Meanwhile a NASA Technical Report (19770013810) mentions a resonant frequency for the human eye of 18 Hz causing severe "smearing" of vision." (This is the second paper he references in his e-mail, the one we are discussing in this post.) Smearing of vision? That's it? What percent of subjects reported this? How many were tested?

This article may only have one sentence as a side note saying "out of 500 test subjects, one person reported smearing of his vision".

Perhaps the article will say "of 500 test subjects, 475 reported smearing of vision", that might make me think "hey, maybe he's onto something". But if this is the case, why would this test be the only one that reports any type of vision distortion?

If what Tandy says about the smearing of vision, (and he further goes on to suggest it may only be peripheral?) see link below, is all he has to go on, I'm disappointed, I would love for someone to have found the explanation, but I need to read the papers before I can agree or disagree with his assumptions.

http://www.the-bureau.org/Conclusions.htm

I believe he is sincere in his belief, but I don't think this is the answer we're looking for to explain "hauntings".

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Evo Smearing of vision? That's it? What percent of subjects reported this? How many were tested?
Goodness, you're impatient. Ivan hasn't even gotten ahold of this paper yet.
This article may only have one sentence as a side note saying "out of 500 test subjects, one person reported smearing of his vision".
It very well might say this. Let's wait till we can read the paper.
Perhaps the article will say "of 500 test subjects, 475 reported smearing of vision", that might make me think "hey, maybe he's onto something". But if this is the case, why would this test be the only one that reports any type of vision distortion?
Perhaps it will. We should probably read it before getting exited one way or the other.
If what Tandy says about the smearing of vision, (and he further goes on to suggest it may only be peripheral?) see link below, is all he has to go on, I'm disappointed, I would love for someone to have found the explanation, but I need to read the papers before I can agree or disagree with his assumptions.
Read the papers first? Novel idea!

Tandy has never claimed anything but the appearance of a blurry, grey moving figure in his periferal vision during his own experience. I posted two versions of his story in my opening post to this thread. I'm not sure where you got the impression it was anything more definite than that.
I believe he is sincere in his belief, but I don't think this is the answer we're looking for to explain "hauntings".
Well, I'm not sure what answer you're looking for, but this explanation would certainly cover some of them, particularly the vague ones that resemble the one Tandy had. It makes perfect sense that the combination of a spooky place, compounded by unpleasant emotions and then the vague appearance of something in one's periferal vision that disappears when you look directly at it would cause some people to conclude they'd been visited by a ghost.

[Evo]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
[B]Goodness, you're impatient. Ivan hasn't even gotten ahold of this paper yet.[B] One of my bad qualities, I'm known to go without food or sleep when I am trying to find a piece of a puzzle.

Tandy has never claimed anything but the appearance of a blurry, grey moving figure in his periferal vision during his own experience. I posted two versions of his story in my opening post to this thread. I'm not sure where you got the impression it was anything more definite than that. From the website of the company he is working with to manufacture his devices.

Well, I'm not sure what answer you're looking for, but this explanation would certainly cover some of them, particularly the vague ones that resemble the one Tandy had. It makes perfect sense that the combination of a spooky place, compounded by unpleasant emotions and then the vague appearance of something in one's periferal vision that disappears when you look directly at it would cause some people to conclude they'd been visited by a ghost.But those types of reports don't draw attention.

[mouseonmoon]

quote:
take into account combinational factors..... infrasound + spooky environment increases the odds of feeling a presence... in my view infrasound acts as catalyst.
----

Furthermore-temperature and humidity-and as a guess 'humidity' may be part of the 'combination'--ghosts appear winter and summer--same as fog--if you 'see' the analogy-certainly humidity has an effect on sound---infrasound?

what exactly is 'vibrating' the eyeball?--is it the 'liquid' eyeball, or, are muscles reacting (twitching,having a spasm--if chest starts vibrating,will this cause eyeball vibration if....)

Conditions may exist that would produce a 'wet or dry eyeball'==i'm thinking of numerous reports of certain 'smells' in the air--sulphur like---a'nother 'combinational factor' than may be present and more likely to be 'in the air' in higher concentrations when there is high humidity--yet below the threshold of smell or 'noticed but forgotten'.

(like the smell of leaking gas--((for example, we had a leak here after new furnace was installed, i could smell it when i first entered the room,only an instant 'whiff'.....the fellow who came to check it out commented that 'i must have a good sense of smell,as he didn't notice anything'.....eventually found it

my point--always been curious about these reports of the 'smells'--like 'old eggs',burnt match, sulphur,'gas', etc.----and as the smell of an onion produces tears in the eye....'see' where i'm going?

number of 'factors' here may be working together to cause the 'eyeball shakes'='hautings"=background infrasound causes sulphur molecules to vibrate which increase olafactory sense producing 'eyeball shake'.

also curious is "smearing of vision"--it's not like every night he was 'seeing ghosts';
something unique happened,right?......i have 'smearing of vision' whenever i stop taking vitamin B (result of too much ale the night before,alcohol consumes vit B affecting vision/mind/brain). So, it's getting complicated, and this, I think, is his point=="take into account combinational factors"..... (I use the "...." a lot myself, and it 'means'- 'follow this thought,you may have questions,i'm willing to discuss further but it will take too long at the momment,much more can be said on this, etc...


really fascinating,keep up the investigations...

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by Evo
One of my bad qualities, I'm known to go without food or sleep when I am trying to find a piece of a puzzle.

Now you sound more like me than Tsunami.

I will get back to this thread as soon as work lightens up a bit. Hopefully this will only take a few days or so.

[Ivan Seeking]

Thank you for contacting the NASA STI Help Desk.

I believe you are probably using the NTRS: NASA Technical Reports Server for your searches. The NTRS is available at the following web address:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/

If I am wrong, please let me know what server you are using.

Documents with the numbers 19800007533 and 19730008358 are listed on the NTRS, although the full text is not available there. Document number 19770013810 is not listed on the NTRS. The probable reason is that 19770013810, unlike the other two documents, was not issued by NASA, but is a U.S. Air Force report. NASA's goal for the NTRS is to provide a source of all publicly available NASA scientific and technical information, and to enhance those resources with certain other aerospace related materials. Since 19770013810 is not a NASA document, it is less likely to appear on the NTRS. I would like to note further that a search for "infrasound" would not have retrieved this document even if it were on the NTRS server, since that is not the subject of the report and the word does not appear in the citation.

The report is available for purchase from here at the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information (CASI) for the price listed below, plus shipping and handling per copy. A reproduction will be supplied unless otherwise noted. Prices are subject to change without notice.

Doc ID 19770013810
"Mechanical resonant frequency of the human eye in vivo; Ph.D. Thesis," by M.K. Ohlbaum. Aerospace Medical Research Laboratories, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio. August 1, 1976. 105 pages. Report No. AMRL-TR-75-113. AD-A030476.

Price: $35.50 within the U.S.A.
S&H: $ 2.00

We require prepayment in the form of Visa, MasterCard, American Express, Diner's Club, check, or money order (U.S. currency). Please make your check or money order payable to: NASA Center for AeroSpace Information.

Most orders are processed in-house within 3 business days and are delivered within 3-7 business days within the United States. One day in-house rush processing is available for an additional fee of $10.00 per item. The standard shipping and handling fee per item is $2.00. Federal Express shipping is also available for U.S. addresses for an additional fee of $7.00 per item.

You may place an order by:
1) completing the online STI Order Form at
http://www.sti.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/ordersti.pl,
2) sending your order form to the NASA CASI STI Ordering Services fax number, or
3) mailing the order form to:

Attn: STI Ordering Services
NASA Center for AeroSpace Information
7121 Standard Drive
Hanover, MD 21076-1320

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the NASA STI Help Desk by telephone, fax, or email.

Sincerely,

**************
NASA STI Help Desk
Tel: (301) 621-0390
Fax: (301) 621-0134
help@sti.nasa.gov

The NASA Scientific and Technical Information Program is dedicated to providing superior service. You may submit comments on our products and services by sending feedback via email to: help@sti.nasa.gov and indicating "STI Feedback" in the subject line. If you are a Federal Government employee, you may use the automated poll at http://poll.larc.nasa.gov/STI/.

If you are a repeat customer who prefers not to provide feedback each time you access services and products, we will assume that we have provided very satisfactory service unless we hear from you.

We greatly appreciate your patronage.

[zoobyshoe]

19770013810 seems to be the one we're most interested in. Tandy also mentioned 19870046176A, bu they said nothing about that one.

What are 19800007533 and 1973008358 about? You didn't mention you were asking about any but the ones Tandy mentioned.

[Evo]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking - Since 19770013810 is not a NASA document, it is less likely to appear on the NTRS. I would like to note further that a search for "infrasound" would not have retrieved this document even if it were on the NTRS server, since that is not the subject of the report and the word does not appear in the citation.So, the document is not even about infrasound.

Kind of a leap for Tandy to use this to back up his "infrasound" theory, isn't it?

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
What are 19800007533 and 1973008358 about? You didn't mention you were asking about any but the ones Tandy mentioned.

Those popped up when searching the tech reports for "infrasound" and "humans". The reports are not available online. They must be purchased.

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by Evo
So, the document is not even about infrasound.

Kind of a leap for Tandy to use this to back up his "infrasound" theory, isn't it?

I am curious to see how much supporting evidence really exists. I find more and more that technical sorts will jump on any logical explanation, regardless of its merits or lack there of. This is why I am now so very skeptical of popular skeptics and skeptical sites.

Also, the comments made by Pergatory and Megashawn suggest to me that volume may be more critical than frequency. This is what bothered me about the original claim. I find many of the sources listed as unlikely candidates to produce enough volume [wave intensity].

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Evo
So, the document is not even about infrasound.

Kind of a leap for Tandy to use this to back up his "infrasound" theory, isn't it?
What it says is that the word "infrasound" does not appear in the title or the citation, which is the blurb used to briefly describe the report. It does not mean the word isn't used in the report, or that references aren't made to, for instance, "sound in the range of 18 cps" with regard to the resonance frequency of the human eyeball.

[zoobyshoe]

http://www.sti.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/ordersti.pl

Testing to see if I can get this link to work by removing the comma between .pl and the closing url bracket.
____________________

Edit: That did the trick. The comma was preventing NASA from being able to find the page.

[Evo]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
What it says is that the word "infrasound" does not appear in the title or the citation, which is the blurb used to briefly describe the report. It does not mean the word isn't used in the report, or that references aren't made to, for instance, "sound in the range of 18 cps" with regard to the resonance frequency of the human eyeball. From what the guy at NASA is saying about the search function, that the article would not be found by searching on "infrasound" I think it would be safe to say that the word is not in the document at all.

I think Tandy may have been a bit over excited and perhaps made some overly optimistic assumptions based on a thought he had. He is correct that infrasound can cause "weird feelings", but the visual impairment tends to be unsubstantiated as yet.

I can find no research anywhere on humans that shows visual impairments of any type cause by infrasound. None. And I have done quite an extensive search. I am still open to the possibility of it, but I am still waiting for that bit of evidence to support it.

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Those popped up when searching the tech reports for "infrasound" and "humans". The reports are not available online. They must be purchased.
Where were you searching? I'd be interested in reading the abstracts. I would also be interested in reading the abstract for the "eyeball in vivo" and other one Tandy mentioned.

[zoobyshoe]

I found the abstracts for 19800007533 and 19730008358.

Do you have any idea where to find abstracts for the other two?

[zoobyshoe]

This paper here:

Address:http://users.iafrica.com/s/sa/salbu/apollo/HumA2.html

says that Tandy got his info from more sources than just the NASA paper and quotes what these other sources say about the effect of infrasound on the eye.

It also explains, Ivan, how Tandy experimented to find the spot in the room where the standing wave was strongest. With a wave this large being at the node would be quite a different experience than being at an anti-node. Tandy found a very different reaction in his foil depending on where he put it in the room. He, too, thought the decibel level would be too low, but reconsidered when he took the size of the fan and motor into account.

[Evo]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
and quotes what these other sources say about the effect of infrasound on the eye. Can you pull these out of that person's website you list and show them? I don't see anything except supposition.

[zoobyshoe]

Interesting info about pipe organ that produces infrasound:


World's Largest Organ, Atlantic City, NJ
Address:http://theatreorgans.com/atlcity/index2.htm

"the largest pipe in the organ, and also the largest organ pipe in the world, is the low "C" of the 64 foot diaphone profunda. The pipe is 64 feet nine inches long, ten inches square at the base, and 36 inches square at the top..." "...Since low "C" vibrates only eight cycles per second the tone is felt rather than heard but nevertheless it supplies a strong foundation for the entire pedal organ division."

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Evo
Can you pull these out of that person's website you list and show them? I don't see anything except supposition.
"In any case, the symptoms listed by Temple (1976) for low frequency sound waves are; Severe middle ear pain (not experienced), persistent eye watering, and respiratory difficulties, sensations of fear including excessive perspiration and shivering."


"Table IV on page 212 of this book shows frequencies causing disturbance to the eyes and vision to be within the band 12 to 27 Hz. A more recent book by Kroemer (1994) describes the effects of low frequency vibration as follows;
'Vibration of the body mostly affects the principal input ports, the eyes, and principal output means, hands and mouth.'(p. 287)."


"Tables 5-12 of Kroemer (1994) on p. 288, indicate that the resonant frequencies of body parts are; Head (2-20 Hz causing general discomfort), Eyeballs (1-100Hz mostly above 8 Hz and strongly 20-70Hz effect difficulty in seeing). However, different sources give different resonant frequencies for the eye itself."
_

[Evo]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
"In any case, the symptoms listed by Temple (1976) for low frequency sound waves are; Severe middle ear pain (not experienced), persistent eye watering, and respiratory difficulties, sensations of fear including excessive perspiration and shivering." A statement without the facts to back it up means nothing. At what levels were these effects observed at? From the 2003 UK government study I found below, apparently it takes a rather high level and even then the effects are not enough to be considered significant. Tests done by Tempest only showed effects on 30% of his test subjects suffered nystagmus with no mention of vision impairment while another noted test done by Johnson showed no cases of nystagmus. (zooby, the term nystagmus is used here in relation to involuntary eye movements caused by infrasound)

In all of the research, vision impairment doesn’t appear to be a symptom that is considered related to infrasound, even with “vibrations” taken into consideration, since the “vibrations” are so insignificant.

The study is titled “A review of published research on low frequency noise and it’s effects”

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/noise/lowfrequency/pdf/lowfreqnoise.pdf

On page 8, paragraph 2.6 Infrasound - it says “Much of what has been written about infrasound in the press and in popular books is grossly misleading and should be discounted.”

See page 25, paragraph 7.2 through page 27 paragraph 7.2.2 on body vibrations.

Also page 55, paragraph 13.3 Biological effects on humans: In the numerous published studies there is little or no agreement about the biological activity following exposure to infrasound.

Page 56 – “To study vestibular effects in humans, both a rail balancing task and direct nystagmus (involuntary eye movements) measurement have been used.”

“However Evans (Evans & Tempest 1972) examining the effect of infrasonic environments on human behavior found that 30% of normal subjects exposed to tones of 2-10 Hz had nystagmus within 60 seconds of exposure to 120db signal, with 7 Hz being most effective in causing it. Higher intensities resulted in faster onset of nystagmus, but there were no complaints of discomfort from any of the subjects at any SPL.”
“Subsequently Johnson (Johnson, 1975) who investigated nystagmus in many experiments under different conditions with aural infrasound stimulations from 142 to 155db had negative results.”

After looking at all of the various research, I have to conclude, for now, that Tandy jumped to a conclusion without any substantial or conclusive evidence. That’s my take on it, you may see it differently.

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Evo
After looking at all of the various research, I have to conclude, for now, that Tandy jumped to a conclusion without any substantial or conclusive evidence. That’s my take on it, you may see it differently.

Originally posted by Evo
I believe he is sincere in his belief, but I don't think this is the answer we're looking for to explain "hauntings".
So, I'm getting the distinct feeling you, or someone you know has had a "haunting"?

[zoobyshoe]

And to reiterate:

"The involuntary eye movements of nystagmus are caused by abnormal functions in the areas of the brain that control eye mevements"

from this:

MEDLINEplus Medical Encyclopedia: Eye movements - uncontrollable
Address:http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/003037.htm
Mechanical vibrations of the eye cannot accurately be referred to as "nystagmus".

[Evo]

zooby, the documents that Tandy said he used are the ones using the term nystagmus in reference to the vibration of the eyeball. Are you disputing Tandy's references then? See the research done by Tempest, he's the only one that has documented nystagmus as an effect of ultrasound, but mostly at 7Hz, not 19Hz. This is one of Tandy's sources that you listed.

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Evo
zooby, the documents that Tandy said he used are the ones using the term nystagmus in reference to the vibration of the eyeball.
The distinction has to be maintained between involuntary eye movements that may be suspected to be caused by infrasound affecting the brain's motore control of the eyes, and a different, purely mechanical, direct vibration of the eyeball by infrasound with no involement of the brain or nervous system or eye muscles. These are two separate phenmomena.

Finding that infrasound does not cause nystagmus implies that it is a much safer thing to be exposed to than if it is thought to be affecting people brains. You see? This is an important thing to find out because of various industrial situations where people would be exposed to infrasound. Is this exposure safe? "Mere" mechanical vibrations of the eyeball would not involve the brain or nervous system, and would not be considered so dangerous, (and could also not correctly be refered to as "nystagmus"). People performing studies to "clear" infrasound of causing nystagmus among other health risks, are not automatically also clearing it of direct mechanical vibration of the eyeballs.
__________________________

So, Evo, ever seen a ghost?

[Ivan Seeking]

Here are my impressions so far.

So far I think that Evo has shown that any specific frequency dependence for mechanical oscillations of the eye is doubtful.

Next, the numbers mentioned indicate that the wave intensity required to cause physical effects are well into levels that would cause loss of hearing. I would also expect that waves of this intensity could be felt throughout the body. Again, this makes me question the wave intensities required in order to produce any significant physical effects.

Also, how could a person's eye be vibrating but with only subtle effects? I would expect that given eye rattling one's vision would be generally affected as with Megashawn's experience.

Finally, I had a ghostly episode two nights ago and as discussed here. I was sitting here working and I kept getting glimpses of a gray, blurry image in my right eye's peripheral vision. when I turned and looked nothing was there. First I thought infrasound, and then I thought temporal lobe seizure, and then I realized the real culprit - a mouse. It really had me going for a couple of minutes. [:D]

[Evo]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
So, Evo, ever seen a ghost? I saw a cat that wasn't there. But since I'm not convinced that anything exists afer we die, I wouldn't call it a ghost. I don't believe that people that see "ghosts" are seeing the dead walking around. But I do believe that there may be a natural explanation for a lot of the reported "apparitions" or whatever you want to call them. They've been reported by too many credible people over the years to be discounted.

[Evo]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Finally, I had a ghostly episode two nights ago and as discussed here. I was sitting here working and I kept getting glimpse of a gray, blurry image in my right eye's peripheral vision. when I turned and looked, nothing was there. First I thought infrasound, and then I thought temporal lobe seizure, and then I realized the real culprit - a mouse. It really had me going for a couple of minutes. [:D] Too funny!!! [:D]

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
So far I think that Evo has shown that any specific frequency dependence for mechanical oscillations of the eye is doubtful.
The brief and incomplete things we've actually been able to read do indicate that the eye responds to a large portion of the infrasound spectrum, yes.
Next, the numbers mentioned indicate that the wave intensity required to cause physical effects are well into levels that would cause loss of hearing.
It isn't at all clear to me what effect infrasound has on hearing.
If the frequencies of infrasound are outside the range of frequencies that the eardrum responds to high decibel levels of infrasound may be imaterial.
I would also expect that waves of this intensity could be felt throughout the body. Again, this makes me question the wave intensities required in order to produce any significant physical effects.
This would be where the standing wave aspect of it would come into play: a wave of insufficient intensity in and of itself that is reflected back on itself would result in spots where the anti-nodes combine and produce areas of double the intensity. Recall how Tandy located one spot in the shop where the effect was vastly more pronounced. If the original source of the sound was intense enough by itself he would have found the effect anywhere in the shop. Instead, he only found one spot. This indicates a standing wave situation.
Also, how could a person's eye be
vibrating but with only subtle effects? I would expect that given eye rattling one's vision would be generally affected as with Megashawn's experience.
I'm not sure what you're doubtful about here. The intensity of the vibration of the eye would correspond to the intensity of the amplitude of the sound. The greater the amplitude of the eye vibration, the greater the disturbance of vision. Megashawn was inside a small chamber with a really high amplitude sound.
Finally, I had a ghostly episode two nights ago and as discussed here. I was sitting here working and I kept getting glimpses of a gray, blurry image in my right eye's peripheral vision. when I turned and looked nothing was there. First I thought infrasound, and then I thought temporal lobe seizure, and then I realized the real culprit - a mouse. It really had me going for a couple of minutes. [:D]
Little did you realize that it was the ghost of a mouse who died during a temporal lobe seizure and which was producing infrasound. (Did you find any mouse ghost "ectoplasm? Mouse ghosts are known to leave "ectoplasm" behind in the form of small, dark, oblong "pellets".)

[mouseonmoon]

could have been my doppelganger--been very interested in this

[Evo]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
Little did you realize that it was the ghost of a mouse who died during a temporal lobe seizure and which was producing infrasound. (Did you find any mouse ghost "ectoplasm? Mouse ghosts are known to leave "ectoplasm" behind in the form of small, dark, oblong "pellets".) ROFLMAO!!!!!!! [:D]

[zoobyshoe]

I found this much more detailed article by Tandy in which he explains his experiences and reasoning about them as he goes along, and also goes into thorough detail about the aspect of standing waves:

Live Sound International | Ghost Story: Phantoms, Vibrations and Standing Waves
Address:http://www.livesoundint.com/archives/2002/janfeb/low/low.php

[Ivan Seeking]

It isn't at all clear to me what effect infrasound has on hearing.
If the frequencies of infrasound are outside the range of frequencies that the eardrum responds to high decibel levels of infrasound may be imaterial.

The damage to the ear is a function of ambient pressure changes relative to the inner ear. The ear is more responsive to higher frequencies, but the large pressure changes due to the passing of a high intensity sound or infrasound wave is what damages the ear. Sound, as opposed to infrasound, is really just a matter of perception. Some of the links given already state that infrasound causes loss of hearing but at somewhat higher levels than mid range sound.


This would be where the standing wave aspect of it would come into play: a wave of insufficient intensity in and of itself that is reflected back on itself would result in spots where the anti-nodes combine and produce areas of double the intensity. Recall how Tandy located one spot in the shop where the effect was vastly more pronounced. If the original source of the sound was intense enough by itself he would have found the effect anywhere in the shop. Instead, he only found one spot. This indicates a standing wave situation.

This changes nothing. The standing wave only acts to amplify the overall intensity of the primary at a point. The intensity at a point [the observer] is what matters. According to the links posted, a person should feel the infrasound if the decibel levels are high enough to induce other effects.

I'm not sure what you're doubtful about here. The intensity of the vibration of the eye would correspond to the intensity of the amplitude of the sound. The greater the amplitude of the eye vibration, the greater the disturbance of vision. Megashawn was inside a small chamber with a really high amplitude sound.

Why would his vision only be blurred in the peripheral field? I would expect all vision to be affected…especially in a lab where people usually are found reading text and instruments.

Little did you realize that it was the ghost of a mouse who died during a temporal lobe seizure and which was producing infrasound. (Did you find any mouse ghost "ectoplasm? Mouse ghosts are known to leave "ectoplasm" behind in the form of small, dark, oblong "pellets".)

If I see any glowing mouse poop I will post an attachment.

You know, before you came along, when I saw something out of the corner of my eye I thought "mouse", or "cat", or "wind", but now I think temporal lobe seizure!!! [!:)]

[:D]

[Ivan Seeking]

One more objection...

As yet I haven't seen one main stream scientific journal that has published Tandy's argument. The Psychical Society [published one paper] may or may not be respectable but they are clearly not in the mainstream. Since Tandy's argument is so earthly I would expect journals like Nature, Science, and even Physics Today to jump all over this...unless it is not worthy of publication...

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Some of the links given already state that infrasound causes loss of hearing but at somewhat higher levels than mid range sound.
Deafness by exposure to high levels of sound is cumulative and happens over time according to the level you are exposed to. Since the level of infrasound that can damage hearing is "somewhat higher" than mid range sound, then my guess would be that he level in the cases Tandy speaks about were high enough to cause the hyperventilation, anxiety, and blurred vision, but not high enough to compromise hearing. On the other hand I don't expect that anyone has had the thought to have the hearing of the workers at he various industrial "haunting" sites checked to see if it is less than normal.
According to the links posted, a person should feel the infrasound if the decibel levels are high enough to induce other effects.
This physical feeling you seek is what the hyperventilation and anxiety are about, isn't it? I don't see why you would expect the same kind of sensation one gets standing next to a big speaker basting in the audible range.
Why would his vision only be blurred in the peripheral field?
He is feeling intense anxiety, he is hyperventilating, his eyeballs are being vibrated: I would venture to guess his periferal vision was more affected because his eyes were watering, an effect mentioned in one of the papers.
I would expect all vision to be affected…especially in a lab where people usually are found reading text and instruments.
Recall that Tandy's desk was located right next to the spot of greatest intensity. The other people only passed through that spot occasionally.
You know, before you came along, when I saw something out of the corner of my eye I thought "mouse", or "cat", or "wind", but now I think temporal lobe seizure!!! [!:)] My continued attempts to disseminate information about simple partial seizures, which is motivated by the desire to assure anyone who might be having alot of them in silent bewilderment, that they are not crazy or the victim of some paranormal evil force, seems to continually backfire on me, yes. Rest assured that I have never intended to put you on edge.

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Since Tandy's argument is so earthly I would expect journals like Nature, Science, and even Physics Today to jump all over this...unless it is not worthy of publication...
This is just plain uncharitable and mean.

Tandy is a guy with a very intersting theory. He knows enough about accoustics to explain his reasoning, but he is not an expert in acoustics. He has not conducted and published a formal scientific study of this phenoenon. This is a side thing to his real profession that happened to get alot of press. Nature, Science, and Physics Today would not jump to solicite material from a non-expert with an interesting theory about a subject like "hauntings" despite having no particular objections to it, now would they?

For the record I will clearly state that I do not think the kind of "haunting" experience Tandy experienced and described has anything to do with the "haunting" you and Tsunami experienced. Your experience was signifigantly different by virtue of the olfactory element, and the sensation of weight on the foot of the bed, to name two things that have never been proposed as a part of the infrasound kind of "haunting".

I say that in case you, Tsunami, and Evo are thinking I'm interested in Tandy in an attempt to explain your experience "away", which I'm not. Honest to God, I have no leads to what happened to you beyond the hoax by building caretaker possibility I speculated about.

Edited to add: to the extent that Tandy could explain what had happened to people like the very upset cleaning lady who was quite frightened by her experience, and anyone else who has been caught unawares by an infrasound "ghost' in a creepy place, he is doing a good thing. Shut the fan off: ghost disappears; an illusion. No worries. Why should people suffer anxiety over something stupid like a wobbling fan?

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
This is just plain uncharitable and mean.

I don't think so. In science we require something called peer review. He has published his work. It only appears in one journal put out by the Psychical Research Society. This along with the weakness of his claims pretty much settles this for me for now. Perhaps one day he or others will gather enough supporting evidence to justify his claims. In the mean time it seems that he is selling books and soon, ghost machines. Hmmm.

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
I don't think so.
I think so. Your "...unless it is not worthy of publication..." line is pure editorial on your part, and is intended to create the impression this is the only possible reason he hasn't been written about in those magazines.
In science we require something called peer review.

I don't see where Tandy has tried to resist any peer review.
He has published his work.It only appears in one journal put out by the Psychical Research Society.
So, he has submitted a piece to a journal he felt would be interested. They published it, and...where's the problem?
This along with the weakness of his claims pretty much settles this for me for now."The weakness of his claims..." again, is you editorializing. They don't look weak to me at all. I think he has made an excellent case. You yourself were impressed enough to be in the process of making your own infrasound generator when this thread began.

[Ivan Seeking]

Originally posted by zoobyshoe
I think so. Your "...unless it is not worthy of publication..." line is pure editorial on your part, and is intended to create the impression this is the only possible reason he hasn't been written about in those magazines.

It was intended to convey my take on the evidence presented. The more I learn and think about this the more dubious I am of his claim. I wasn't trying to be subtle.

I don't see where Tandy has tried to resist any peer review.
So, he has submitted a piece to a journal he felt would be interested. They published it, and...where's the problem?

Mainstream journals are the proper channel for publishing a theory; not the internet, books, and fringe journals. Since I have seen none mentioned, I must assume that either he avoids a qualified review of his claims, he awaits publication while his work is reviewed, or he can't get published because his claims lack sufficient supporting evidence. Similar public maneuvers by two gents named Ponds and Fleishmann led to the cold fusion fiasco of the late 80's. They were so discredited by this breach of protocol that they effectively went into hiding. The same rules apply to Hawking, Tandy, me, and anyone else who makes public claims such as Tandy's. Is this science or not?


"The weakness of his claims..." again, is you editorializing. They don't look weak to me at all. I think he has made an excellent case. You yourself were impressed enough to be in the process of making your own infrasound generator when this thread began.

Even you agreed that his unique 18.9 Hz dependency for eye resonance seems to fail. Since this was his key test for apparitions - specifically at 18.9 Hz - his most basic claim falls apart. Also, I don't think I am being mean spirited just because we don't agree. I am highly dubious about this whole business by Tandy. I am still allowing that eventually he might prevail but for the moment I just don't see it. As I said from the start, the wave intensities required for the desired effects appear to far exceed levels that would otherwise go unnoticed; even as infrasound.

[zoobyshoe]

Originally posted by Ivan Seeking
Mainstream journals are the proper channel for publishing a theory; not the internet, books, and fringe journals. Since I have seen none mentioned, I must assume that either he avoids a qualified review of his claims, he awaits publication while his work is reviewed, or he can't get published because his claims lack sufficient supporting evidence.[QUOTE][B]
This is where you are being uncharitable. As I tried to point out before, he is just a guy with an interesting theory which is well outside his own actual profession. He has a certain amount of evidence to show, but he has not conducted a formal study that he could write up nd present to any hard science journals. He presents nothing at the level of a "claim". What he has could be called a "theory" at the very best.

"Infrasound + spooky place = "haunting" is a notion that is almost certainly of so little interest to mainstream science that the reaction is not that it lacks credibiity, but that it evokes a response of "Could be, I suppose. So what?"

Infrasound, from the nature of the studies presented, is of interest to people concerned with occupaional safety. These people have no interest in whether or not it might have this pseudo-paranormal effect in old dungeons. The only people who have any real concern are paranormal believers and skeptics.

I am not aware if he has submitted anything to any hard science journals and been rejected but if hes has I would say it is either because he didn't conduct a formal study under specific conditions that people could recreate and test, or, it was because none of them deemed the subject to be particularly important.
[QUOTE][B]Similar public maneuvers by two gents named Ponds and Fleishmann led to the cold fusion fiasco of the late 80's. They were so discredited by this breach of protocol that they effectively went into hiding.
The cold fusion guys were not discredited because they did not publish in the proper journals, Ivan. They did go through the peer review process and were discredited because no one could replicate their results. Someone who tried, who had read their material, figured out the mistake they had made. Breach of protocol was not the offense that discredited them, it was the fact their claims were plain wrong.

Cold fusion, also, was important.
Even you agreed that his unique 18.9 Hz dependency for eye resonance seems to fail. Since this was his key test for apparitions - specifically at 18.9 Hz - his most basic claim falls apart.
First off the 18.9 hz did not fail. He discovered that frequency in his workshop. Apparently it works, according to what he read in the NASA paper. The difference is that the other papers for which we found abstracts and from which we have second hand quotes, maintain that the eyes can be affected by many frequencies in the infrasonic range. This doesn't debunk Tandy at all. It increases the range of infrasound at which his theory might be accurate. Also, I don't think I am being mean spirited just because we don't agree.
I don't either. Normally you are charitable in all disagreements with me and others. I found that one post to be an exception.
I am highly dubious about this whole business by Tandy. I am still allowing that eventually he might prevail but for the moment I just don't see it. As I said from the start, the wave intensities required for the desired effects appear to far exceed levels that would otherwise go unnoticed; even as infrasound.
Your impression of the wave intensities required come from the abstracts and brief quotes from papers none of us has read. The studies seem to disagree with each other (par for the course), and I suspect this is due to the fact that each was conducted under different circumstances for very different reasons and motivations. None studied the effects of infrasound as produced by improperly mounted industrial exhaust fans in shops of the size and construction in which Tandy had his experience.

[mouseonmoon]

Ivan:
===
"Infrasound + spooky place = "haunting" is a notion that is almost certainly of so little interest to mainstream science that the reaction is not that it lacks credibiity, but that it evokes a response of "Could be, I suppose. So what?"
===

I'm afriad you're right--but even worse, what's the chance of getting 'funded' if you even mention 'ghosts' or 'UFOs'.....

One of my favorite 'science' stories is about the 'French Academy of Science' declaring 'rocks don't fall from the sky'---