Can Auroras Produce Audible Sounds?

  • Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date
In summary: People have been debating whether or not auroras can be heard by an observer on the ground for centuries, but no instrumental measurements have ever been made. Many people claim to have heard auroras, though no objective measurements have ever been taken to back up these claims. There are several theories as to why auroras might make noises, including one that suggests they can be heard through the Earth's atmosphere. If this is true, it would be difficult to hear because the auroras are very active in the microwave range and noise interference would be common. Another theory suggests that people are sensitive to one or a range of microwave frequencies and can hear the auroras as sound. This theory has never been confirmed, but is still possible
  • #1
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
8,142
1,756
Auroral sounds
A controversial question concerning auroras is whether or not they can be heard by an observer on the ground. It has been debated for several centuries, but no instrumental, objective measurements of audible sound created from auroral displays have ever been made, despite several attempts with highly sensitive microphones. Still, many people claim to have heard auroras [continued]
http://www.northern-lights.no/english/what/sounds.shtml
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If auroras made sounds I am pretty sure it should have been picked up by the space phycis research center in kiruna sweden.
I have seen hundrads of auroras myself and never once did I hear any sound. But I think it would be easy to imagine hearing a faint sound when watching a aurora because they look like they should make cracking and sparkling sounds.
 
  • #3
There have been reports, reports that I have never confirmed or debunked, which claimed that humans, or at least some humans are sensitive to one or a range of microwave frequencies; that this can be used to produce the sense of audible clicks in a targeted individual if directed properly. The story was that the KGB was trying to use this to develop a form of secret communication. But, as I said, I have never seen this confirmed in any sense by a reliable source. Still, as I understand things, the aurora are very active in this range and it came to mind - not to be taken too seriously, it's just a thought. :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
  • #4
I saw an aurora once when I lived in Minnesota and it made a rare excursion that far south. Didn't hear a thing, though.
 
  • #5
if I still lived in northern sweden I would snop around to se if there is any sami myths about sound from northern lights. To bad I don't :(
 
  • #6
It'd have to be pretty damn loud to propogate from the thermosphere eh?
 
  • #7
I wonder if this could be a subtle manifestion of synethesia.
 
  • #8
Ivan Seeking said:
I wonder if this could be a subtle manifestion of synethesia.
Not exactly synaesthesia, but some people's auditory processing centers might be sensitive to something put out by the auroras such that it manifests as sound to them. Something like a direct EM stimulation of the auditory circuits of their brains.
 
  • #9
I grew up in a small town north of the polar circle, and have seen many auroras. I have never heard them making any sounds. My grand father, however, swears he has heard sounds which were fully correlated to the movement of the aurora. According to him, the sounds are very faint and can not be heard if there is to much surrounding noise.

Here is a link to the Swedish Institute of Space Physics where this phenomenon is discussed.

http://www.irf.se/norrsken/Norrsken_noise.html
 
  • #10
zoobyshoe said:
Not exactly synaesthesia, but some people's auditory processing centers might be sensitive to something put out by the auroras such that it manifests as sound to them. Something like a direct EM stimulation of the auditory circuits of their brains.

Well, that's the sort of thing that I was alluding to with the KGB story, but I don't know if this is really possible.
 
  • #11
DavidK said:
I grew up in a small town north of the polar circle, and have seen many auroras. I have never heard them making any sounds. My grand father, however, swears he has heard sounds which were fully correlated to the movement of the aurora. According to him, the sounds are very faint and can not be heard if there is to much surrounding noise.

Here is a link to the Swedish Institute of Space Physics where this phenomenon is discussed.

http://www.irf.se/norrsken/Norrsken_noise.html

Thanks DavidK.

Something else that keeps bugging me is the idea that since people can't be hearing what they see where they see it, could the aurora be affecting the local atmosphere in some other way? With Sprites, Jets, Starters, ELVES, Tigers,

http://thunder.nsstc.nasa.gov/bookshelf/pubs/sprites.html
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2005-01/agu-ccc011705.php

and now Black Auroras,
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=109501

it seems to me that if people think they are hearing something that they can't be, then perhaps other related but secondary phenomena might be involved. For example, the dark leader stroke in lightning comes to mind - you can't see it but you can sometimes hear it. Being that the aurora are a highly energetic and complex phenonena, it seems to me that it could be that other processes are creating sound that can be heard by the observer. And this could explain the apparent paradox of propogation speeds. Also, if the effect is highly directed and relatively rare, it might be sheer luck to be at the right place and time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
Ivan Seeking said:
Well, that's the sort of thing that I was alluding to the KGB story, but I don't know if this is really possible.
Well, someone linked to a story here a few months ago about an inventor who came up with a way to project audible voices into people's heads with ultrasound. I read the link, and googled some other places the story had been printed, and it looked legit. You have to be standing in exactly the right spot to hear it, and someone right next to you won't hear it. But all they said was that ultrasound was the medium, and beyond that described nothing of how it worked.

No one much paid attention to the thread, as I recall, not too many comments.
 
  • #13
I was talking about microwaves as per your reference to EM inducing electifical activity in the brain. Do you know of any verified examples of EM causing a false sense of sound?
 
  • #14
Ivan Seeking said:
I was talking about microwaves as per your reference to EM inducing electifical activity in the brain.
I understood that. I was just improvising on the notion of it being possible by any means at all. Which it seems it might be.
Do you know of any verified examples of EM causing a false sense of sound?
Only thing I've heard of is the Neurophone, but that seems to require direct contact with the skin. I don't know if it's been confirmed to work, but I've never run across a debunking of it either. Apparently it was demonstrated on TV in the 60's.
 
  • #15
zoobyshoe said:
I understood that. I was just improvising on the notion of it being possible by any means at all. Which it seems it might be.

...ah, I see...
 
  • #16
zoobyshoe said:
Only thing I've heard of is the Neurophone, but that seems to require direct contact with the skin. I don't know if it's been confirmed to work, but I've never run across a debunking of it either. Apparently it was demonstrated on TV in the 60's.

Hmmm, well, if it could be done at all, and assuming that they were really using EM, then it is possible that a transmitted signal of sufficient intesity could as well. But that does sound a bit fake, esp since we don't see anything using the effect, and the KGB stuff is of course all highly suspect.
 
  • #17
Ivan Seeking said:
Hmmm, well, if it could be done at all, and assuming that they were really using EM, then it is possible that a transmitted signal of sufficient intesity could as well. But that does sound a bit fake, esp since we don't see anything using the effect, and the KGB stuff is of course all highly suspect.
There's no reason I can think of that some particular frequency couldn't directly affect the brain if all we're talking about is a rudimentary noises. It could be we all are affected by this frequency briefly once in a while and don't even know it since the noise effect is soft and can be mistaken for anyone of a number of background noises. The aurora may be the only sustained natural source of this range and many people could be insensitive to it altogether.

Your notion about secondary effects is also a possibility. Were the aurora somehow leading to ultrasonic phenomena these could be "heard" as some kind of audible noise by the right person in the right place by the same mechanism, whatever it is, that ultrasound becomes audible in that guy's invention.
 
  • #18
Oh, I know what you are talking about with the ultrasound. I think he used beat frequencies to bring the combination of tranmistted sound waves to an audible level - the beat frequency is the difference between the frequencies of two different waves that combine.
 
  • #19
zoobyshoe said:
There's no reason I can think of that some particular frequency couldn't directly affect the brain if all we're talking about is a rudimentary noises.

It becomes more a matter of showing why it could be true. But human hearing is incredibly sensitive, and the electrical signal evenually generated and finally perceived as sound must be extremely small. It seems easy to imagine that some EM signals of sufficient amplitude might affect this.
 
Last edited:
  • #20
Ivan Seeking said:
It becomes more a matter of showing why it could be true. But human hearing is incredibly sensitive, and the electrical signal evenually generated and finally perceived as sound must be extremely small. It seems easy to imagine that some EM signals of sufficient amplitude might affect this.
I'm thinking more on the lines of the EM frequency affecting one of the various parts of the brain that process hearing and producing a false, but authentic sounding, noise. The biggest block in the way of this is the skull which scatters EM. However, if, like the neurophone, the route to the brain were through skin nerves into the brain, the skull would be bypassed.

Someone posted an interesting article in Mind and Brain a few weeks back about how when a sound accompanies touch, as when you produce a sound by rubbing your finger on the rim of a wine glass, both the sound and touch are processed in the same part of the brain (one that is normally only used to process either sound or touch, I forget which). So, if an EM signal somehow directly affected touch nerves in the skin at a special and specific frequency it might produce a synesthetic kind of sound as well.
 
  • #21
Ivan Seeking said:
Oh, I know what you are talking about with the ultrasound. I think he used beat frequencies to bring the combination of tranmistted sound waves to an audible level - the beat frequency is the difference between the frequencies of two different waves that combine.
This makes sense because you could produce any frequency you wanted with the beats from two separately inaudible ultrasound frequencies. Beats are always of a lower frequency than the two contributing frequencies.
 

1. Do auroral sounds actually exist?

Yes, auroral sounds do exist. They have been reported by many people who have witnessed the aurora borealis (northern lights) or aurora australis (southern lights). These sounds have also been recorded by scientific instruments, providing evidence of their existence.

2. What do auroral sounds sound like?

Auroral sounds can vary in pitch and intensity, but are often described as crackling, hissing, or popping noises. They can sometimes be heard in combination with a faint humming or buzzing sound. However, the sounds are usually very faint and can only be heard in quiet, isolated areas.

3. What causes auroral sounds?

The exact cause of auroral sounds is still not fully understood. However, it is believed that they are produced by the interaction of charged particles from the sun with the Earth's magnetic field. This produces electromagnetic waves which can then be converted into audible sounds by certain atmospheric conditions.

4. Can auroral sounds be heard from anywhere on Earth?

No, auroral sounds are typically only heard in areas near the Earth's magnetic poles, where the auroras are most active. This includes regions such as northern Canada, Alaska, Scandinavia, and Antarctica. The sounds are also more likely to be heard in areas with low ambient noise levels.

5. Are auroral sounds harmful to humans?

No, auroral sounds are not harmful to humans. They are very faint and can only be heard in certain conditions, so they do not pose any risk to our health. In fact, many people find them to be a beautiful and awe-inspiring addition to the aurora viewing experience.

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
1K
  • General Engineering
4
Replies
136
Views
14K
  • Earth Sciences
2
Replies
40
Views
45K
  • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
29
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
8K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
69
Views
10K
Replies
18
Views
8K
Back
Top