Experimentobtaining sound from molecules

  • Thread starter Thread starter Treacle
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Molecules Sound
AI Thread Summary
Creating sound from molecular interactions is theoretically intriguing but practically challenging. The equation E=hv relates to electromagnetic waves, not directly to sound waves, as sound is a mechanical wave requiring a medium. While thermal noise generated by electronic components can produce audible frequencies, it primarily results in white noise, which lacks musicality. Amplifying thermal noise could yield sound in the audio range, but this process does not directly map electromagnetic frequencies to sound frequencies. Overall, while there are connections between the two domains, they operate under different principles and mechanisms.
Treacle
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Was just wondering whether or not it was at all possible to create "sound" from molecule interactions, and if so how would I go about it?
I was going on the theory that if E=hv then a frequency is obtained when this equation is applied and as sound is theoretically a frequency (movement of particles) .. would it not be possible to slow down and increase 'v' in order to get an audible frequency as 'sound' ?

Is this at all possible-just thinking out loud and wondering :smile:

If it was..then how would I go about it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Not quite what you asked for but...

Any electronic component that's not at absolute zero generates thermal noise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson–Nyquist_noise

http://www.daycounter.com/Calculators/Thermal-Noise-Calculator.phtml

It wouldn't be very interesting to listen to, essentially white noise.

You could build a thermal noise generator that simply amplifies the noise produced by a resistor. High gain is required so several stages of amplification might be necessary instead of trying to do it with a single stage (max gain of an op-amp is limited by it's non-ideal properties - such as DC offset). You would be able to hear those components in the audio range, but obviously not those outside it.
 
Last edited:
E=hv tells us that the energy of a photon is equal to the frequency of the EM wave (v) times Plancks constant (h). It is not related to the frequency of a sound wave.
 
I understand that the equation gives the frequency of an EM wave but was thinking about mapping that onto a sound frequency ? Do you think that may work?
 
Treacle said:
I understand that the equation gives the frequency of an EM wave but was thinking about mapping that onto a sound frequency ? Do you think that may work?

I'm not sure what exactly you are looking for. What does E=hv and molecules have to do with this? Keep in mind we already use EM waves to transfer sound through radio, although the technique is a little different than what you seem to be proposing.
 
A lot of the optical and acoustic wave formulas work the same, except that
in the acoustic world "c" becomes the speed of sound in the medium in question.
Beyond that there in not much overlap. Some of the real long wavelength IR
may produce some secondary sound (popping of a microwave heated object),
but I don't think that is what you are asking.
The two frequency scales may overlap, but are different affects.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top