Page 1 of 8

A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 06:39
by lotek
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECNDpCYvaOc&feature=related[/youtube]

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 13:46
by A Thing of Eternity
On mythbusters they actually pulled off having a singer do it, but it was extremely difficult, almost didn't happen.

Maybe it was easier back in the day when the glass had more impurities?

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 14:18
by SadisticCynic
A Thing of Eternity wrote:On mythbusters they actually pulled off having a singer do it, but it was extremely difficult, almost didn't happen.

Maybe it was easier back in the day when the glass had more impurities?


I'd have guessed that more impurities would make it harder to get the whole thing to resonate. :think:

I wondered also why he said the sound it made with his finger got deeper when they added water was because of 'inertia'. The only thing I could think of was that the pressure of the water pushing against the sides of the glass made it harder for the glass to vibrate, but I don't see immediately why that would change the resonant frequency. Bah, apparently the seventh grade child is smarter than me. :(

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 15:12
by Freakzilla
They broke glass with a low-flying F-4 phantom jet, too.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 16:44
by A Thing of Eternity
SadisticCynic wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:On mythbusters they actually pulled off having a singer do it, but it was extremely difficult, almost didn't happen.

Maybe it was easier back in the day when the glass had more impurities?


I'd have guessed that more impurities would make it harder to get the whole thing to resonate. :think:


Possibly, though wood has a million impurities and it resonates fairly well! I agree it might dampen resonance, but would it dampen resonance more than it would weaken the structure? That's the question to be answered to know whether impurities would make it easier or harder to break.

I wondered also why he said the sound it made with his finger got deeper when they added water was because of 'inertia'. The only thing I could think of was that the pressure of the water pushing against the sides of the glass made it harder for the glass to vibrate, but I don't see immediately why that would change the resonant frequency. Bah, apparently the seventh grade child is smarter than me. :(


Well, he said that because he was wrong! Higher mass = lower resonant frequency (generally speaking). Adding water adds mass to the whole resonant body, so lower note is produced.

Though, it's possible inertia does come into play here the more I think about this - I'm thinking that the reason higher mass causes a lower resonant frequency is simply that the more mass something has the harder it is to accelerate and stop, and resonating involves a whole lot of going back and forth... so more mass means something simply cannot vibrate as quickly as something with less math.


That last bit is just my own logic about why higher mass = lower resonant frequency, not something based on anything else really.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 16:51
by Ampoliros
I'd just use a hammer...

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 17:22
by Kojiro
A Thing of Eternity wrote:On mythbusters they actually pulled off having a singer do it, but it was extremely difficult, almost didn't happen.


The singer likely didn't hit the right note. There was a guest on Dr. Oz that pulled it off without a hitch.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 17:42
by A Thing of Eternity
Kojiro wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:On mythbusters they actually pulled off having a singer do it, but it was extremely difficult, almost didn't happen.


The singer likely didn't hit the right note. There was a guest on Dr. Oz that pulled it off without a hitch.


No it was the right note for sure (it's pretty easy to tell) the issue was amplitude, not frequency. The time on mythbusters was actually the first time it was ever filmed being done with an unamplified human voice - up until that episode it actually was an unproven thing, lots of people claimed to have done it, or to have seen it done, but nobody had every actually caught it on film to prove it.

EDIT: note too that the last time the guy attempted it it totally looked easy, but that was after quite a few tries!

Who knows why the guest on Oz's show had an easier time - better singer, or simply a louder singer, different glass... lots of variables.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 18:39
by antonio
Just to jump in here, Does anyone think that Frank Herbert could support the sound technique as consistent with the ideas described in his novels? From the movie: Some thoughts have a certain sound, thought being equivalent to a form.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 18:48
by Ampoliros
I liked the idea (as an audiophile I fully appreciate the power of sound), and Frank must not of hated it because he liked the film.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 19:19
by antonio
Ampoliros wrote:I liked the idea (as an audiophile I fully appreciate the power of sound), and Frank must not of hated it because he liked the film.


Yes. Good point. Frank Herbert reported that he liked the movie. In the novel Dune he described prana-bindu training. This training didn't explicitly include the use of sound as a weapon, unless we consider the use of Voice as a weapon. However, the term prana-bindu calls to mind the terms hindu and yoga. Bhakti yoga involves the chanting of "sacred names" and the use of mantras to evoke healing powers. So viewed from the perspective of yoga beliefs, sound can represent thoughts, forms, and higher powers (deities) that can influence reality. Given Frank Herbert's extensive knowledge of religious texts (e.g., Sufi beliefs), there may be some basis for viewing the sound technique as quasi-canonical with respect to the Dune Universe. While sound vibrations can shatter glass, the sound technique, as presented in the movie, involved a conceptual dimension: thoughts and words; calling to mind the hidden dimension of the alam al-mithral: the realm of similitudes. Although "weirding modules" were used to effectuate the reality of the sound technique, this departure from the novels does not necessarily represent a departure from Frank Herbert's ideas concerning special abilities. In his fictional work, Frank Herbert often described technological methods for accessing psychic powers.

Random Image Player

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 19:29
by SandChigger
Image

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 19:51
by SadisticCynic
Possibly, though wood has a million impurities and it resonates fairly well! I agree it might dampen resonance, but would it dampen resonance more than it would weaken the structure? That's the question to be answered to know whether impurities would make it easier or harder to break.


Hmm, good point. I was thinking that if it damped how well the system responded to a resonant frequency, then the amplitude of the vibrations would not be so large, and it might not shatter as easily. The structure thing probably makes more sense though.

Well, he said that because he was wrong! Higher mass = lower resonant frequency (generally speaking). Adding water adds mass to the whole resonant body, so lower note is produced.

Though, it's possible inertia does come into play here the more I think about this - I'm thinking that the reason higher mass causes a lower resonant frequency is simply that the more mass something has the harder it is to accelerate and stop, and resonating involves a whole lot of going back and forth... so more mass means something simply cannot vibrate as quickly as something with less math.

That last bit is just my own logic about why higher mass = lower resonant frequency, not something based on anything else really.


The only thing is that water won't have the same resonant frequency as the glass, so it won't contribute to the vibration when you apply the sound waves (the force). :think:
I would guess that the water's weight presses against the glass, which means that the damping is greater. This would affect the frequency at which the glass resonates under the action of the force. Pulled from Wikipedia is the solution to the equation of motion for a driven underdamped harmonic oscillator:

z(t)=Ae^(-γω0t) sin(√(1-γ^2 )ω0t+φ)

I swear that looks more complicated than it actually is*. γ is the 'damping coefficient' and ω0 is the natural frequency of the oscillator (the glass for us). The oscillation in that equation is given by the sin term, and the frequency is the number multiplied by the variable t. For an underdamped system, γ < 1, so the actual frequency is a number less than 1 multiplied by the natural frequency, giving an actual frequency less than the natural one, which translates to a lower pitch. Hence the glass with water in it should prduce a lower note.

Well, I guess that's complicated enough to sound plausible... :shifty:

*It actually looks a lot prettier here. Except I have changed the Greek letter used for the damping coefficient.

Re: Random Image Player

Posted: 15 Apr 2011 22:29
by Omphalos
SandChigger wrote:Image


Ya think?

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 00:07
by merkin muffley
antonio wrote:While sound vibrations can shatter glass, the sound technique, as presented in the movie, involved a conceptual dimension: thoughts and words; calling to mind the hidden dimension of the alam al-mithral: the realm of similitudes. Although "weirding modules" were used to effectuate the reality of the sound technique, this departure from the novels does not necessarily represent a departure from Frank Herbert's ideas concerning special abilities. In his fictional work, Frank Herbert often described technological methods for accessing psychic powers.


As a Raelian, I've made a few discoveries along these lines, especially during sensual meditation. The correct application of sound during sexual contact has a very real effect on awareness. I also think that Frank Herbert will prove to be increasingly prophetic as time goes on and technology with psychic applications is developed. To be more accurate, humans will "RE-DISCOVER" technologies that were part and parcel of their creation (such as cloning). What we call scientific advancement is really a process of tapping into our origins.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 06:46
by inhuien
___ {o,o}
 ||)_) -"-"-
O RLY?

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 08:19
by ULFsurfer
SadisticCynic wrote:The only thing is that water won't have the same resonant frequency as the glass, so it won't contribute to the vibration when you apply the sound waves (the force). :think:
I would guess that the water's weight presses against the glass, which means that the damping is greater. This would affect the frequency at which the glass resonates under the action of the force. Pulled from Wikipedia is the solution to the equation of motion for a driven underdamped harmonic oscillator:

z(t)=Ae^(-γω0t) sin(√(1-γ^2 )ω0t+φ)

I swear that looks more complicated than it actually is*. γ is the 'damping coefficient' and ω0 is the natural frequency of the oscillator (the glass for us). The oscillation in that equation is given by the sin term, and the frequency is the number multiplied by the variable t. For an underdamped system, γ < 1, so the actual frequency is a number less than 1 multiplied by the natural frequency, giving an actual frequency less than the natural one, which translates to a lower pitch. Hence the glass with water in it should prduce a lower note.

Well, I guess that's complicated enough to sound plausible... :shifty:

*It actually looks a lot prettier here. Except I have changed the Greek letter used for the damping coefficient.


I think I need to clarify one thing here. This damping oscillator solution is only for when the external force has been withdrawn, thus it is only how the system behaves after you stop singing. If the glass survives it will have a very quick amplitude dissipation and not so quick shift to lower frequency. If you continue to sing (apply force) then the resonant condition of the glass needs to be at that exact frequency in order for it to break.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 08:29
by SandChigger
(ULFsurfer, I really like how you are continuing a serious conversation while the thread slowly unravels and begins to burn around you. You've got the right attitude. :lol: )

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 08:50
by merkin muffley
Image
Mothman Lives!

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 10:02
by SadisticCynic
ULFsurfer wrote:
SadisticCynic wrote:The only thing is that water won't have the same resonant frequency as the glass, so it won't contribute to the vibration when you apply the sound waves (the force). :think:
I would guess that the water's weight presses against the glass, which means that the damping is greater. This would affect the frequency at which the glass resonates under the action of the force. Pulled from Wikipedia is the solution to the equation of motion for a driven underdamped harmonic oscillator:

z(t)=Ae^(-γω0t) sin(√(1-γ^2 )ω0t+φ)

I swear that looks more complicated than it actually is*. γ is the 'damping coefficient' and ω0 is the natural frequency of the oscillator (the glass for us). The oscillation in that equation is given by the sin term, and the frequency is the number multiplied by the variable t. For an underdamped system, γ < 1, so the actual frequency is a number less than 1 multiplied by the natural frequency, giving an actual frequency less than the natural one, which translates to a lower pitch. Hence the glass with water in it should prduce a lower note.

Well, I guess that's complicated enough to sound plausible... :shifty:

*It actually looks a lot prettier here. Except I have changed the Greek letter used for the damping coefficient.


I think I need to clarify one thing here. This damping oscillator solution is only for when the external force has been withdrawn, thus it is only how the system behaves after you stop singing. If the glass survives it will have a very quick amplitude dissipation and not so quick shift to lower frequency. If you continue to sing (apply force) then the resonant condition of the glass needs to be at that exact frequency in order for it to break.


Indeed you're right. :doh: It doesn't make it explicit on Wikipedia, but I should have realised from the exponential term. Not as good at this as I would like to be.
I guess for a sound wave driving the oscillator I should be using the solution for a sinusiodal driving force?

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 11:05
by D Pope
I love it when I find that the answers to questions i've given up on were within reach, just didn't ask the right people.

PMs to follow.

Jacurutu ROCKS! :D

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 12:38
by Omphalos
inhuien wrote:___ {o,o}
 ||)_) -"-"-
O RLY?


ThT is one fucked up looking owl, amigo.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 12:54
by A Thing of Eternity
antonio wrote:Just to jump in here, Does anyone think that Frank Herbert could support the sound technique as consistent with the ideas described in his novels? From the movie: Some thoughts have a certain sound, thought being equivalent to a form.


Nope.

FH supported the sound weapon only because they didn't want to make a martial arts movie. It had nothing to do with Dune.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 13:00
by A Thing of Eternity
SadisticCynic wrote:
Well, he said that because he was wrong! Higher mass = lower resonant frequency (generally speaking). Adding water adds mass to the whole resonant body, so lower note is produced.

Though, it's possible inertia does come into play here the more I think about this - I'm thinking that the reason higher mass causes a lower resonant frequency is simply that the more mass something has the harder it is to accelerate and stop, and resonating involves a whole lot of going back and forth... so more mass means something simply cannot vibrate as quickly as something with less math.

That last bit is just my own logic about why higher mass = lower resonant frequency, not something based on anything else really.


The only thing is that water won't have the same resonant frequency as the glass, so it won't contribute to the vibration when you apply the sound waves (the force). :think:
I would guess that the water's weight presses against the glass, which means that the damping is greater. This would affect the frequency at which the glass resonates under the action of the force. Pulled from Wikipedia is the solution to the equation of motion for a driven underdamped harmonic oscillator:

z(t)=Ae^(-γω0t) sin(√(1-γ^2 )ω0t+φ)

I swear that looks more complicated than it actually is*. γ is the 'damping coefficient' and ω0 is the natural frequency of the oscillator (the glass for us). The oscillation in that equation is given by the sin term, and the frequency is the number multiplied by the variable t. For an underdamped system, γ < 1, so the actual frequency is a number less than 1 multiplied by the natural frequency, giving an actual frequency less than the natural one, which translates to a lower pitch. Hence the glass with water in it should prduce a lower note.

Well, I guess that's complicated enough to sound plausible... :shifty:

*It actually looks a lot prettier here. Except I have changed the Greek letter used for the damping coefficient.


I'm going to have to take your word on that math as ecidence for that idea! My experience/logic says: Dampening kinda makes sense, but usually it only effects the amplitude of the resonating body, not the frequency, from what I've seen anyways. Resonance is weird when it comes to multiple things vibrating together - just because they resonate at different frequencies doesn't necessarily mean they won't work together to produce one tone with their combined mass (or more often, a tone with complex overtones). I'm not convinced that this isn't a simple mass raising = frequency lowering thing, because dispite having different resonant frequencies per molecule (or whatever), they still may be acting as one "averaged" body (averaged being an example/guess only, I'm sure it's not a straight average).

I could be wrong about all that though.

Re: A technique involving sound

Posted: 16 Apr 2011 13:03
by A Thing of Eternity
merkin muffley wrote:
antonio wrote:While sound vibrations can shatter glass, the sound technique, as presented in the movie, involved a conceptual dimension: thoughts and words; calling to mind the hidden dimension of the alam al-mithral: the realm of similitudes. Although "weirding modules" were used to effectuate the reality of the sound technique, this departure from the novels does not necessarily represent a departure from Frank Herbert's ideas concerning special abilities. In his fictional work, Frank Herbert often described technological methods for accessing psychic powers.


As a Raelian, I've made a few discoveries along these lines, especially during sensual meditation. The correct application of sound during sexual contact has a very real effect on awareness. I also think that Frank Herbert will prove to be increasingly prophetic as time goes on and technology with psychic applications is developed. To be more accurate, humans will "RE-DISCOVER" technologies that were part and parcel of their creation (such as cloning). What we call scientific advancement is really a process of tapping into our origins.


Bah, forget this foolish nonsesne, Rael is full of shit. If you want to know the TRUTH you need to start researching Atlantis, and the aliens that helped the Nazis gain so much technology so quickly.