Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: HUM_FORUM: Experiments

Expand Messages
  • Glen MacPherson
    Thanks, Dave, for weighing in. I am a notorious cheapskate, and I am thinking of ways to make this work. I was examining the skin depth formula, and then found
    Message 1 of 8 , Dec 14, 2012
    Thanks, Dave, for weighing in.

    I am a notorious cheapskate, and I am thinking of ways to make this work. I was examining the skin depth formula, and then found a list of magnetic permeabilities and resistivities of various substances.

    And I have a plan. Please see the attached Word document and see if you can spot any errors in my rusty physics or arithmetic.

    Cheers

    Glen




    On 12-12-13 5:52 PM, profdeming wrote:
     

    As I have suggested in 2004 paper, there are some experiments that could help determine the source of the Hum.

    Unfortunately, none of these experiments is inexpensive.

    One experiment would be to construct two walk-in size boxes. From the outside, the boxes would appear identical but have different compositions. The first box would be constructed of a material capable of attenuating acoustic signals--for example, 12 inches of concrete. The second box would be less effective at attenuating acoustic signals, but very effective at attenuating electromagnetic signals.

    The second box would be constructed of a metal in sufficient thickness to screen out even very low frequency radio waves. By "sufficient" thickness, I mean a conductor such as aluminum or copper on the order of 1 inch or 2-3 centimeters thick. Quite expensive.

    People who hear the Hum could then be asked to step into both boxes and answer which one, if either, attenuates the Hum. Ideally, the experiment would be performed double-blind, so neither the subject nor the experimenter would know which box was the acoustic screen and which was the electromagnetic screen.

    (As I have emphasized before, if the Hum is a VLF or ELF radio signal, it cannot be screened out with aluminum foil or ordinary Faraday cages. Depending on the frequency, substantive conductor thicknesses are needed. Keep this in mind: if the Hum is a VLF or ELF radio signal used for submarine communications, it has to be able to penetrate significant thicknesses of salty seawater, a substance which is also a conductor.)

    Final experimental suggestion. Monitor reports of the Hum while simultaneously monitoring the VLF and ELF parts of the EM spectrum. I do not know where you can purchase a VLF or ELF monitor, but I believe this would be an exotic piece of equipment.

    --DD


  • Copsne
    Glen do not put blinders on. I am very emotional right now we had today a mass murder in Newtown CT. The same area I have voyaged for hum field work. Remeber
    Message 2 of 8 , Dec 14, 2012
      Glen do not put blinders on. I am very emotional right now we had today a mass murder in Newtown CT. The same area I have voyaged for hum field work. Remeber this Kiss- keep it simple stupid

      Sent from Steve's iPhone and I appologize for typo's

      On Dec 14, 2012, at 5:26 PM, Glen MacPherson <glen.macpherson@...> wrote:

       

      Thanks, Dave, for weighing in.

      I am a notorious cheapskate, and I am thinking of ways to make this work. I was examining the skin depth formula, and then found a list of magnetic permeabilities and resistivities of various substances.

      And I have a plan. Please see the attached Word document and see if you can spot any errors in my rusty physics or arithmetic.

      Cheers

      Glen




      On 12-12-13 5:52 PM, profdeming wrote:
       

      As I have suggested in 2004 paper, there are some experiments that could help determine the source of the Hum.

      Unfortunately, none of these experiments is inexpensive.

      One experiment would be to construct two walk-in size boxes. From the outside, the boxes would appear identical but have different compositions. The first box would be constructed of a material capable of attenuating acoustic signals--for example, 12 inches of concrete. The second box would be less effective at attenuating acoustic signals, but very effective at attenuating electromagnetic signals.

      The second box would be constructed of a metal in sufficient thickness to screen out even very low frequency radio waves. By "sufficient" thickness, I mean a conductor such as aluminum or copper on the order of 1 inch or 2-3 centimeters thick. Quite expensive.

      People who hear the Hum could then be asked to step into both boxes and answer which one, if either, attenuates the Hum. Ideally, the experiment would be performed double-blind, so neither the subject nor the experimenter would know which box was the acoustic screen and which was the electromagnetic screen.

      (As I have emphasized before, if the Hum is a VLF or ELF radio signal, it cannot be screened out with aluminum foil or ordinary Faraday cages. Depending on the frequency, substantive conductor thicknesses are needed. Keep this in mind: if the Hum is a VLF or ELF radio signal used for submarine communications, it has to be able to penetrate significant thicknesses of salty seawater, a substance which is also a conductor.)

      Final experimental suggestion. Monitor reports of the Hum while simultaneously monitoring the VLF and ELF parts of the EM spectrum. I do not know where you can purchase a VLF or ELF monitor, but I believe this would be an exotic piece of equipment.

      --DD


    • Kevin Hawthorne
      In the recording biz, not only have I witnessed the construction of anechoic chambers, but, more commonly, rooms that are isolated from the outside world of
      Message 3 of 8 , Dec 15, 2012
        In the recording biz, not only have I witnessed the construction of anechoic chambers, but, more commonly, rooms that are isolated from the outside world of noise and vibrations via monstrous rubber isolator pads (somewhat like engine mounts on a vehicle, but on a larger scale) in addition to the normal sound insulation materials.

        I have also watched the construction of rooms that were designed to shield the sensitive electronic equipment inside by utilizing a grounded "cage" design consisting of a wire grid material (not unlike common chicken wire) inside the wall, ceiling, and flooring material.

        =k=





        From: Glen MacPherson <glen.macpherson@...>
        To: humforum@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 3:26 PM
        Subject: Re: HUM_FORUM: Experiments [1 Attachment]

         
        Thanks, Dave, for weighing in.

        I am a notorious cheapskate, and I am thinking of ways to make this work. I was examining the skin depth formula, and then found a list of magnetic permeabilities and resistivities of various substances.

        And I have a plan. Please see the attached Word document and see if you can spot any errors in my rusty physics or arithmetic.

        Cheers

        Glen




        On 12-12-13 5:52 PM, profdeming wrote:
         
        As I have suggested in 2004 paper, there are some experiments that could help determine the source of the Hum.

        Unfortunately, none of these experiments is inexpensive.

        One experiment would be to construct two walk-in size boxes. From the outside, the boxes would appear identical but have different compositions. The first box would be constructed of a material capable of attenuating acoustic signals--for example, 12 inches of concrete. The second box would be less effective at attenuating acoustic signals, but very effective at attenuating electromagnetic signals.

        The second box would be constructed of a metal in sufficient thickness to screen out even very low frequency radio waves. By "sufficient" thickness, I mean a conductor such as aluminum or copper on the order of 1 inch or 2-3 centimeters thick. Quite expensive.

        People who hear the Hum could then be asked to step into both boxes and answer which one, if either, attenuates the Hum. Ideally, the experiment would be performed double-blind, so neither the subject nor the experimenter would know which box was the acoustic screen and which was the electromagnetic screen.

        (As I have emphasized before, if the Hum is a VLF or ELF radio signal, it cannot be screened out with aluminum foil or ordinary Faraday cages. Depending on the frequency, substantive conductor thicknesses are needed. Keep this in mind: if the Hum is a VLF or ELF radio signal used for submarine communications, it has to be able to penetrate significant thicknesses of salty seawater, a substance which is also a conductor.)

        Final experimental suggestion. Monitor reports of the Hum while simultaneously monitoring the VLF and ELF parts of the EM spectrum. I do not know where you can purchase a VLF or ELF monitor, but I believe this would be an exotic piece of equipment.

        --DD




      • engineidler
        If anyone is able to perform these experiments may I suggest a 3rd box, a reference box, made the same size and of normal home construction materials , using
        Message 4 of 8 , Dec 15, 2012
          If anyone is able to perform these experiments may I suggest a 3rd box, a reference box, made the same size and of normal home construction materials , using an oblique peaked roof. This would perform a few crieria. Eg , if the hum frequency is building size dependant and cannot be heard in the home copy then the other 2 tests may be mute. Also , what happens if it can be heard in the home copy but neither the concrete or steel boxes.
          I beleive the the roof of a building is an amplifier of the hum,defined by size and slope. I recently performed an unexpected experiment on my nearly new exceptionally insulated home , it has a large roof with a 9/12 slope, I had heard the hum often and at medium volume. I did not like the look of the roof so I added more roof over a bedroom and the Hum became louder and 24x7.

          Regards,

          John B.
          Langley




          --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, "profdeming" <profdeming@...> wrote:
          >
          > As I have suggested in 2004 paper, there are some experiments that could help determine the source of the Hum.
          >
          > Unfortunately, none of these experiments is inexpensive.
          >
          > One experiment would be to construct two walk-in size boxes. From the outside, the boxes would appear identical but have different compositions. The first box would be constructed of a material capable of attenuating acoustic signals--for example, 12 inches of concrete. The second box would be less effective at attenuating acoustic signals, but very effective at attenuating electromagnetic signals.
          >
          > The second box would be constructed of a metal in sufficient thickness to screen out even very low frequency radio waves. By "sufficient" thickness, I mean a conductor such as aluminum or copper on the order of 1 inch or 2-3 centimeters thick. Quite expensive.
          >
          > People who hear the Hum could then be asked to step into both boxes and answer which one, if either, attenuates the Hum. Ideally, the experiment would be performed double-blind, so neither the subject nor the experimenter would know which box was the acoustic screen and which was the electromagnetic screen.
          >
          > (As I have emphasized before, if the Hum is a VLF or ELF radio signal, it cannot be screened out with aluminum foil or ordinary Faraday cages. Depending on the frequency, substantive conductor thicknesses are needed. Keep this in mind: if the Hum is a VLF or ELF radio signal used for submarine communications, it has to be able to penetrate significant thicknesses of salty seawater, a substance which is also a conductor.)
          >
          > Final experimental suggestion. Monitor reports of the Hum while simultaneously monitoring the VLF and ELF parts of the EM spectrum. I do not know where you can purchase a VLF or ELF monitor, but I believe this would be an exotic piece of equipment.
          >
          > --DD
          >
        • iprefertruth
          In a message dated 14/12/2012 02:52:05 GMT Daylight Time, profdeming@earthlink.net writes: The second box would be constructed of a metal in sufficient
          Message 5 of 8 , Apr 8, 2013
             
             
            In a message dated 14/12/2012 02:52:05 GMT Daylight Time, profdeming@... writes:
            The second box would be constructed of a metal in sufficient thickness to screen out even very low frequency radio waves. By "sufficient" thickness, I mean a conductor such as aluminum or copper on the order of 1 inch or 2-3 centimeters thick. Quite expensive.
            Could a typical metal shipping container be used to see if any radio waves, and which frequencies, if any, could get into the container?
            I went into one at our previous workshop (a storage area), and neither a small transistor radio nor a mobile phone would work in there. I would think there might be many such shipping containers 'around',so
            would it be worth a try ? At least if one could ask just  to use it for an experiment,
             there might not even be any expense involved ?
            Best Wishes,
            Rosemarie Mann,
            LFNSH, England.

          • tofinosurfer
            Hi. An excellent question. First, we would expect that an AM radio or cell phone would not work inside one, mainly because radio signals at that frequency are
            Message 6 of 8 , Apr 9, 2013
              Hi.

              An excellent question. First, we would expect that an AM radio or cell phone would not work inside one, mainly because radio signals at that frequency are easily blocked by a very thin layer of foil. As David Deming points out, VLF signals can penetrate materials much more deeply. (For a more in-depth look at this topic, google "radio skin depth").

              My own contribution here was to avoid the expense of the suggested materials (aluminum, for example) by noticing that a 1.2 mm layer of mild steel (which shipping containers are not made of), should be able to block almost all VLF signals. But there is another complication: VLF signals are very good are leaking through small holes and cracks in materials.

              So, as to whether or not a standard shipping container will block VLF signals, there is a simple test: walk into one, shut the doors, turn on a flashlight, and look at the signal strength on a portable VLF meter. These meters can be tricky to find, but you can get one here: http://www.ebay.it/itm/Ricevitore-receiver-VLF-radio-natura-e-EVP-/251238490317?pt=Ham_HF_VHF_UHF_SHF&hash=item3a7efb20cd

              You need to conduct a "proof of concept" experiment where you first establish that a box (shipping container in your case) actually shields against VLF. Once you've established that, you can conduct a few informal tests to see if the container blocks the Hum. If so, then a fully controlled, double-blind experiment comes next.

              Please keep us informed about what you discover, because if a well-sealed shipping container will work, then it will save me considerable time and work in my own experiments.

              Cheers

              Glen MacPherson
              www.thehum.info



              --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, Tobypaws2002@... wrote:
              >
              >
              >
              > In a message dated 14/12/2012 02:52:05 GMT Daylight Time,
              > profdeming@... writes:
              >
              > The second box would be constructed of a metal in sufficient thickness to
              > screen out even very low frequency radio waves. By "sufficient" thickness,
              > I mean a conductor such as aluminum or copper on the order of 1 inch or 2-3
              > centimeters thick. Quite expensive.
              >
              > Could a typical metal shipping container be used to see if any radio waves,
              > and which frequencies, if any, could get into the container?
              > I went into one at our previous workshop (a storage area), and neither a
              > small transistor radio nor a mobile phone would work in there. I would think
              > there might be many such shipping containers 'around',so
              > would it be worth a try ? At least if one could ask just to use it for an
              > experiment,
              > there might not even be any expense involved ?
              > Best Wishes,
              > Rosemarie Mann,
              > LFNSH, England.
              >
              > https://guide.glosnhs.net/guide/resource/images/logos/Low%20Frequency%20Nois
              > e%20Sufferers%20Helpline.pdf
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.