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

Re: HUM_FORUM: Since I can perceive this hum then maybe other creatures suc...

Expand Messages
  • Tobypaws2002@aol.com
    In a message dated 28/05/2004 14:41:55 GMT Daylight Time, e-ken@shaw.ca ... I would expect submarines to have very specialised, sensitive equipment for this
    Message 1 of 6 , Jun 2, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      In a message dated 28/05/2004 14:41:55 GMT Daylight Time, e-ken@... writes:

      whales could perceive it as well. If that's the case no wonder many are found
      unnaturally beaching themselves in frustration. Signals powerful enough for
      submarine communication and earth crust penetration and graphing could possibly
      heat the molecules in our inner ear to the point of creating this hum perception.


      I would expect submarines to have very specialised, sensitive equipment for this sort of communication.  I wouldn't expect humans to pick it up.
      Does anyone know the intensity / strength of the beams?
      Don't they have to be over a certain level of watts per square centimetre?
      Are the beams / signals concerned strong  enough?
      R.M.  England.
    • Demonbusters
      ... many are ... enough for ... could ... hum ... One thing that I have read is that the messages are usually very simple, and with codes and symbols to
      Message 2 of 6 , Jun 2, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Tobypaws2002@a... wrote:
        >
        > e-ken@s... writes:
        >
        > > whales could perceive it as well. If that's the case no wonder
        many are
        > > found
        > > unnaturally beaching themselves in frustration. Signals powerful
        enough for
        > > submarine communication and earth crust penetration and graphing
        could
        > > possibly
        > > heat the molecules in our inner ear to the point of creating this
        hum
        > > perception.
        >
        > I would expect submarines to have very specialised, sensitive
        > equipment for this sort of communication. I wouldn't expect humans
        > to pick it up. Does anyone know the intensity / strength of the
        > beams? Don't they have to be over a certain level of watts per
        > square centimetre?
        > Are the beams / signals concerned strong enough?

        One thing that I have read is that the messages are usually very
        simple, and with codes and symbols to further simplify the
        communication. The transmission rate is fairly slow, given how low is
        the frequency of the radio waves, and a message might be only a dozen
        or two dozen words. The submarine commanders are given a lot of
        authority to carry out their missions with a minimum of input from
        shore, and the transmissions from the shore to submarines are very
        infrequent, especially true in peacetime (and from a standpoint of the
        need for defensive and offensive use of the U.S.'s submarines, the
        current military conflicts are pretty close to "peacetime" from the
        standpoint of the use of our submarines).

        If the submarine needs to communicate with the shore, they need to
        come up to a depth to where they can poke an antenna above water to
        make a brief transmission.

        Even the ballistic missile submarines utilize a menu of pre-planned
        missions so that the need for communication with the shore can be
        minimized, since there are difficulties in making such communications
        without being detected and attacked by the enemy forces.
      • Tobypaws2002@aol.com
        In a message dated 03/06/2004 04:45:32 GMT Daylight Time, ... (Which in my opinion tends to undermine the theory that these transmissions are causing constant
        Message 3 of 6 , Jun 2, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          In a message dated 03/06/2004 04:45:32 GMT Daylight Time, demonbusters2000@... writes:

          Tobypaws2002@a... wrote:
          >
          >e-ken@s... writes:
          >
          >>whales could perceive it as well. If that's the case no wonder
          many are
          >>found
          >>unnaturally beaching themselves in frustration. Signals powerful
          enough for
          >>submarine communication and earth crust penetration and graphing
          could
          >>possibly
          >>heat the molecules in our inner ear to the point of creating this
          hum
          >>perception.
          >
          >I would expect submarines to have very specialised, sensitive
          >equipment for this sort of communication.  I wouldn't expect humans
          >to pick it up. Does anyone know the intensity / strength of the
          >beams? Don't they have to be over a certain level of watts per
          >square centimetre?
          >Are the beams / signals concerned strong  enough?

          One thing that I have read is that the messages are usually very
          simple, and with codes and symbols to further simplify the
          communication.  The transmission rate is fairly slow, given how low is
          the frequency of the radio waves, and a message might be only a dozen
          or two dozen words.  The submarine commanders are given a lot of
          authority to carry out their missions with a minimum of input from
          shore, and the
          transmissions from the shore to submarines are very
          infrequent,

          (Which in my opinion tends to undermine the theory that these transmissions are causing constant hum for many people in many different parts of the developed world.)
          R.M.  England.


          especially true in peacetime (and from a standpoint of the


          need for defensive and offensive use of the U.S.'s submarines, the
          current military conflicts are pretty close to "peacetime" from the
          standpoint of the use of our submarines). 

          If the submarine needs to communicate with the shore, they need to
          come up to a depth to where they can poke an antenna above water to
          make a brief transmission.

          Even the ballistic missile submarines utilize a menu of pre-planned
          missions so that the need for communication with the shore can be
          minimized, since there are difficulties in making such communications
          without being detected and attacked by the enemy forces.


          (Exactly. So there would not be constant transmissions of the waves that many people suspect of causing 24/7 'hum' ).     R.M.  England.





        • Bill Curry
          RM, So far, no mechanism for hearing of electromagnetic waves has been demonstrated except microwave hearing. If the thermoacoustic mechanism of microwave
          Message 4 of 6 , Jun 2, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            RM,
                So far, no mechanism for hearing of electromagnetic waves has been demonstrated except microwave hearing.  If the thermoacoustic mechanism of microwave hearing is the only possible meachanism, then there is a threshold stated in amount of energy deposited in a given area in the first 30 microseconds of any pulse. Expressed as a peak radiation power density, the lowest value at which microwave hearing (in the form of a buzz) was demonstrated in humans is 0.09 W/cm^2 by Frey and Messenger in 1973.  Incidentally, wearing ear stoppers limits the background noise perception, so a lower and more accurate measurement of the power density threshold is obtained with ear stoppers.   What has not been demonstrated is whether the use of pulsing rates comparable with brain wave frequencies can reduce the threshold for microwave hearing below the stated value.
            |Bill P. Curry, Ph.D.            Physics is fun|
            |(630) 858-9377        Fax (630) 858-9159|
            |      EMSciTek Consulting Company     |
            ----- Original Message -----
            Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 9:09 PM
            Subject: Re: HUM_FORUM: Since I can perceive this hum then maybe other creatures suc...

            In a message dated 28/05/2004 14:41:55 GMT Daylight Time, e-ken@... writes:

            whales could perceive it as well. If that's the case no wonder many are found
            unnaturally beaching themselves in frustration. Signals powerful enough for
            submarine communication and earth crust penetration and graphing could possibly
            heat the molecules in our inner ear to the point of creating this hum perception.


            I would expect submarines to have very specialised, sensitive equipment for this sort of communication.  I wouldn't expect humans to pick it up.
            Does anyone know the intensity / strength of the beams?
            Don't they have to be over a certain level of watts per square centimetre?
            Are the beams / signals concerned strong  enough?
            R.M.  England.

          • hotnite2
            ... powerful ... graphing ... this ... humans ... low is ... dozen ... from ... very ... transmissions ... of the ... the ... the ... to ... to ... planned ...
            Message 5 of 6 , Jun 3, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In humforum@yahoogroups.com, Tobypaws2002@a... wrote:
              > In a message dated 03/06/2004 04:45:32 GMT Daylight Time,
              > demonbusters2000@y... writes:
              >
              > > Tobypaws2002@a... wrote:
              > > >
              > > >e-ken@s... writes:
              > > >
              > > >>whales could perceive it as well. If that's the case no wonder
              > > many are
              > > >>found
              > > >>unnaturally beaching themselves in frustration. Signals
              powerful
              > > enough for
              > > >>submarine communication and earth crust penetration and
              graphing
              > > could
              > > >>possibly
              > > >>heat the molecules in our inner ear to the point of creating
              this
              > > hum
              > > >>perception.
              > > >
              > > >I would expect submarines to have very specialised, sensitive
              > > >equipment for this sort of communication. I wouldn't expect
              humans
              > > >to pick it up. Does anyone know the intensity / strength of the
              > > >beams? Don't they have to be over a certain level of watts per
              > > >square centimetre?
              > > >Are the beams / signals concerned strong enough?
              > >
              > > One thing that I have read is that the messages are usually very
              > > simple, and with codes and symbols to further simplify the
              > > communication. The transmission rate is fairly slow, given how
              low is
              > > the frequency of the radio waves, and a message might be only a
              dozen
              > > or two dozen words. The submarine commanders are given a lot of
              > > authority to carry out their missions with a minimum of input
              from
              > > shore, and the transmissions from the shore to submarines are
              very
              > > infrequent,
              > (Which in my opinion tends to undermine the theory that these
              transmissions
              > are causing constant hum for many people in many different parts
              of the
              > developed world.)
              > R.M. England.
              >
              > especially true in peacetime (and from a standpoint of the
              > >
              > > need for defensive and offensive use of the U.S.'s submarines,
              the
              > > current military conflicts are pretty close to "peacetime" from
              the
              > > standpoint of the use of our submarines).
              > >
              > > If the submarine needs to communicate with the shore, they need
              to
              > > come up to a depth to where they can poke an antenna above water
              to
              > > make a brief transmission.
              > >
              > > Even the ballistic missile submarines utilize a menu of pre-
              planned
              > > missions so that the need for communication with the shore can be
              > > minimized, since there are difficulties in making such
              communications
              > > without being detected and attacked by the enemy forces.
              >
              > (Exactly. So there would not be constant transmissions of the
              waves that many
              > people suspect of causing 24/7 'hum' ). R.M. England.
              >
              > >


              The power level of the navy's sub communications systems is, I
              believe, around .75Meg watts, originating from antennas in Michigan
              and Wisconsin. If you do a web search, there is info that is easy
              to find.

              I don't think we can postulate anything about when or how frequently
              these transmissions are made. The transmissions are one way, from
              the transmitter, to the sub, where they can reach deep into the
              ocean, without giving the sub away. The sub must float an antenna
              near the surface if it needs to communicate back. Given that the
              transmission is one way and doesn't risk the security of the sub,
              there is no reason the transmissions couldn't be quite frequent.

              I can even give you scenarios why they would now be very frequent.
              Look at modem transmission technology. Two decades ago, we had 300
              baud modems. Now with improved signaling technology, that has
              improved to 56KB, a two orders of magnitude improvement over the
              same medium. If anywhere near that level of improvement has occured
              on the VLF sub comm system, they could send a hell of a lot more
              info now. So, where before they only sent short basic mesgs, like
              to come near the surface to communicate, now they may be sending a
              lot more info, because they can send real complete mesgs.

              A second scenario is it's been reported that in the beginning, the
              sub only received a short msg to come near the surface. Now, they
              can no longer do that because enemy detection systems have greatly
              improved. So, now the entire longer mesg must be sent via VLF.

              Another issue is how people can possibly hear this or some other
              radio freq. There seems to be the assumption that it must be
              directly through some effect on the body. However, there is also
              the possibility that something in the environment is serving as the
              receiver. For example, as kids, many of us made simple crystal
              radio sets using just wire and a crystal, to receive radio
              stations. There have been reports of people receiving radio signals
              through teeth following having fillings done. It's possible that
              the VLF signals are being picked up by something, eg say, the gas
              pipe lines coming into homes, etc and somehow being converted into
              sound. I thought of the gas lines, simply because they are a huge
              underground metal array, roughly matching the 28 mile kind of
              antenna the Navy has on the other end.

              It would seem to me that there is some kind of environmental
              component to the hum, as the majority are saying they hear it mostly
              indoors, that stepping outside it either goes away completely, or is
              diminished. By environmental, I mean things like acoustic resonance
              or some type of "receiver" sited above, etc. That would seem to
              shoot a big hole in the theory that somehow people are hearing some
              EMF signal directly, ie radar, cell phones, etc. If that were the
              case, one would not expect moving outside to diminish the sound, if
              anything it would likely get louder. Also, if something as simple
              as a cell phone were responsible, you would expect the hot bed of
              activity to be a conference room or hotel in NYC, not someone's home
              in Taos.

              I think the navy system has a couple of characteristics that make it
              worthy of investigation. One, it is designed to do exactly what the
              hum does, which is transmit a low freq signal over a geographical
              distance of many thousands of miles. Second, it is modulated and
              most people seem to agree that the hum has a pulsating, varying
              component.
            • Demonbusters
              ... I have not worked directly with any aspect of the ELF communication system, nor have I ever worked for any aspect of the U.S. military, and given that some
              Message 6 of 6 , Jun 3, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Tobypaws2002@a... wrote:
                >
                > demonbusters2000@y... writes:
                >
                > > One thing that I have read is that the messages are usually very
                > > simple, and with codes and symbols to further simplify the
                > > communication. The transmission rate is fairly slow, given how
                > > low is the frequency of the radio waves, and a message might be
                > > only a dozen
                > > or two dozen words. The submarine commanders are given a lot of
                > > authority to carry out their missions with a minimum of input from
                > > shore, and the transmissions from the shore to submarines are very
                > > infrequent,
                >
                > (Which in my opinion tends to undermine the theory that these
                > transmissions are causing constant hum for many people in many
                > different parts of the developed world.)
                >
                > > especially true in peacetime (and from a standpoint of the
                > > need for defensive and offensive use of the U.S.'s submarines, the
                > > current military conflicts are pretty close to "peacetime" from
                > > the standpoint of the use of our submarines).
                > >
                > > If the submarine needs to communicate with the shore, they need to
                > > come up to a depth to where they can poke an antenna above water
                > > to make a brief transmission.
                > >
                > > Even the ballistic missile submarines utilize a menu of
                > > pre-planned missions so that the need for communication with the
                > > shore can be minimized, since there are difficulties in making
                > > such communications
                > > without being detected and attacked by the enemy forces.
                >
                > (Exactly. So there would not be constant transmissions of the waves
                > that many people suspect of causing 24/7 'hum' ).

                I have not worked directly with any aspect of the ELF communication
                system, nor have I ever worked for any aspect of the U.S. military,
                and given that some aspects of the system would be classified, my
                knowledge of the system is by no means exhaustive, and some of what I
                have read might not have the whole picture.

                I've read that the transmissions are not voice communication, that the
                messages are written messages like an e-mail.

                The system was designed in the early 1980s during the Cold War, so
                that the US Navy's shoreborne top commanders could communicate with
                their submarines during a war with the Soviet Union, since the USSR
                had about 100 hunter-killer nuclear submarines and many ASW aircraft
                that would have been deadly enemies to the U.S. submarines. The ELF
                system would be absolutely necessary during war with the USSR, and
                also during non-war times of high alert, and would be valuable during
                times of lower alert status also.

                It has been over 10 years since the Cold War ended, and it would seem
                to me that there has been very little need for such ELF communication
                since then. Perhaps occasionally there would be the need when U.S.
                submarines are on a mission near China or the Middle East, and
                certainly there is a need for periodic testing to keep the system
                functional, but it seems to me that the submarines that are out on
                patrol should with rare exceptions be able to safely use conventional
                communications methods (i.e. not ELF) with an antenna above the
                surface of the water when they need to communicate with the shore.

                So it would seem to me that ELF communications have been -very-
                infrequent since about 1993.


                --
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.