In article
08e77e00-9e7a-49af-aa37-d315ecf68...@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,

 Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Frequency or pitch can be derived from, or related to, the square root
of the tension, the square of its diameter and the inverse of the
length of the vibrating material.

If you're talking about a string ...and you left out the mass. What's
the formula relating the length of a closed-ended or open-ended pipe to
its pitch?

There is no reason to believe the same cannot be applied to the
physics of seismology. (If such in fact is not already the case.)

Except perhaps that rocks aren't configured like strings.

Bernard Chouet did some work on the frequencies of seismic waves,
bringing to the attention of his peers that there is a relationship in
the change of frequencies prior to disturbances. And that such pitches
could be used to identify what seismic reactions were most likely.

The resonant frequency of any vibrating body is related to the stress it
is under, whether that stress is tension, torsion, flexion, or
compression. We (some of us, at any rate) already know that earthquakes
release energy that is previously built up. That energy is stored as
compression of rocks. As they are more compressed, their resonant
frequencies would increase and their reaction to passing seismic waves
would change.

Marin Mersenne, an early advocate of Open Source, proposed that as
many as five different notes could be plucked at the same time on an
open string of a musical instrument.

This has to do with harmonic modes of vibration.

Obviously he was not referring to a carillon as such bells use ropes,
not strings.

Haw, haw!

The bell in Santa Fe has two notes. The caribbean percussion instruments
made from oil drums have many notes.  

*******

Tension.

It is difficult to imagine that plates of a soft material such as
earth -especially such materials as earth near the point of
liquefaction, can produce any (never mind much) tension.

You mean material soft like granite or basalt?

So what might be the material that is in tension? Solid rock strata
perhaps? Pressurised vessels such as caverns filled with superheated
water, steam or magma?

Thus giving us a likely subject whose diameter might be measured. And
so too, its length.

You're barking up the wrong tree here.

I believe the equation for pitch is:
The square root of the tension divided by the product of the square of
its diameter and the inverse of the length.

Let's look at this algebraically. (It's clear you didn't.)

P = k * sqrt(T) / ( D^2 * 1/L)  
P = k * sqrt(T) * L / D^2  

In other words, you believe that pitch increases with tension, decreases
with string diameter, and increases with length. I believe you're wrong.
I seem to recall that the longer strings of a harp make the lower
pitches. Maybe you could actually look up the equation in Wikipedia
instead of believing you've got it right and not checking your results.

And which if applied to the vibrating material, will give us a
mechanism for measuring the earth. Or a substantial portion of it,
perhaps.

There's already such a mechanism: seismometers.

If only we had a little more than the frequency to go on.

Perhaps such things as an understanding of the vibrational modes of a
sphere?

Such is the dark art though, that after all these billions of dollars
spent on it, all we have is an inkling of the frequencies.

I look at it this way: Such is the pity that, after all these billions
spent on it, all *you* have is a mistaken inkling of what's going on.
You seem to think that people know only as much as you do ... and you've
demonstrated you don't know much.

Except that, thanks to Mersenne, we can guess the length of the string
by the number of the the frequencies involved, provided only that we
can locate all the right frequencies.

The first step would be to abandon the string model. The second step
would be to actually examine seismic waves. Instead of philosophizing
about them, you could measure them.

Why are you babbling instead of measuring?

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

On Jan 15, 10:27 pm, Timberwoof



timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote:
In article
08e77e00-9e7a-49af-aa37-d315ecf68...@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,

Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Frequency or pitch can be derived from, or related to, the square root
of the tension, the square of its diameter and the inverse of the
length of the vibrating material.

If you're talking about a string ...and you left out the mass. What's
the formula relating the length of a closed-ended or open-ended pipe to
its pitch?

There is no reason to believe the same cannot be applied to the
physics of seismology. (If such in fact is not already the case.)

Except perhaps that rocks aren't configured like strings.

Bernard Chouet did some work on the frequencies of seismic waves,
bringing to the attention of his peers that there is a relationship in
the change of frequencies prior to disturbances. And that such pitches
could be used to identify what seismic reactions were most likely.

The resonant frequency of any vibrating body is related to the stress it
is under, whether that stress is tension, torsion, flexion, or
compression. We (some of us, at any rate) already know that earthquakes
release energy that is previously built up. That energy is stored as
compression of rocks. As they are more compressed, their resonant
frequencies would increase and their reaction to passing seismic waves
would change.

Marin Mersenne, an early advocate of Open Source, proposed that as
many as five different notes could be plucked at the same time on an
open string of a musical instrument.

This has to do with harmonic modes of vibration.

Obviously he was not referring to a carillon as such bells use ropes,
not strings.

Haw, haw!

The bell in Santa Fe has two notes. The caribbean percussion instruments
made from oil drums have many notes.

*******

Tension.

It is difficult to imagine that plates of a soft material such as
earth -especially such materials as earth near the point of
liquefaction, can produce any (never mind much) tension.

You mean material soft like granite or basalt?

So what might be the material that is in tension? Solid rock strata
perhaps? Pressurised vessels such as caverns filled with superheated
water, steam or magma?

Thus giving us a likely subject whose diameter might be measured. And
so too, its length.

You're barking up the wrong tree here.

I believe the equation for pitch is:
The square root of the tension divided by the product of the square of
its diameter and the inverse of the length.

Let's look at this algebraically. (It's clear you didn't.)

P = k * sqrt(T) / ( D^2 * 1/L)
P = k * sqrt(T) * L / D^2

In other words, you believe that pitch increases with tension, decreases
with string diameter, and increases with length. I believe you're wrong.
I seem to recall that the longer strings of a harp make the lower
pitches. Maybe you could actually look up the equation in Wikipedia
instead of believing you've got it right and not checking your results.

And which if applied to the vibrating material, will give us a
mechanism for measuring the earth. Or a substantial portion of it,
perhaps.

There's already such a mechanism: seismometers.

If only we had a little more than the frequency to go on.

Perhaps such things as an understanding of the vibrational modes of a
sphere?

Such is the dark art though, that after all these billions of dollars
spent on it, all we have is an inkling of the frequencies.

I look at it this way: Such is the pity that, after all these billions
spent on it, all *you* have is a mistaken inkling of what's going on.
You seem to think that people know only as much as you do ... and you've
demonstrated you don't know much.

Except that, thanks to Mersenne, we can guess the length of the string
by the number of the the frequencies involved, provided only that we
can locate all the right frequencies.

The first step would be to abandon the string model. The second step
would be to actually examine seismic waves. Instead of philosophizing
about them, you could measure them.

Why are you babbling instead of measuring?

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don't blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

Hi Timberwoof,

Thanks for your comments, except this one:

I look at it this way: Such is the pity that, after all these
billions
spent on it, all *you* have is a mistaken inkling of what's going on.
You seem to think that people know only as much as you do ... and
you've
demonstrated you don't know much.

I've said it a thousand times and I'll say it 1001, we have lost the
art of conversation and it's nice to have someone add something to
explain it better or more comprehensively, but it doesn't have to come
across as bashing someone in doing so. Just think, your contribution
made a difference for probably quite a few, but you wouldn't have ever
made the contribution if Michael hadn't submitted his offering. A
little give and take is a good thing.

On Jan 16, 9:02 am, Petra <petras...@hotmail.com> wrote:


A little give and take is a good thing.

Ah shoot!
Now I have to go and read his drivel.

Frequency or pitch can be derived from, or related to, the square root
of the tension, the square of its diameter and the inverse of the
length of the vibrating material.

There is no reason to believe the same cannot be applied to the
physics of seismology. (If such in fact is not already the case.)

Bernard Chouet did some work on the frequencies of seismic waves,
bringing to the attention of his peers that there is a relationship in
the change of frequencies prior to disturbances. And that such pitches
could be used to identify what seismic reactions were most likely.

Marin Mersenne, an early advocate of Open Source, proposed that as
many as five different notes could be plucked at the same time on an
open string of a musical instrument.

Obviously he was not referring to a carillon as such bells use ropes,
not strings.

Haw, haw!

*******

Tension.

It is difficult to imagine that plates of a soft material such as
earth -especially such materials as earth near the point of
liquefaction, can produce any (never mind much) tension.

So what might be the material that is in tension? Solid rock strata
perhaps? Pressurised vessels such as caverns filled with superheated
water, steam or magma?

Thus giving us a likely subject whose diameter might be measured. And
so too, its length.

I believe the equation for pitch is:
The square root of the tension divided by the product of the square of
its diameter and the inverse of the length.

And which if applied to the vibrating material, will give us a
mechanism for measuring the earth. Or a substantial portion of it,
perhaps.

If only we had a little more than the frequency to go on.

Such is the dark art though, that after all these billions of dollars
spent on it, all we have is an inkling of the frequencies.

Except that, thanks to Mersenne, we can guess the length of the string
by the number of the the frequencies involved, provided only that we
can locate all the right frequencies.

In article
1a7542f4-e778-4083-aa41-287ecd056...@s8g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,

Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Suppose it is a mountain range.

Why do mountains range?

Suppose it is a mountain range.

Why do mountains range?

I think you're thinking

Why do mountains range?

That may sound like a daft question but there has to be a reason why
conical natural edifices appear in lines. Why not in big lumps?

It's not as if waves are unknown in nature. Why, if continental
collision causes mountain ranges to grow, why do they grow one conic
section at a time?

On Jan 16, 12:13 pm, Weatherlawyer <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Why do mountains range?

That may sound like a daft question but there has to be a reason why
conical natural edifices appear in lines. Why not in big lumps?

It's not as if waves are unknown in nature. Why, if continental
collision causes mountain ranges to grow, why do they grow one conic
section at a time?

There is an analogy for the development of these things called the
Molasses Effect, attributed to the British in retribution for the
Boston tea party. It was one of those quasi scientific manufacturer's
experiments in geology, concerning the running of rivers of treacle
down the streets of a recalcitrant city.

Apparently several inhabitants came to a sticky end. (None of them in
conic sections though.)

Frequency or pitch can be derived from, or related to, the square root
of the tension, the square of its diameter and the inverse of the
length of the vibrating material.

There is no reason to believe the same cannot be applied to the
physics of seismology. (If such in fact is not already the case.)

Bernard Chouet did some work on the frequencies of seismic waves,
bringing to the attention of his peers that there is a relationship in
the change of frequencies prior to disturbances. And that such pitches
could be used to identify what seismic reactions were most likely.

Marin Mersenne, an early advocate of Open Source, proposed that as
many as five different notes could be plucked at the same time on an
open string of a musical instrument.

Obviously he was not referring to a carillon as such bells use ropes,
not strings.

Haw, haw!

*******

Tension.

It is difficult to imagine that plates of a soft material such as
earth -especially such materials as earth near the point of
liquefaction, can produce any (never mind much) tension.

So what might be the material that is in tension? Solid rock strata
perhaps? Pressurised vessels such as caverns filled with superheated
water, steam or magma?

Thus giving us a likely subject whose diameter might be measured. And
so too, its length.

I believe the equation for pitch is:
The square root of the tension divided by the product of the square of
its diameter and the inverse of the length.

And which if applied to the vibrating material, will give us a
mechanism for measuring the earth. Or a substantial portion of it,
perhaps.

If only we had a little more than the frequency to go on.

Such is the dark art though, that after all these billions of dollars
spent on it, all we have is an inkling of the frequencies.

Except that, thanks to Mersenne, we can guess the length of the string
by the number of the the frequencies involved, provided only that we
can locate all the right frequencies.

Consider the mystery of latent heat.

How many scholars in Arab and Latin countries must have pondered the fuel
efficiency involved in heating water from ice to liquid and raising the
temperature from freezing point to one percent of the temperature of boiling?

Once the thermometer had been invented, it was a a relatively simple
matter compared to the previous attempts that would have involved
weighing charcoal. And yet it took several decades to drop on the truth.

How long was it from the production of reliable thermometers to the
concept of latent heat?