The Bangor
Hum Influence of Wind Speed and Direction on Subjectively Perceived Levels by Dr C.
Barnes, Bangor Scientific and Educational Consultants November 2012
Abstract
The Hum is briefly described. A hypothesis of the Hum is
advanced. Potential sources for the Hum in Bangor are discussed. Results of a
study of the subjective Hum intensity as a function of wind speed and Jet
Streams are presented. The most likely contributing sources to the Bangor Hum
are re-evaluated in the light of the wind speed data. Competing mechanisms for
human sensitivity in terms of Bragg matching and electromagnetic sensitisation
are discussed. A comprehensive list of
conclusions on what is known of the Hum from this and other work is given.
Generally the original hypothesis is supported.
Introduction
The HUM is an annoying (magneto) acoustic effect which
plagues and often ruins the lives of an estimated 2% of the World’s
population. Despite 40 years research
involving Defra and the UK Universities of Salford
and Southampton no proper conclusions have been reached as to cause or cure for
the Hum. It is thus left to private researchers the like of the UK’s John Dawes
and the present author to try and elucidate this curse for the good of human kind. The Hum is often described as a quasi
periodic pulsatile noise like a distance idling
engine tone matched at between 30 and 80 Hz with modulations from about 1-5Hz
and as being more prevalent at night and in rural or semi rural areas. Sometimes the Hum is described as difficult
or impossible to screen out even with ear plugs. Following from an anomalous
observation of the Hum due to car PWM electrical systems, the present author
has established that besides an infrasound component, some Hums in general may
have a magnetic component which enhance their perception and account for the
difficulty in screening. There is also
considerable body of evidence that the Hum may be related to Electricity and
Power Systems. The Hum is often heard much louder inside buildings
which tends to suggest that the fabric of a building somehow amplifies
or resonates the Hum.
Hypothesis
The hypothesis
is that the HUM cannot be purely due to a single tone of infrasonic
origin, because infrasound is known to be very pervasive, so under that premise
alone, many more locations should perceive the HUM. It is thus proposed multiple acoustic
conditions have to be satisfied to receive/perceive the HUM.
It is also proposed that to perceive the HUM; certain precise
electromagnetic conditions may have also to be fulfilled. In previous work, the author has made an
observation that the HUM seems to reduce with increasing wind speed; this could
be associated with moving tress and objects reducing the temporal and spatial
coherence of the required sound and /or electromagnetic waves.
Bangor as a
location
Besides having natural sources infrasound, to
re-iterate these are; the sea, mountains and a waterfall, the author also lives
close to potential sources of anthropogenic infrasound. These are; a railway
tunnel, the Menai suspension bridge 1.6 km to the
West, the Britannia Bridge being a combined road and rail bridge 4.25 km to the
West and three wind farms, two onshore at Llyn Alaw and Amlwch about 20km to the
North West and the third offshore about 30 km at North Hoyle to the North East
and a pumped storage header lake some 10 km to the South East. These are all potential sources of infrasound
in the region of 1-20Hz. There are also
three nearby low voltage electricity sub-stations, located at OS grid
references SH572718, SH 572720 and SH573721, and also a Super grid switch station 5km to the South East. The Super grid
conductors run just below the mountain ridge to the North East. These are potential sources of 50 and 100 Hz
sound fields and sound fields including one third and two thirds of these
frequencies due to sub-harmonic
generation as a result of the three phase nature of electricity supply. Finally it should be noted that there is a
large gymnasium to the South –South-West of the author’s residence which is
constructed with corrugated steel sides and roof. Not only could such a
building act as a radio and/or acoustic reflector it could also act as a
reverberant source. If this source were reverberant, this would further
complicate the picture with regard to electromagnetic scattering (Lawrence and Sarabandi 2006). It
is interesting to note that in most of the other local locations wherein the
author has experienced loud aggressive HUMS
there have been painted and or /corroded metallic structures including
beach car park barrier, iron fences, power pylons and a rusty metallic barn.
Recently the author has also experienced the Hum in three businesses and
residential properties containing steel RSJ type girders. It is possible that
some kind of passive demodulation at these structures, in addition to possible
reverberation, could contribute to the perceived effects by providing in-phase
audio components to stimulate the nervous system additionally. Alternatively,
if the body coherently detects infrasound and an associated magnetic component
maybe enhanced permeability in its neighbourhood is relevant?
Experimental
The experiment is in essence very simple but also very
time consuming as it relies on the randomness of the weather to provide a
suitable range of variables. The two
experimental subjects are the author and his wife.
In order to attempt to elucidate the combined acoustic
(infrasonic) and electromagnetic involvement in the HUM, in this present work,
the author has made a painstaking and more comprehensive study of the effect of
both ground level wind speed and direction on the HUM and has also examined
the effects of the Jet Stream. The wind speed values in knots were recorded as
were their directions. A perceived subjective HUM level averaged across the subjects was recorded on a scale of
0-10; a score of 0 representing no HUM
and a score of 10 being an intolerable HUM
requiring the full range of infrasound and electromagnetic ear defence. Several
years’ worth of painstaking work allowed the data to be recorded and
analysed. Not only can winds in
association with the sea, atmospheric boundary layers and mountains generate
infrasound but they can change the propagation of or mask ground level anthropogenic
sources (Woodward et al 27th Seismic Research Review) and disrupt
the coherence of distant seismic sources (Withers et al 1996).
RESULTS
The results for ground level winds reveal that
although the initial conclusions (Barnes (1+2)(2007)
concluding that wind speed as a function
of perceived HUM intensity has a
simple inverse correlation may be justified. However, with more data samples
now available and these having been gathered from a greater range of wind
speeds and wind directions, it has been found that the correlation is far
weaker than had originally been thought. Instead, a complex pattern emerges
when wind direction is also taken into account.
Wind blowing through appropriately sized structures, natural or
anthropogenic, can generate all kinds of acoustic as well as infrasonic noises.
The wind can be used to make beautiful music viz a viz the Aeolian harp.
Low level winds blowing from different directions at
the author’s residence actually all have different effects on the HUM intensity. If the wind were simply
reducing some external electromagnetic or acoustic coherence or both by
randomly moving vegetation or metallic structures, one would perhaps have
thought it might have been equally effective in all directions. However, if
some wind induced, wind carried or wind attenuated sound source or sources were
involved with the HUM and if the HUM hearers were located outside the
immediate near fields of those sources then a pronounced wind directivity
effect might be expected. An alternative is that if the building wherein the
Hum is perceived is in forced or resonant vibration winds impinging on
different facades of the building will also produce different effects by virtue
of their directivity. Indeed this is
exactly as is observed. When the wind data from different directions are
plotted as sinusoidal best fits, see figures 1-5, it would appear that there
are some wind speeds at which the HUM is
suppressed and some wind speeds at which the HUM is enhanced, indicative perhaps of multiple processes and phase
critical interactions. Reflections and standing waves associated with the
structure of both the house receiving the Hum and the nearby structures are
considered to be a possible cause for some of these interactions.
Of course another possibility here is that
vegetation, particular nearby trees, responding to winds, do move as to reduce
radio signal coherence, as previously suggested, but in doing so are responding as damped
oscillators, only able to respond to certain wind speeds (Mayer 1989) and hence
only able to reduce the coherence of the background radio fields at certain
specific wind exposure times.
Additionally, wind is also known to destroy the coherence of seismic
infrasound. Withers et al (1996) have
shown that winds with speeds as low 3m/s can, in certain circumstances, destroy
the coherence of seismic infrasound at 15Hz and below whereas winds of greater
than 8m/s were required to reduce the coherence of infrasound in the 23-55Hz
frequency band. Extending the result of
Withers, the author has derived a linear equation to predict how seismic
frequency coherence will be lost as a function of wind speed:
F (Hz) = 0.6+4.8 W ...................................................................................(1)
Where W= wind speed in m/s.
The wind
direction wherein the HUM is partly
wind speed independent is North West, see figure 1. This could either be because the author’s
house is located on the leeward side of a slight north west facing slope,
reducing the wind’s effectiveness or perhaps because the North West wind
actually contains one or because more components of the HUM are generated in or propagated from that direction. In this latter respect it is interesting to
note that the nearest wind farms are located some 20 km to the North West. Also the narrow sea strait, Menai Strait is located broadly in this general direction
with its two bridges as possible infrasonic sources and further along which
points have been located which have given rise to daytime HUM. It is possible that the
infrasound from those points gets propagated further at night. In all cases, figure 1-5 the HUM intensity is greatest at low or
zero wind speed indicating the propagation of a sound source in an undisturbed
night-time boundary layer as a distinct possibility and/or seismic vibration.
Alternatively, a very locally generated sound source
is a possibility but this does not immediately seem to fit with the
observations of the HUM at greater distances within the author’s locality,
unless many such sources, the same or similar, existed and were fairly
uniformly spread throughout the environment.
In this respect it is interesting to note that there are electricity
sub-stations and a high pressure gas main in the immediate vicinity. Such sound sources are of course relatively
common throughout the urban environment
These type of data are also reminiscent of the effects
obtained using radio acoustic atmospheric sounding system (RASS) particularly
of the bistatic type ( Saebbo, Triad AS, Norway) with the wind blowing
either across or in line with the signal field. In that case Doppler shift of
the radio frequency source is measured. It may be rather fanciful to propose,
but it could be rather as though humans perceiving the HUM are acting like
bio-RASS systems!
Involvement of a large metallic sports hall located
130m to the South South West of the author’s residence
has been cited. When motor vehicles transit travelling North Eastwards i.e.
approaching from the South West along the road which runs almost parallel with
this hall and towards the author’s residence on the left, the HUM ceases for
several seconds. Two metres to the south and travelling in a South Westerly
direction there is no difference. Therefore it is suspected then there may be a
standing wave radio and/or acoustic field in this area, possibly in the form of
a pyramidal volume of triangular cross-section. Such a volume could accommodate
both the high and low frequencies requited for the HUM. It is interesting to
note that a South West wind, figure 3, of approximately the same velocity as a
moving car also kills the HUM. It is
believed this must be disturbing the sound field in the standing wave volume.
It is not practical to apply Doppler equations for stationary or
semi-stationary fields but at these wind speeds the Doppler shift would be
significant on an audio signal but is not relevant to a radio frequency
signal. The maximum East wind
experienced to date is about 11 knots and also looks as though it is sufficient
to shift the interaction from perhaps an anti-node to a node, figure 5. The results for the other winds appear to
take on a sinusoidal form with a generally increased frequency perhaps because
they blow less obliquely over the zone of interaction. From the results it is
very clear to see that something analogous to Bragg scattering may be
happening. This is why the HUM is
perceived as so intensive on some nights.
Perhaps the Bragg zone does not need to be external. Effected buildings
themselves could form part of it. The
results figures 1 and 2 for North West and West winds are very instructive. The
data have been plotted in the general form of sinusoidal fits according to the
equation
Y = A + Bcos ( Cx+ D) ……………………………………………………..(1)
Table 1 below shows the coefficients of equation (1)
for various wind –directions.
TABLE 1
|
A |
B |
C |
D |
Wind
direction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NW |
5.85 |
2.65 |
1.11 |
-0.736 |
W |
5.79 |
3.37 |
0.38 |
-0.636 |
SW |
0.87 |
9.33 |
0.04 |
-0.231 |
S |
4.19 |
6.04 |
0.138 |
0.214 |
E |
6.74 |
5.94 |
0.19 |
0.83 |
Parameter ‘A’ represents the non- oscillatory constant
which appears largest for a wind from an Easterly direction and smallest for a
South Westerly Wind. There are
mountains, power lines and waterfall to the East and a pumped storage lake to
the South East. The oscillatory constant
‘B’ is largest for the South West wind confirming suspicions that there will be
a scattering zone associated with the Sports Hall. An alternative explanation
is that the South West wind by blowing towards the North East is destroying the
coherence of an oscillatory field in that direction. One has to make the assumption that the other
requisite sound and radio fields will also be somewhere in the scattering
volume. The problem is far too complex to solve analytically, but reference to
the angular components C and D are instructive. D is positive for cross track
winds and negative for the along-track winds. Regarding the orientation of the author’s
house Southerly and Easterly winds would produce least interaction with
the walls but most interaction across the entire zone and this is seen
particularly in the Easterly wind which is relatively free of obstruction until
it reaches the zone whence it gradually,
almost linearly reduces the Hum amplitude.
Clearly the standing wave field oscillates more
wildly when the winds are on track with
the reflection zone. A south westerly wind seems to produce a longer
oscillatory period presumably because it is blowing across not only the
incident and reflected path but also takes time to propagate in between. It is
interesting to note that the space in between these zones as defined by the
length of the sports hall and distance to the author’s residence is about 300
metres about the wavelength of a medium wave radio transmission or a 1 Hz sound
wave or a 23 Hz underground seismic wave. A moving vehicle entering this zone
would take five or ten seconds to transit and would disturb the fields involved
with these components of the HUM accordingly.
All the winds will also agitate nearby foliage which is a mechanism to
attenuate and reduce the coherence of UHF radio and microwave signals. Interestingly mode conversion on this basis
could give rise to the lowest pulsatile frequency of
the Hum.
Returning to findings of Withers et al (1996) puts a
very interesting slant on the data particularly if one assumes that all the
sound fields arriving in the scattering zone are quite directional and could
have their coherence ‘blown out’ by opposing winds in a manner broadly
according to Withers’ findings, which have here been extrapolated across a
wider range of frequency and wind speed. The relevant information after
extrapolation of the wind speed from each sinusoidal plot for the first HUM ‘node’ is shown in Table 2 below;
TABLE 2
WIND |
ACOUSTIC
|
BRAGG
MATCHED Air/Water/Solid |
STRONGEST
POSSIBLE |
DIRECTION
|
FREQUENCY
HZ |
R.F.
RANGE MHZ |
R.F.
SOURCE |
|
|
|
|
NW |
8.3
HZ |
3.8/.825/.25 |
SHORT/MED/LONG/WAVE |
W |
24.6
HZ |
11.4/2.2/.69 |
SHORT/MED |
SW |
96.6
HZ |
45/9/2.8
|
SHORT |
S |
49.56
HZ |
23/4.5/1.4 |
SHORT/MED |
E |
27.7
HZ |
25.9/5.1/1.56 |
SHORT/MED |
Table 2 clearly
shows most of the acoustic frequencies could
be accounted for by stating that they are within the range of power line and
sub-station frequencies, harmonics, and their sub-harmonics. The
presence of such frequencies at the author’s residence has been independently
confirmed using acoustic and magnetic spectrum analysis recording techniques.
Particularly of interest is the result for South West
winds. There are electricity sub-stations to the North, the North East and
South West of the author’s residence and this result shows the highest
oscillatory constant (table1). It is well known that power transformers
generate a fluctuating periodic component at double the power frequency
fundamental with varying load (Keerthipala et al
1998), this frequency very close to 100
Hz (within the limits of experimental error)
is seen in the range for SW winds (Table 2). Despite so much electronic
technology in Japan, as far as the author is aware, there are no reports of the
HUM in that country. Japan uses mainly
underground and indoor electricity sub-stations with gas insulated transformers
(Tsukao and Hasegawa 2002), presumably this minimises
their experience of the HUM. It is also
very interesting to note that Japan appears to take the problem of infrasound
in general far more seriously than in the West.
(http://www.acoustics.org.tw/asoroc/report/Dr.%20Yamashita's%20Paper.pdf).
So perhaps in this light there are simply fewer sources of infrasound available
in Japan to produce acoustic beats and Bragg match with electromagnetic waves.
Of course in line with the rest of the developed World, Japan has had an
explosion of the latter.
In Bangor, radio frequencies capable of Bragg matching
audio in the range 20-160 Hz are all available locally. There is very strong
field strength from Radio Wales on 882 KHz which will be a very close Bragg
match for the 8.3 Hz Hum propagated in water or the
24.6 Hz Hum component propagated in steel or rock. The Dinorwig Pumped
storage plant is capable of producing such frequencies; alternatively
centrifugal compressors in the gas industry can also produce noise in this
frequency band. There is a Gas Pressure reduction station just to the East of
the author’s residence. It is not unreasonable to expect two or more coherent
wavelengths to be involved here because sound from such sources can travel
through the air and underground into the walls of buildings.
Frequencies in the range around 11Hz have been
associated with gas supply (Springerlink.com / index / Q6JH11813263UP67.PDF). Consideration of the Bragg matching radio
frequency range is appropriate here. For airborne sound, this is predicted to
lie within the Short Waves. There are no strong local sources of short waves
which by day leaves only the lower frequencies in this range as possibilities.
At night lower frequency short waves are returned to earth from the ionosphere.
Mountain waves are also known to propagate to the ionosphere. Similarly the
whole UK gas grid could be a formidable source of infrasound (New Scientist 30th
May 1992). There is no reason to suppose that with the frequencies and lengths
of pipes involved this infrasound should not be capable of radiating upwards
for large distances, possibly to the ionosphere (Mutschlecner
and Whittaker 1990).
It has been postulated elsewhere that higher frequency
radio waves might sensitise us to the Hum? To investigate associated variation
in radio field strengths, a radio scanning receiver was set up at the
author’s residence to elucidate
variation in strengths of signals on windy and non windy days. The local 400
MHz TETRA signal varied in received signal amplitude by less than 10%. One
local GSM signal hardly varied in strength at all while another one only 2 MHz
away in frequency varied with deep fades up to 70% of amplitude. The local UHF
TV channels transmitted from the North North East
across the Menai Straits varied by very deep fades up
to 90% of amplitude. The frequency of
all the fades increased dramatically when it was windy or when vehicles passed
by. It therefore looks as though UHF TV
transmissions are also getting trapped in the scattering zone. From this result it seems that although TETRA
was previously shown to be relevant in the HUM,
it may simply increase the potential for the HUM rather than be the sole cause. For instance North Shore New
Zealand has reported the HUM but has no TETRA (Moir
2007). The electromagnetic signals being
scattered the most appear to be GSM and UHF TV.
Such effects have been noticed elsewhere for TV signals (Das et al 1989)
and (Sim and Warrington 2006).
An additional experiment was conducted at a
number of local sites one evening when a strong Southerly wind was completely
extinguishing the HUM at the
author’s residence. A very weak HUM could be discerned sitting in a
parked vehicle at grid reference SH
584707, despite quite a significant wind. The only point where the HUM was strong was a point much lower
in town sheltered completely from the wind, grid reference SH 584725. The conclusion is that when the wind is local to the HUM hearer, it will generally, by
whatever mechanism, disrupt the HUM. This supports the notion that at least
part of the HUM acoustic field may
not be immediately local.
To test this, a second additional experiment was
carried out on a still night in a parked vehicle at location grid reference SH 589718 which is located such that
the magnetic A and B components of the local TETRA transmitter will be exactly
pi/2 out of phase.
To the North East of the location was a gas pressure
reducing station and to the South East a low voltage sub-station. The HUM was perceived as very loud and aggressive.
This location is on urban estate but there was very little vehicular movement
at that time. A vehicle passing the road junction at map reference SH 590718 had the effect of deadening
the HUM for some 5 seconds or so.
The vehicle was travelling from North to South at approximately 40km/hr. The
vehicle was to the East of the fixed HUM
monitoring location. The TETRA mast was due south of both. The inference seems
to be that the vehicle may have been disrupting a sound field was originating
from the East, or the Tetra field from the South or both. This is similar to
the conclusion reached for the non –oscillatory component of the HUM above.
Possible
sound sources broadly to the East of both locations are the power grid, the
mountains, the waterfall, the Pumped Storage Lake and separate electricity
sub-stations and gas pressure reduction stations.
Sound could of course be reflecting off the mountains
or being propagated for a significant distance in the night –time boundary
layer from elsewhere. A crucial feature of the HUM seems to be that it is more easily disrupted by vehicular
movement than by wind. A
vehicle will readily disrupt both a sound field and an electromagnetic field,
whereas the wind will have largest effect on a sound field. This seemingly confirms the present
hypothesis, that both are needed for perception of the HUM. This may account for why in many rural and
quiet urban areas of the world the HUM
appears to ‘switch on’ late at night when vehicular movement dies down.
Similarly although the night-time boundary layer starts forming after dusk it
will take time to stabilise after which optimal sound transfer from a distance
will occur. Daytime HUMS can probably be heard closer to the sea because the sea
temperature varies less than that of the land so there is more of a stable
boundary layer present for most of the time and thus less diurnal variation.
Effect of
the Jet Stream
The results for Jet stream winds generally reinforce the
results for ground level winds. Several significant Welsh mountains are located
broadly to the East of the author’s residence. Jet Streams from directions
which don’t impinge on the mountains or impinge on the windward side (same side
as the author’s residence) have the effect of slightly reducing the HUM. Unless that is they are seriously
kinked in shape just to the West of Britain, a sign of shear and turbulence (Smigeilski 1960 and Colson 1960), which can be its own
source of infrasound. On the other hand
when the author’s residence is to the lee of the Jet Stream with respect to the
mountain ranges, i.e. for Jet streams approaching from broadly Easterly
directions there is a slight increase in the subjective HUM level, figure 6. This is probably due to mountain
infrasound generation by leeward scattering. Leeward generated winds scattered
to lower levels could also however assist in the propagation of sound from any
other source, simply by blowing it in the wind as it were.
Possible
sounds to arrive in this manner other than mountain infrasound itself could be
from the power lines, the waterfall and the pumped storage lake. In no case are the correlation coefficients
high. Shearing between low and high level winds at atmospheric boundary layers
is known to produce infrasound and air turbulences Smigeilski
1960 and Colson 1960).
In support of this, a positive linear correlation,
figure 7, has been found between the subjective HUM intensity and intersection angles of low level winds and jet
stream winds at the author’s residence but once again the correlation is poor,
with a regression coefficient of only 0.31. This adds some credence to the
observations of HUMS in regions with
CAT not near the coast. No such regions exist in the UK sufficiently far from
the coast to fully test this hypothesis. It also tends to confirm the notion
that atmospheric turbulence and associated mountain infrasound has at least
some, if relatively minor, part to play in the HUM at the author’s residence.
ABOVE: Figure 6 Effect of East to West flowing Jet
Stream weak positive correlation with perceived HUM level.
ABOVE:
Figure 7, Effect of angle between upper Jet Stream and low level wind on
relative HUM intensity.
None of the Jet Stream data, from Jet stream winds in any
or all directions, fitted sinusoidal equations as did the data from the plots
of HUM intensity versus ground level
wind speed and direction. The conclusion
is that there is no Bragg Scattering taking place at Jet stream height and
simply that any infrasound or turbulent effects from this height propagate to
other levels where significant effect and interaction with electromagnetic
waves takes place. There are few
occasions when the UK is not proximal to a jet stream. However the author has
noticed that when the jet stream is more than about 800 miles distant from the
UK, the HUM in Bangor completely ceases with the exception of just 2 days in a
3 year observation period on which deep low pressure was in the south western
approaches of the UK but no significant upper level jet stream was marked on
the 300mb CRWS Jet Stream map http://squall.sfsu.edu/crws/jetstream.html.
The jet stream is a source of infrasound in its own right but in the present context
is the most likely driving source for mountain infrasound. Also it is known that other sounds can
propagate into or through the jet stream (Chung et al 1970).
Overall, the results presented here are suggestive
that HUM generation is very complex problem involving more than one
infrasonic co-source in addition to the previously stated requirement for more
than one electromagnetic source for enhanced perception, small wonder that no
single person has completely ever elucidated the mystery of the HUM.
Discussion
The results obtained by this study are equally
supportive of two possible and quite radical ideas. The first of these is that
the wind at appropriate speeds in coastal mountain areas and at night can
generate infrasound by interaction with mountains and atmospheric boundary and
inversion layers. When infrasound of the correct frequency is produced it will
scatter radio waves also of appropriate frequencies. Because the infrasound or
radio frequency field in itself may also be pulsating, the Bragg type
interaction which occur are manifests is perceived as the aggressive HUM.
The idea being that the body can adjust to living in a radio field(s) or
an infrasound field but not both,
particularly if their wavelengths are comparable. Previous work, Barnes 1 and 2
(2007), has shown the magnetic components of the radio field to be most
relevant. A useful analogy is to think
of someone sitting in a chair. You get used to the mutual pressure and blank it
out; however, if a spring bursts in the chair and stabs you in the posterior
then you are instantly aware of this!
The second equally valid hypothesis is that together
with a natural infrasound presence, anthropogenic sources of infrasound are
also additionally and especially relevant, as they can be propagated both
seismically and through night time boundary (inversion) layers and so scattered
and diffracted in mountainous regions such that they too are involved in Bragg
interactions with each other and /or with radio waves of appropriate frequency
and similarly perceived as the HUM. It must not be forgotten that
with seismic propagation in solid structures acoustic wave velocity will be
very different and mode conversion can give rise to unexpected frequencies.
In other words the magnetic components of
electromagnetic fields are merely the vehicles for conducting the infrasound
mediated HUM into the body which to be perceived needs a very precise set of
interacting and intersecting variables.
These being namely the following; a source of low frequency radio
emission and infrasound of comparable wavelength and a second
source of higher frequency radio emission and a source of infrasound or
acoustic frequency of comparable
wavelength.
Given the results
in Figure 2 ubiquitous 50Hz vibrations, harmonics and sub-harmonics from the
power grid and electricity sub-stations are a possible source for this shorter
wavelength infrasound. The prerequisite
infrasonic conditions for additional, longer wavelength, lower frequency
infrasound are far more likely to be met on a regular basis in coastal or
mountainous regions at night. But it must not be forgotten that anthropogenic
sources such as pumped storage power stations and wind turbines are often located
in such regions. In a small island like
Britain most natural and even anthropogenic infrasound from sources such as
pumped storage power generation and wind turbines will be more or less
ubiquitous, hence it will mainly be the locations and (magnetic) field strengths of
transmitters and radio frequency matching aspects which will be more critical
for determination
of the HUM in the majority of cases
except wherein locally very large amplitude anthropogenic infrasound sources
are active.
Local or
intense infrasound can under such circumstances reach the recipient’s body sensory
organs directly, or even be conducted a vibration to the body where it could
excite cavity resonances, as an aside
from being modulated onto scattered electromagnetic waves causing sensory
reinforcement if there is sufficient coherence of arrival. Human beings employ
sensory reinforcement in everyday perception for example, reinforcement of
auditory perception by sight in a noisy environment (not unlike lip-reading by
a deaf person) (Burke 2001). Even the
semi-circular canals or vestibular apparatus may be involved in the synergy of
the senses required for HUM perception.
Lebovitz (1975) has sown this organ to be sensitive
to weak electromagnetic fields and is not inconsistent with the hypothesis
presented here. Similarly involved in human balance, the organ contains the
body’s gravity detection system. Airborne infrasound has also been shown to be
associated with gravity perturbation (Saulson 1984)
and so here we have yet another possible synergistic link. This is useful for
it consoles the present work with the ideas of Dawes (2006). Within the vestibular apparatus of the inner ear lies the saccule which is said to contain piezoelectric material.
Similarly this organ in some birds and fishes is said to contain ferromagnetic
material. Birds use magnetic fields http://www.backyardnature.net/birdnavi.htmto
navigate and also infrasound (Hagstrum 2001). Maybe
our ability to perceive the HUM is
buried deep within in our evolutionary path of development from our avian
cousins.
Summary
HUM factors at author’s residence
The most likely HUM factors and components at the
author’s residence based on the above experiments are summarised in Table 3
below;
Table 3
SOUND |
ACOUSTIC
|
BRAGG
MATCHED |
STRONGEST
POSSIBLE |
DIRECTION
|
FREQUENCY
HZ AND SOURCE |
R.F.
RANGE MHZ |
R.F.
SOURCE |
SE*/E* |
GAS
GRID 5-9/31 HZ UNDERGROUND SPEED 7KM/S |
.125
/2.45 0.59-8.3 |
LONG/MEDIUM
WAVE |
SE |
5-9
HZ Mountain infrasound/Pumped
Storage Lake/Gas main |
2.5-49.5
|
SHORT
WAVE |
E |
24-31
HZ Gas pressure reduction station
over ground SPEED 340m/s and/or
Mountain/waterfall infrasound |
12.2
-135-171 |
VHF
PAGING |
NE |
99.5
-155 HZ Electricity sub-station |
50.59-870
|
FM
,TETRA,TV, GSM |
N/S |
52-78
HZ Electricity sub-station / TETRA/ Plus Unknown acoustic source |
26-56
- 293-435 |
FM
,TETRA |
W |
20-30
HZ Bridge infrasound /Menai Suspension Bridge |
9.9-15.9
- 110-165 |
VHF
PAGING |
SW
|
29-38
HZ Bridge infrasound/ Britannia
Bridge |
14.4-160-210 |
VHF
PAGING |
Because the only wind speed data available is rather course
data from the met office station at Valley on Anglesey, it has not been
possible to search for lower ‘microbarom type’ pulse
repetition frequencies as would be required by gentle HUM. What is certain is that
when the frequency components which are driven by the jet stream, in all
probability the mountain infrasound at frequencies between 5 and 31 Hz are not
present, that is if the jet stream is absent or distant, the whole aggressive HUM often disappears. These components are Bragg Matched mainly by
Low Megahertz Short Wave signals which propagate best at night and will always
be present along with all the other electromagnetic signals. Thus the HUM
cannot be purely electromagnetic. This
observation also discounts waterfall infrasound as being the likely or main
cause of the HUM in Bangor.
To reiterate, it is very instructive to consider noise
from a gas main or other ground borne source travelling underground and through
building structures with seismic, rather than air velocities. The longer wavelength of the sound makes a
significant difference to the Bragg matching. It becomes much easier to see how
long/medium wave radio broadcasts can be involved in HUM perception, see SE*/
E* Table 3.
The HUM and
vehicles
It has long been known that just as with houses,
the HUM is often perceived by
hearers much louder inside stationary vehicles. Typical car interiors resonate between 100
-200 Hz. Vehicle suspension resonances are typically of the order of 1 or 2 Hz
and other mechanical parts have resonances around 10Hz, close that of mountain
infrasound. VHF, UHF and microwave
radio fields can enter vehicles relatively unimpeded through window glass
whereas entry of lower radio frequencies and mains frequency fields would be
confined to the magnetic component, whereas the electric components would have
a tendency to excite the flow of eddy currents in the vehicle body. Furthermore
vehicle electrical systems use PWM control which can generate EM fields even
when the vehicle is stationary.
Vibration of the vehicle structure at eddy current frequencies may be
another mechanism by which vehicles amplify the HUM especially when the vehicle is parked under power lines. It is
known that the magnetic components of electromagnetic field are most crucial
for the HUM ( Barnes 1 and 2 (2007)) and this is borne out
by people who still perceive the HUM
in Faraday tents (Moir 2006) or in Faraday cages
(Dawes 20076) wherein the electric component will be cancelled.
The HUM and
electricity supply phases
Some mobile experiments were conducted at very rural
locations outside Bangor where only one electricity supply phase was present in
the form of overhead low voltage cables. Generally the HUM was not heard in a car at these locations even though the
higher frequency electromagnetic pre-requisites were fulfilled. Only where three phase electricity supply was
present then the HUM was heard. It would seem then criteria for the HUM is not only the electricity supply
frequency but that it be present in three phases separated by 120 degrees. This will generate periodic electromagnetic
and acoustic signals at mains frequencies and harmonic and sub-harmonic
frequencies. 16, 33, 50, 66, 100 and 133 Hz etc. The
hypothesis being, the more frequencies present, the more chance of Bragg
matched beat frequency conditions and /or direct interaction with Mountain
Infrasound. .
Concerned with power line electromagnetic sources, the
author has for several years been observing the behaviour of the local ELF
spectrum with respect to power line harmonics with a piece of computer software
known as Spectrum Lab. These harmonics often appear to vary in relative
intensity during HUM episodes. The author has also reported elsewhere on their behaviour
with special reference to the weather, space weather and the HUM.
Also a very strong and unusual ELF signal between 1.08 and 1.24 Hz often
centred on 1.13 Hz sometimes appears to prevalent at the author’s house.
Signals at 2.4, 5 and 7 Hz have also been observed. It is not yet known if these are of
relevance to aggressive HUMS. However, during the period of writing, these
frequencies could also be detected in the received and de-modulated audio
spectrum of a least four different ionospheric heater
signals ranging from 2.3 -6.9 MHz. Based on the frequency ranges involved, it is
suspected these signals may be arising from EISCAT or similar. There remains a
conjecture by some that ionospheric heating is a
cause of or at least a contributing factor of the HUM. Soviet and European
experiments on such heating certainly began about the same time major HUM reports in Britain commenced and
continue to this day , see Ponomarev and Eruschenkov (1977),
Karashthin et al (1977) and Rapoport
et al (2003). Russian Scientists have
recently succeeded in propagating artificial ULF signals over a distance of
1500 km (Bolyaev et al 2004). This starts to become
significant as far as parts of the UK are concerned. Certainly in the light of this and the
requirement for Bragg radio frequencies in the low MHz range to satisfy one of
the HUM components at the author’s
residence these ideas may be worth pursuing further. Another mechanism for these signals could be by mode
conversion in piezo-electric or magneto-strictive rock.
Conclusions
from this and other work of the author
The author believes this work now comes close to a
solution to the perplexing problem of accounting for the generation and
perception of the HUM. The ultimate solution will, perhaps, only
come when Science has a far better understanding of infrasound, atmospheric and
seismic and electromagnetic wave-wave interactions. The following list of points is now more
certain
·
One of the most comprehensive pictures of a Taos type HUM to date has so far been
presented.
·
The work strongly supports the hypothesis that the HUM is a magneto-acoustic effect which requires a complex combination of electromagnetic
frequencies and appropriate infrasonic cofactors for its perception.
·
The HUM may be conducted into the human
body at the right ear in some individuals. Electromagnetic
signals present may be may be the facilitators
for enhanced sensitivity of the body to infrasound
·
The HUM might involve longitudinal
electro-scalar waves
·
The HUM appears to be enhanced when
infrasound and electromagnetic atmospheric waves are of similar wavelength (equally
matched to within an order of magnitude of each other depending on scattering
angle and volume) causing Bragg reflection (scattering) of an electromagnetic
component(s)
·
In some cases local infrasound may enter the body at other places and act
as to coherently reinforce the Bragg scattered electromagnetic radiation by
duelling of the senses i.e. optical modulation or vibration of body
cavities
·
The said infrasonic sources can be natural or anthropogenic but must be
present sufficiently and with appropriate frequencies to account for the geographic
distribution and temporal occurrence of the HUM
· A strong
radio transmission in the hundreds of kilohertz radio frequency range or low
megahertz range is often associated with sensitisation to the HUM.
·
A second strong radio transmission
in the VHF,UHF or microwave region with critical phase matching in the
propagation delay between its magnetic potential A and magnetic field vector B
might a pre-requisite for the HUM .
·
The most likely natural infrasound sources are microbaroms, surf noise and mountain infrasound. Mountain infrasound is driven by the jet
stream and the aggressive version of the HUM sometimes disappears if the latter
is not proximal
·
The most likely anthropogenic sound sources are the electricity power and gas grids and bridges, not forgetting
the possibility of wind turbines; acoustic noise and LES waves from the
electricity grid are perhaps the most ubiquitous of these followed by noise
from the gas grid.
·
The HUM does
not take on the direct modulation envelope of any of the radio transmitters
involved because as coherent detectors, humans
require coherence times to respond to signals which outweigh rapid modulation
periods.
·
The perceived HUM is more aggressive in mountainous areas
probably due to involvement of mountain generated turbulence and associated
waves.
·
The perceived HUM level seems to get more aggressive with increasing
numbers of competing radio and /or anthropogenic infrasound sources and
increased radio passive inter-modulation products. Clearly the possibility for acoustic beats also
increases here.
·
Standing wave fields can accentuate
the HUM intensity and directivity.
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to acknowledge the aid of his wife
Gwyneth as valuable experimental assistant and with whose infinite patience the
preparation of this work and manuscript was possible.
References
Advanced noise solutions http://www.advanced-noise-solutions.co.uk/noise-nuisance.html
AMS Glossary http://amsglossary.allenpress.com/glossary/search?id=radio-acoustic-sounding-system1
Allen S.T. (1995) www.eskimo.com/~bilb/freenrg/sara.txt
Anisimov et al (2001) Mechanisms for the Formation of Electric-Field Pulsation Spectra
in the Near-Surface Atmosphere, Radiophysics and quantum electronics, 44 (7) , 520-532, 2001.
Anritsu Application Note; Solving your Radio Frequency
Interference Problems MS2721A
Aucan .J. et al
(2006) Infrasound
from large surf GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL.
33, L05611, doi: 10.1029/2005GL025085, 2006
http://www.backyardnature.net/birdnavi.htm
Barnes C. (2007) The Hum in Britain a Geographic Study
leading to a New Causal Hypothesis of both UHF/Microwave and low frequency
Magnetic Involvement. (Submitted to Journal of Scientific Exploration February
2007; JSE 07-009)
Barnes C. (2007) Active Prediction of Sites Prone to
the HUM by Aharonov- Bohm Criteria
(Paper Submitted to Journal of Scientific Exploration
February 2007); JSE 07-010
Barrick. D. (1972) First-order theory and analysis of
MF/HF/VHF scatter from the sea, IEEE Trans. Antennas and Propagation, 20 (1) 2-10, 1972.
Bass, F. Fuks, I. Kalmykov, A. Ostrovsky, I. Rosenberg, A. (1968) Very high
frequency radiowave scattering by a disturbed sea
surface Part II: Scattering from an actual sea surface, Antennas and Propagation,, 16 (5)
560-568, 1968.
Bedard Jnr. A.J. (1978) Infrasound Originating Near Mountainous Regions in Colorado American Meteorogical Socitey, 17 (7) 1014-1022.
Bedard Al.
NOAA/ETL CHAPTER IX INFRASONIC SIGNATURES ASSOCIATED WITH
TRANSIENT ELECTROMAGNETIC EVENTS fma-research.com
Belyaev, P.P. et al, First experiments on Generating and
Receiving Artificial ULF ( 0.30-12 Hz) Emissions at a distance of 1500 km, Radiophysics and Quantum Electronics,
45 (2), 135-146.
Bocharev N.N. (2005) Peculiarities in statistical
characteristics of fluctuations of near-surface acoustic waves in the
atmosphere, XVI Session of the Russian Acoustical Society, Moscow, November
14-18, 2005.
Bosinger, T ( 2000) Final Report of
INTAS99-0335 project: The ionospheric Alfen resonator, ULF waves ( 01-10Hz) , and particle
phenomena in near-Earth environment, started on 1st July 2000, Department of Physical Sciences, University
of Oulu.
Burke B.J. (2001) Duelling Senses Hearing and Vision
and How They Work Together , Comm 141, Term Project, April 19th ,2001, www.unc.edu/~jimlee/BrentBurkeHearingandVision.htm
BWEA –UKWED Operational Wind Farms, 1 Azytec Road, Berners Row, LONDON
N1 0PW
Casperson, L.W.
Waterfall Lasers, Journal of Applied Physics, 82 (10), 4727-4731.
Chilson P.B. et al
(2000) First artificially induced modulation of PMSE using the EISCAT
heating facility, Geophysical
Research Letters, 27, Issue 23,
3801-3804.
Chimonas G. (1977) A Possible
Source Mechanism for Mountain-Associated Infrasound, Journal of the Atmospheric
Sciences, 34 (5) 806-811.
Colson D. (1961) ANALYSIS OF CLEAR AIR TURBULENCE
DURING APRIL 1960 AMS Monthly Weather Review, 89 (3), 94-98.
Cowan J.P. (2003) The Kokomo Hum Investigation, Acentech Report No. 61541111, Acentech Inc. 33 Moulton Street, Cambridge, MA. 02138.
Cowen R. (1998) Clearing the Air About Turbulence A
fearful flier’s foray , Science
News 153, (26),408.
Cowen R.C.
(2003) Eerie feeling? Maybe you’re just hearing things, Science and space,
September 18th 2003, www.csmonitor.com
Das J. et al (1989) Diffraction
patterns observed in VHF signal propagation, Indian Journal of Radio and Space Physics, 18, 10-13.
Dawes J. (2006) http://homepages.tesco.net/~John.Dawes2/gravity.htm
Dekker P.L. et al (2000) VTMX Field Campaign, Microwave Remote
Sensing Laboratory, University of Massachusetts.
Delyukov A.A and Didyk L. (1999) The effects of extra-low-frequency atmospheric pressure
oscillations on human mental activity , International Journal of Biometeorology
, 43 (1) 31-37.
Deming, D. (2004) The Hum: An
Anomalous Sound Heard Around the World. Journal of
Scientific Exploration. 18(4) 571-595.
Domm and Balachdran (1972) Atmospheric Infrasound, 10 to 0.1
Hz, JASA, 51 (1A) ,136.
Donn W.L. et al (1974) Atmospheric
infrasound radiated by bridges, JASA, 56
(5), 1367-1370.
Drob D.P The
Effect of Atmospheric Variability on Infrasound Propagation Eos Trans. AGU,
84(46), Fall Meet. Suppl.,
Abstract U32B-05, 2003
Ellrod G.P. and
Knox J.A. (2005) An improved
clear air turbulence diagnostic index to account for unbalanced flow in anticyclonically curved jet streams21st Conference on Weather Analysis and Forecasting/17th …,
2005 - ams.confex.com
Evers (2003) http://www.knmi.nl/~evers/infrasound/events/030818/030818-eng.html.
Fomichev V.V. and Fainshtein S.M. (1981) On a possible mechanism of zebra pattern generation in
solar radio emission, Solar Physics, 71
(2), 385-393.
Fox B. (1989) Low frequency ‘Hum’ May Permeate the
Environment, New Scientist, December 9th
, 1989,
p27.
Garstang M. et al
(1995) Atmospheric controls on elephant
communication, J Exp Biol. Apr; 198(Pt 4):939-5
Guardian (The) October 18th 2001
Haak H ‘Probing
the Atmosphere with Infrasound, Infrasound as a tool for CTBT verification’, Hein Haak heads the Division of Seismology at the Royal Netherlands
Meteorological Institute.
Hagstrum J.T. (2001) Infrasound and the Avian
Navigational Map, Journal of Navigation, 54, 377-391, Cambridge University press.
Hanington et al (1999) G Hanington, PF Chen, PM Asbeck, LE
Larson - Microwave Theory and Techniques, IEEE Transactions on, 1999 - ieeexplore.ieee.org, 47 ,8 ,1471-1476.
Hickson P. and Lanzetta K. (
2004) Measuring
Atmospheric Turbulence with a Lunar Scintillometer Array , The
Astronomical Society of the Pacific,116
, 1143–1152.
Hoffman N.( Los Alamos
National Laboratory) ‘ Wave –Matching Conditions
for Acoustic –Gravity Wave Interactions.
Hu .X. et al (2002) A numerical study of wavelike Motion
in Forests, Boundary Layer Meteorology, 102
(2), 199-223.
Keerthipala W.W.L et al
(1998) Electronic circuits for active control of acouistic noise
generation in voltage transformers, Power
Electronic
Drives
and Energy Systems for Industrial Growth, 1998 Proceedings International
Conference On. 1, 243-248.
Inness Seminar s6 , www.met.rdg.ac.uk/~swshargi/MT11B/MT11B_S6.pdf
Irvine T.
(2007) Vibrationdata, January 2007 Newsletter.
Jones,
R.M. CIRES/Univ.
of Colorado, Boulder, CO; and E. S. Gu and A. J. Bedard, Jr., Infrasonic atmospheric
propagation studies using a 3-D ray trace model P2.9 http://ams.confex.com/ams/pdfpapers/81665.pdf
Poster Session 2, 22nd Conference on Severe Local Storms HAZARD MITIGATION, SOCIETAL IMPACTS, AND
WARNINGS Monday, 4 October
2004, 3:00 PM-4:30 PM
Karashtin A.N. et al (1977) Generation of
sound in the ionosphere by powerful radio waves, Radiophysics and Quantum Electronics, 20 (5) 540-542.
Kelly N.D. et al, Comparison of acoustic emission characteristics of
three large wind turbine designs Proc.
- Int. Conf. Noise Control Eng. ; 1;
International conference on noise control engineering; 17 May 1982; San
Francisco, CA, USA
Khvorostenko N.P. (1992)
A hypothesis for the
possibility of longitudinal electromagnetic waves in arbitrary media, Russian
Physics Journal, 35 (3) 223-227.
Koshovyy et al Acousto-electromagnetic
investigations of acoustical channel of Lithosphere-Ionosphere interaction.
Kulichov S.N. (2004)
Long range propagation and scattering of low frequency sound pulses in the
middle atmosphere, Metrology and Atmospheric Physics, 85 (1-3) 47-60.
Laine U.K. (2004)
De-noising and analysis of audio recordings made during the April 6 -7 2000
geomagnetic storm by using an ad hoc
set up, Joint Nordic-Baltic Acoustics Meeting, 8-10th June 2004,
Mariehamn, Aland.
Lawrence D.E. and Sarabandi K. (2006) Electromagnetic
scattering from vibrating penetrable objects using a general class of
time-varying sheet boundary conditions, IEEE Transactions on antennas and
propagation, 54 (7),
2054-2061.
Lebovitz, R.M. ( 1975) Detection of weak electromagnetic radiation by the
mammalian vestibulo- cochlear apparatus,
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 247 (1), 182-193. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1975.tb35995.x
Lees J.M. et al 2006 Volcanic eruptions, lightning, and a waterfall:
Differentiating the menagerie of infrasound in the Ecuadorian jungle, GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 33, L06308,
doi:10.1029/2005GL025515, 2006
Leventhall G.
(2003), DEFRA Report on Low Frequency
Noise.
Liddle R.(2003) Scientist
to create haunted house , Guardian Unlimited , Thursday 24th July
2003
Lui P.L. (1990) Passive intermodulation interference in communication systems,
Electronics & Communication Engineering Journal, 2 (3) 109-118.
Lui, P.L. Rawlins,
A.D. Watts, D.W.
Electron. Eng. Labs.,
Kent Univ., Canterbury;
Measurement of intermodulation
products generated by structural components, Electronics Letters, 24
(16), 1005-1007.
Lui Z., Hill
D.L. Centrifugal
Compressor Noise Reduction by Using Helmholtz Resonator Arrays, Dressler Rand,
Olean, NY, USA.
Lyakhov G.A and Suyazov N.V (1998), Electromagnetic excitation of infrasound in a conducting
medium Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 68, 80–83.
Maeda K. and Watanabe T. (1963), Pulsating Aurorae and
Infrasonic Waves in the Polar Atmosphere, AMS , Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences,
21 (1) 15-29.
Maeda K. and Watanabe T. (1964), Infrasonic Waves from
the Auroral Zone- NASA
technical note, June 1964.
Mayer, H. (1989) Windthrow, Phil.Trans. Soc. Lond. B324, 267-281.
Medeiros E.B. et al (2001) Controlling Noise in
Electricity Substations , INTERNOISE 2001, Proc. Intl. Conf. and Exchange on
Noise Control Engineering, 2001.
Matani, Y. et al (2002) Correlation between scintillation of
laser beam and wind noise, Proceedings of the 41st SICE Annual Conference, 2002 -
ieeexplore.ieee.org 3 1881-84.
Mityakov N.A ( 2006)
Parametric acoustic antenna in the atmosphere Izvestiya Vysshikh Uchebnykh Zavedenii, Radiofizika,. 49,
No. 7, 570–576, July 2006.
Moir T. (2006) http://www.massey.ac.nz/~tjmoir/hum.html
Moir T. (2007) Personal Communication
email, March 2007.
Moller F. Report
on the Humming Noise ( in German)
Frank Moller, Hamburg,
Germany Version 5 March 10, 2005. http://www.comlink.de/cl-hh/f.moeller/bericht%20ueber%20das%20brummen/report%20on%20the%20humming%20noise%20v5-0.pdf
Mutschlecner and
Whitaker (1990) An empirical study of infrasound propagation, osti.gov OSTI ID: 15133.
Naugolnykh K. and Rybank S. (2005) Sounds of cyclone, Geophysical Research
Abstracts, 7, 00333, 2005.
New Scientist (1992)
‘Hum Test’ Issue 1823 page 11.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13518321.000-factories-and-traffic-blamed-for-the-hum-.html),
Nishiyama,
R.T. Bedard, A.J., Jr. Kirschner, A.L. Nat. Oceanic & Atmos. Adm.,
Colorado Univ., Boulder, CO; Strong
winds over mountains and infrasound: possible applications for detecting
regions related to aircraft turbulence reports, Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium,
2002. IGARSS '02. 2002 IEEE International
Nutzel B. et al
(1993) Acoustic and Microwave backscattering of the sea surface , OCEANS apos, 2 (18-21) , 11-13.
Pavlov V.I. and Sukhorukov
A.I. (1985)
Emission of acoustic transition waves, SOV PHYS USPEKHI,
1985, 28 (9), 784-802.
Ponomarev E.A. and Erushchenkov A.I. (1977) Infrasonic Waves in the
Earth Atmosphere /Review, Radiophysics and Quantum Electronics, UDC 551.501.8 ... 12, pp. t773-1789, December, 1977
Posmentier E.S. (1973) Infrasound
of 1 through 16 Hz Associated with Clear Air Turbulence, JASA , 53 (1)
,372.
Qiang Wu et al
(1996) Microwave Symposium Digest, 1996.,
IEEE MTT-S International, 1996 - ieeexplore.ieee.org 2 851-854.
Radford T.(2003) Silent
Sound hits emotional chords, Guardian Monday September 8th 2003
Randle A.M. (1999) Dynamic Radio Channel Effects from L-Band
Foliage Scatter , D-Phil Thesis, Communications Research Group, Department of
Electronics , University of York.
Rapoport V.O .et al
(2003) The possibility of active experiments with artificial monochromatic
infrasound waves on ionospheric altitude,
Geophysical Research Abstracts, 5 , 03105,
2003.
Rapoport V.O .et al
(2005) Electro-acoustic sounding of the atmosphere, Radiophysics and Quantum
Electronics, 48 (1), 29-33.
Reddy L.R.G and Reddy B.M. (1993) Fading
patterns and physical mechanisms associated with deep powerfading
observed on LOS microwave radio links, Antennas and Propagation, 1993., Eighth
International Conference, 660-664
vol.2.
Reiter E.R. (1963) A case study of clear-air turbulence,
Meteorology and Atmospheric Physics, 13 (3-4)
379-389.
Rind and Donn (1975) Further Use of Natural Infrasound as a Continuous Monitor of the Upper
AtmosphereJournal of the Atmospheric Sciences -
ams.allenpress.com 32
(9) 1699-1704.
Roero,C.
and Teich, T.H.,(2004)
4th
International Symposium on Contact Angle, Wettability and Adhesion,Phila- delphia, USA, 2004.
Rottger J, ST radar observations of atmospheric waves over
mountainous areas: a review Annales Geophysicae
18 (7) 760-765, 2000
Rozell (1995) http://www.gi.alaska.edu/ScienceForum/ASF12/1221.html
.
Saebbo J. Estimation
of Wind and Turbulence in The Lower Atmosphere with a Bistatic Radio Acoustic System, Triad AS, PO BOX 89, 2001 Lillestrom, Norway.
Saulson, P. (1984)
Phys. Rev. D. 30, 732-736.
Science Frontiers Online ( 2000) Listening
to the unbearable No. 131 SEP-OCT
2000.
See,S.P., Cai,A and Zhi NC , (2007) Study on Transmission of RF signals on the
Human Body. Institute for Infocomm Research 20 Science Park Road, #02-21/25 Teletech Park , Singapore 117674.
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/90).
Sim C.Y.D and Warrington E.M. ( 2006), Signal strength measurements at frequencies of around 300 MHz over two sea paths in the British Channel Islands, Radio Science, 41, ( 3) , CiteID RS3005 (RaSc
http://www.spacedog.biz/infrasonic.htm
Tektronix
Application Note ‘Interference Testing Fundamentals’ www.tektronix.com/mobile
Terradaily Washington D.C. ( spx) Ocober 19th 2005 ‘ Mountain Wins may Create Atmospheric
Hotspots’
Thomas
S. ‘Detect Interference in wireless nets’
, Anritsu Corp.
Tokovin
A. and Bustos E. (2006)
Single-channel lunar scintillometer , Version 2, Sep 11, 2006,
Townsend
M. (2005) A Haunted Bed, Anomaly 37, 2005.
Vaivods
(2002) http://members.tripod.com/~auroralsounds/#dir).
Wikipedia.org
(2007) Clear-Air Turbulence
Wikipedia.org/
wiki/ Rocky_Mountains
Wikipedia.org/
wiki/ Multipath
Wilson
C.R. et al (2005) High –trace velocity infrasound from
pulsating Aurora at Fairbanks, Alaska,
Geophysics
Res. Letts. 32, 1 14810, doi: 10.1029/2005GL023188
,2005.