Ultrasonic hearing

[Mike(Mont)]

I've talked about the human skin being able to sense a wide range of frequencies, but this device can train the inner ear.

http://www.neurophone.com/home.htm

[Max]

I've talked about the human skin being able to sense a wide range of frequencies, but this device can train the inner ear.

http://www.neurophone.com/home.htm

Neuro-phone ???

Do you mean you're in a neuro-logy department and they let you use the phone ???

I imagine the scene...

You calling Elvis in the middle of the night... asking him to send you as gift his flared pants... and the nurses there that laugh like crazy...

Kind regards,
Max

[Theseus]

Neuro-phone ???

Do you mean you're in a neuro-logy department and they let you use the phone ???

I imagine the scene...

You calling Elvis in the middle of the night... asking him to send you as gift his flared pants... and the nurses there that laugh like crazy...

Kind regards,
Max

I can see your humor, Max; but probably Mike will not.

Mike searches out any and all topics (esoteric or not) and attempts to somehow draw analogies and/or links to the practice of dowsing. Apparently he does this in an attempt to bring some measure of credibility to the practice of dowsing.

So far he has been unsuccessful.

[Qiaozhi]

I've talked about the human skin being able to sense a wide range of frequencies, but this device can train the inner ear.

http://www.neurophone.com/home.htm

I thought the neurophone might actually be a serious relaxation aid, until I followed one of the links to this site -> http://www.phisciences.com/
Then I read about "crystal energy" and "wetter water".

Alarm bells!

Oh! Time to go .....

[Mike(Mont)]

If a scientist can't measure it, "It can't happen here."

[ron_o]

Ultrasonic sound detector

If you want to detect ultrasonic sounds and convert them to a frequency you can hear , see

A home-made ultrasonic power line arc detector by James T Hanson published in April 2006 issue of QST mag

or any bat sound converter.

I cannot understand how it would work or be modified to find buried metal

Regards

Ron_o

[J_Player]

If a scientist can't measure it, "It can't happen here."

Hmmmm....
Maybe you're right. These people at Neurophone may know better than the scientists.
They are actually making a profit selling the Neurophone and accessories that range in price from $12.99 to $495 US.
What scientist can do that? huh?

It just goes to show that scientists don't know chit about living the good life through selling advanced scientific concepts to consumers.
But the folks at Neurophones do!
So you are absolutely correct. If a scientist can't measure it, "It can't happen here."
(of course, we here don't generally pay $495 for pseudoscience).

Best wishes,
J_P

[Mike(Mont)]

Martin Lenhardt (University of Virginia) got his work published in "Science". How many articles have you had published there?

The older version costs $250. I don't know if it works. I was curious how it would work for locating if you input a frequency generator signal.

[Theseus]

Martin Lenhardt (University of Virginia) got his work published in "Science". How many articles have you had published there?

The older version costs $250. I don't know if it works. I was curious how it would work for locating if you input a frequency generator signal.

Exactly the same as if you DID NOT input a frequency generator signal.

Positive results from injecting micro-powered frequencies to dowsing or anything else you can imagine is a trick of the mind. If you think otherwise, than you have been a victim of someone's mind control techniques (probably Dell Winders or Tim Williams) and you should come to your senses.

If you insist on remaining in the clutches of those mind-control specialists than I feel sorry for you.

The truth is out there, it is not hidden, seek it out, Mike.

[Mike(Mont)]

Well, I don't know what will happen and you don't, either. How many articles have you had published in "Science"?

[J_Player]

The older version costs $250. I don't know if it works. I was curious how it would work for locating if you input a frequency generator signal.

Well, if we wanted to make some sense of this, then we must make some hypothetical assumptions that may or may not be true. But for the sake of argument, let's say we can build a signal generator that will broadcast a weak RF signal that will somehow bounce off only gold in the near field (say 10-20 feet distance). Let's also assume we can monitor the TX and RX signal with a number of receivers that have antennas on the detector body. Let's also assume that the RX signal is strong enough to be measurable when superimposed over the TX signal, and the signal is of a long enough wavelength to be a little longer than the spacing between the farthest two of the RX antennas on the detector.

If these conditions are met, then the principle described involves imaging based on the reflected signals being sensed on the RX antennas, or on external source signals arriving at the RX antennas. In the simplest form, we are able to locate the direction, and sometimes the distance of a sound we hear by allowing our brain to measure the time difference of a wavefront arriving at the two ears, and also listening for other attributes of the sound that we have been trained to interpret as meaning "distant" "near" "behind a wall" etc. But this deciphering and interpreting is not so simple. When applied to RF being received on several antennas, we can look at time of arrival, phase difference, and other information used in radio direction finding techniques. Then we could also import some kind of database to check a profile for gold, silver, bottle tops, etc. The hard part would be to develop algorithms to decipher the signature and imaging data of different items picked on the RX antenna matrix..

But the hardest part is none of this can work unless we can find a signal generator that will send back a receivable signal that can be measured and interpreted to indicate only when there is a buried treasure in the ground. I have never seen any such device. Thus this nice imaging technique could be very cool for things that are possible like acoustic waves and light waves imaging objects in front of us (even if a pair of eyeballs working in stereo could do a better job). But this imaging technique would be very un-cool for things that don't work, ie: RF to locate buried gold.

Best wishes.
J_P

[Max]

Well, I don't know what will happen and you don't, either. How many articles have you had published in "Science"?

And you ? How many !?

1000 ?

10000 ?

There's no need to publish stuff on "Science" to know what's c.r.a.p. and will not work!

But seems you don't understand that little concept...

Kind regards,
Max

[Theseus]

Well, I don't know what will happen and you don't, either. How many articles have you had published in "Science"?

You may not know what will happen, but I do.

I stand by my original statement posted above.

Incidently, there is ZERO correlation between the number of articles one has published and whether or not an evaluation of "wish science" is accurate or not. Check your facts before you make such erroneous comparisons, as it degrades your entire posting.

However, as Max pointed out to you; There's no need to publish stuff on "Science" to know what's c.r.a.p. and will not work!

[Mike(Mont)]

Blinded by skepticism. It appears to be some form of fear.

[Max]

Blinded by skepticism. It appears to be some form of fear.

Fear of what ? Something that don't work ?

try another one...

Kind regards,
Max