From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 09:05:39 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA24680; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 08:50:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 08:50:24 -0800
Message-Id: <199703021655.QAA06063@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 16:50:03 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Hum report reposted.
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"vP-OJ1.0.Q16.F_Q6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/609
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I saw this on another list and thought it might add to the list of 
areas that hear the hum.

Regards,
Ron.
--------------------------------------------------------
------- Forwarded Message Follows -------
From:          Enoch144@aol.com
Date:          Sat, 1 Mar 1997 23:05:02 -0500 (EST)
To:            skywatch@phoenix.net
Subject:       Re: Skywatch: Taos "Hum" 

I would like to make a report on this same type of "hum" here in the
US.

While I was living with my father in Rehoboth, Delaware this year..
About an hour from Dover AFB.  During the month of November every so
often starting at 4 AM and ending around 6 AM.. There would be a hum
that actually made me sick to my stomach-- now the area I was living
in consisted mostly of retired folks- usually everyone was in bed- but
both myself and my father were kept awake many nights trying to find
the source of this hum-- the humming sound seemed worse for me than my
father as the hum would echo in my head and make me ill and I could
not sleep..

We asked around in the daytime to ask people if they knew of anyone
using machinery but no one knew anything of it- and we never heard the
hum in the daytime or prime time hours- only from 4 AM til 6 AM.  

We never found out what it was - it seemed to come in the direction of
Dover AFB and it got louder toward the ground.. 

Todd Jumper

NOTE: The Subterrane can cause these effects in some people 
because they operate at such high frequencies.....Col.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 09:47:05 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA26087; Tue, 25 Feb 1997 02:21:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 02:21:58 -0800
Message-Id: <199702251021.LAA37284@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 11:05:00 CET
Subject: Rife generator
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"YB_3p1.0.WN6.5rh4p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/575
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I have now read Mutchg's post about the rife generator and his experience 
in the library.

Mutchg's description of the experience in the library doesnt convince me of 
the existence of an unusual ray there.

Clearly there was acoustic noise from the ballast of the fluorescent 
lightning. Also there was acoustic noise coming into the room through the 
windows. There were at least two sources of hum. (When more than one hum 
source is present there are unexplained effects, in the sense that the 
effect on the individual is not a simple sum of the effects of each hum)

The hum was peceived to stop when the head was bent. There exist a simple 
explanation for this. Bending the head will exert some pressure on the ear, 
which should affect the hearing, in a similar way that pressing on the eyes 
will affect the vision. The threshold of hearing for the hum may change to 
just above the level of hum present. So if bending the head stops the hum, 
it doesnt prove that the hum is caused by some unusual beam. If moving the 
body in an upright position under the fluorescent light (without moving the 
head relative to the body) caused abrupt stopping and starting of the hum 
experience, then it would have been a better indication of an usual beam. 
But according to mutchg's report, this was not the case. Only bending the 
head caused starting and stopping of the hum experience. 

The experience in the library is therefore no proof that anything outside 
acoustics was involved in generating the hum. 

Still the possibility exists that an unknown ray of some sort (A-waves?) 
increases the sensitivity to acoustic hum in some persons.

The rife generator article is another matter entirely, and is related to 
A-waves.

I know an engineer who experiments with Rife-like generators, and he 
testifies that they do heal illnesses in an impressive way. I know more 
people experimenting with similar subtle energies who tell of miraculous 
cures. Some of these stories stretches the imagination, and I will leave 
most of them out. 

So I have reason to believe that Rife generators do indeed work, and are 
indeed suppressed.

Most of the information in the Rife article is sensible, and the author 
obviously has done the experiments he describe. His how to descriptions are 
very practical, and it should be easy to follow his instructions, except 
his description of the three coils is difficult to follow. How many 
windings do the coils have? Are each a simple spiral coil, or does 'pancake 
snail coil' mean something else? What is a 'pancake snail' anyway??
I assume the coils are flat, with each winding in the same plane as the 
previous, but with a bigger diameter, fitting tightly to the previous.

The null antenna is of course no ordinary electromagnetic antenna, but the 
effect sought is no ordinary electromagnetic effect either.

I wonder what the plasma toroids are, I dont remember having seen any in a 
laser tube. To me plasma toroids seem to indicate that something unusual is 
happening.

His comments about electron spin resonance and tachyons make sense, though 
they are outside ordinary electromagnetic theory.

The author wants other people to redo his experiments, and I can only 
recommend that. 

His recommendation of 'The Keys of Enoch' doesnt make him a nutcase. I have 
had this book recommended before. A highranking UN official much into UFOs 
and alien contact once recommended this book. I have only glanced into the 
book, and didnt find it attractive, but I suppose one could read the book.


Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 12:14:57 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA08622; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 12:01:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 12:01:47 -0800
Message-Id: <199703022001.VAA33268@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 1997 20:49:00 CET
Subject: Another strange ray
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"2Rhwc.0.f62.hoT6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/610
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Dr Bruce Cohen has measured some strange magnetic rays apparently coming 
out of the ground in upstate New York. The area has some old mineshafts.

Dr Bruce Cohen concludes there are three underground transmitters in the 
area.

No hum is reported.

Dr Bruce Cohen believes the transmitters belong to an alien culture, rather 
than the US Navy.

The measurements seem to be OK, the signals look like they are 
intelligently controlled. Its difficult to come up with a geological 
explanation. 

Dr Bruce Cohen makes reasonable arguments that the signals are alien, not 
human. 

For those interested in strange magnetic rays, and not repulsed by the 
alien connection, the web address is :

http://www.orionworks.com/bcornet/Vol_2/index.html

or just

http://www.orionworks.com/bcornet/Vol_2/

regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 13:16:38 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA04970; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 13:01:45 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 13:01:45 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703022101.WAA22192@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 1997 21:52:00 CET
Subject: Hum acoustic or something else?
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"n4ToK.0.JD1.mgU6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/612
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

> I know there are
> many sources of noise.  I realize this. But the Taos hum IMHO is
> not industrial.  I do not doubt that there are thousands of people
> suffering from hums that can be explained by industrial noises,
electrical
> noises, traffic noises, etc -- but they are not hummers.   I am
> not sure Anders believes this.  I truly wish he did.

It is some progress that you realize that some Hum is caused by industrial
noise.

But I think you fail to realize that all Hum COULD be caused by acoustical
noise. Not all industial, some of it possibly caused by military plants.

We have seen little evidence that any hum is not caused by acoustics.
Mutchg has mentioned some symptoms which are not typical of acoustic noise.
Sara has mentioned a single experience with a car, where the hum would
abruptly stop when you moved away from the car. This resembles the typical
acoustic experience of the hum stopping when you go out the front door.
But otherwise, I dont remember anybody describing a hum experience that
wasnt typical acoustic?

A hummer who is affected by acoustic noise (usually industrial) cannot
easily tell whether the hum is caused by acoustics or by some strange ray.
He cannot tell from which direction it comes. He cannot locate the source.
He thinks that maybe it is earth-rays, maybe he is insane, maybe it's
mobile phones, maybe it is strange rays from transformer stations, maybe it
is pipelines with natural gas, maybe it is martians, maybe it is submarine
communication, etc.

The hummer will get earplugs, and he will still hear the hum, so he may
become quite convinced that the hum is no sound at all.

I have seen cases, who believe the hum is caused by strange rays, and
usually I can prove the hum is acoustic.

So I have come to believe that all Hum COULD be acoustic (whether the
source is secret military installations or your next door shopping mall)

Have you any evidence that your Hum (or any other hum, perhaps) is not 
acoustic?

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 13:19:04 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA04960; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 13:01:39 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 13:01:39 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703022101.WAA22184@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 1997 21:51:00 CET
Subject: Is the hum acoustic or other?
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"rvGAO1.0.RD1.ogU6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/613
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


>So this device might be described as being inconclusive where the nature
>of the signal recorded is concerned.  (Was it self oscillation of the
>filter, or thermic noise in the microphones??)

I compared the output from two identical units, fed by two identical 
batteries, placed on top of each other. Using sensitive mathematical metods 
I found no correlation between the two signals. Therefore the output could 
be characterized as random, not an external signal.

The noise signal was rather constant, shielding had no effect on it. 
Geographical location had no effect on it. But temperature had a large 
effect on it. I cooled the units in a fridge and in a freezer, and the 
noise dropped, as one would expect with thermal noise.

Using a (wideband) amplifier (insted af a narrowband) amplifier connected 
to the microphone, I passed the output from the microphone to a 
spectrumanalyzer. There was plenty of noise, but no peak at 75 Hz.

To me this is good evidence that the output from Lennart's units was 
thermal noise and not an external signal.



> 2. James Garner in USA built a circuit with a piezoelectric membrane from 

>I would need more data to form any insightful opinions on this one.
>Also inconclusive so far, but very interesting indeed!

We all need more data on Garner's device, but we havent got it.



>Some hum heaers have suffered occupational (partial) hearing loss, which
>usually effects the higher frequancies as I understand, but is there not
>also a loss of very low frequancy response as well?

As far as I know, hearing loss often happens selectively at higher 
frequencies with little effect on lower frequencies. But I dont have a lot 
of data on this. It is my impression that hearing loss usually renders the 
person more sensitive to low frequency sound, because the high frequency 
sound has a masking effect, which is lost, when high frequency sound is 
reduced through hearing loss.

>Here's a really simple test, have any hum hearers heard the hum while
>traveling by commercial airlines?  If so, on what route, and at what
>altitude?  Most importantly, was there any perceptable doppler
>distortion of the hum frequancy???

All the hummers I know report the hum is masked an not perceptible during 
transport. So no doppler observations have been possible.


>The human ear, and out perception of sound plays many tricks at the low
>end of the spectrum.  

Indeed!

>There have been several frequancies claimed to be
>that of the hum, selected via 'hum matching'.  Human perception being
>what it is, this is not the best method we might hope for, 

Indeed!

>but it's all we seem to have currently.

Not at all. We can record the hum, which gives vast possibilities for 
gaining more knowledge.

>If the hum matching frequancies are correct, or nearly so, 8 hz acoustic
>energy seems a bot far off the mark for the hum, is it not?  

I have done hum matching experiments, and no, 8 Hz is NOT far off the mark 
for the hum. You can easily get 75 Hz as a result of hum matching, and I 
got 75 Hz several times by Hum matching. More careful showed that many 
hummers cannot readily discern between one frequency and its overtones.
They cannot readily discern between 20,40,60 or 80 Hz, which are all 
overtones of 20 Hz. So if the hum is 17 Hz, hummers will match it with 
(8?), 17,34, 51 Hz and so on.


>What (subjective) evidence shows the signals recorded to be the same as
>the hum?

* Hummers can recognize their hum from the tape
* If you filter away frequencies below 20 or 30 Hz, they cannot recognize 
their hum from the tape
* If you play the signal being recorded in real time to the hummer (with 
inverse phase) you can nullify the hum experience. (This is strong proof of 
the hum being acoustic)

>Recording infrasound in a hum-plauged home is clearly significant, but
>how is this infrasound correlated to the human perceived hum?  (not
>being critical, just asking as I'm new to this field)

You have a good way of being critical. You ask intelligent questions to 
improve understanding. Not many people here ask intelligent questions 
(whatever the reason may be), and I have been missing such questions.

Mainly because of lack of equipment, I havent done as many recordings over 
long timeperiods as I would like. But I have for example measured 
constantly in a hummers home for a week. The hummer kept a diary where the 
hum was estimated on a scale 0-5 as frequently as possible. Afterwards I 
compared the diary with the measurements and found a general agreement. 
When the hum was 4-5, the infrasound was heavier. If I remember correctly 
the objective infrasound level changed a factor 10 when the subjective 
changed from 1 to 4.

>Would these also be electret microphones?

No. Measurement microphones are (almost) always condensor microphones with 
28 V or up to around 200 V between the membrane and the backplate.

>In the archives, I read the line of reasoning that becuase we can play a
>recorded or simulated hum anti-phase, and a hum hearer will no longer
>perceive the hum as being conclusive evidence that the hum was acoustic.

>I disagree.  Anything might stimulate the auditory nerves, and we will
>preceive this as sound.  The stimuli need not be acoustic.  If we feed
>in opposed acoustic stimuli, we can cancel out the signals in the
>auditory nerves.

You missed the important point. The signal came from a condensor 
microphone. THis is not sensitive to ordinary electromagnetic radiation. It 
is hardly sensitive to scalar waves. The signal measured by the microphone 
is acoustic sound. Only by playing anti-hum which is in anti-phase to 
actual acoustic sound can the hum experience be cancelled. If some scalar 
wave or other unknown radiation was causing a hum experience, the signal 
from the microphone would hardly be in antiphase to it, and therefore 
couldnt cancel it. Furthermore, as the anti-hum is played with  
approximately the same soundpressure as is present as real-hum in the air, 
the presence of acoustic real-hum which is hearable by the hummer is 
proved.

>I've read that visitors to homes effected by the hum can be (or have
>been) effected by proximity to the sufferer or the local environment.  I
>doubt that this is an acoustic phenomena.  Is this at all common in this
>field?

I dont know what you mean? A hummer who visits another hummers home can 
hear the hum there. 

>If we find such EEG data from two hummers in the same geographic area,
>and the EEG extracted hum frequancies differ, we might conclude that the
>hum is produced within the subject, rather than detected by the
>subject.

I have previously measured EEG data on persons, but I see little reason to 
do this experiment. From my viewpoint we already have an excellent and 
proven method of recording the hum (with a microphone) so it should be a 
waste of time to mess around with EEGs.

Regards, 

Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 13:19:05 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA04951; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 13:01:39 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 13:01:39 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703022101.WAA22188@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 1997 21:52:00 CET
Subject: Funny coincidence?
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"9otti2.0.CD1.mgU6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/611
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>Taos,
>
>Just had a funny (maybe not so funny) thought.  With  4 or 5 active
>intelligent lists all talking and building scalar and A-wave devices,
>wouldn't that be something if each (perhaps indirectly) is affecting the
>other. Free Energy group developing the source that drives the
>antigravity machine that ultimately is remotely controlled by... and
>heard as hum by the sensitives and seen as whatever by the
>sighters....like I said just a quick thought.  Bill J

The free energy groups, the antigravity groups, and a few others are all 
battling to come to grips with the same technology as we are currently 
battling with here. Everything indicates that these topics (except hum) are 
closely linked. When one subject is eventually solved, the other subjects 
will be solved as well...

I doubt it has much to do with the hum. The only evidence for that is 
Sara's anonymous scientist, who thought the navy submarine communication 
system might be responsible for some hum. He probably told Sara a good deal 
more that she told us, so Sara probably has better evidence for the 
military causing some hum, than we have.

I have little doubt that the military has technology that can cause hum, 
but I think the percentage of hum cases caused by the military is overrated 
by many.

Bearden and other sources talk about psychotronic weapons. If we are to 
believe in them, they exist and are currently being used for purposes we 
dont know about. If so, I think we are better off studying and learning 
about scalar technology and such, otherwise we might end up as victims.

I dont think such weapons usually create a hum experience.

But whether scalar waves have any relevance to hum or not, it may be 
relevant to study them.


 

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 15:19:58 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA06204; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 14:59:04 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 14:59:04 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <3319B48B.20F1@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 1997 17:10:36 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum acoustic or something else?
References: <199703022101.WAA22192@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"9F4Fr3.0.mW1.kOW6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/614
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote: (snipped)
> 
> So I have come to believe that all Hum COULD be acoustic (whether the
> source is secret military installations or your next door shopping mall)


Anders (and anybody that has an idea),

Why, in your mind did the HUM take on such a life of its own in 1989 and
especially 1992? - yes history says its been around for a longer time
but the hearers came out of the woodwork in the last half dozen years. 
And most on this list can pinpoint approximately when they started
hearing the HUM and it is prior to the Web, the TV shows or the
publications.  So there seems to be some level of reality that a diesel
in the distance HUM (and others) have been with us at a level of
recognition only for the past few years or so. What I am having trouble
understanding with reference to your acoustic view is what has changed
that could cause an acoustic (even if infrasound) HUM that wasn't there
before (on a Worldwide level)? Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 15:36:39 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA09418; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 15:16:05 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 15:16:05 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <3319B9CA.11D7@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 1997 17:32:59 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
References: <199703022101.WAA22184@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"uVC6n2.0.0J2.neW6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/615
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote (snipped)
> 
> * Hummers can recognize their hum from the tape
> * If you filter away frequencies below 20 or 30 Hz, they cannot recognize
> their hum from the tape

How do you play it back to them - through what type of equipment are you
playing for example 8Hz?


> * If you play the signal being recorded in real time to the hummer (with
> inverse phase) you can nullify the hum experience. (This is strong proof of
> the hum being acoustic)

I thought I read several posts where Hummers completely masked the HUM
with all sorts of different noises.  Not sure if this qualifies as
nullifying the HUM experience but maybe there are some Hummers out there
that can answer that question.




> 
> Only by playing anti-hum which is in anti-phase to
> actual acoustic sound can the hum experience be cancelled. 
> Furthermore, as the anti-hum is played with
> approximately the same soundpressure as is present as real-hum in the air,
> the presence of acoustic real-hum which is hearable by the hummer is
> proved.

Again same comment as above.

> 
> >I've read that visitors to homes effected by the hum can be (or have
> >been) effected by proximity to the sufferer or the local environment.  I
> >doubt that this is an acoustic phenomena.  Is this at all common in this
> >field?
> 
> I dont know what you mean? A hummer who visits another hummers home can
> hear the hum there.

This sounds like the phenomonon of the fellow who recorded tinnitus from
the external ear - maybe there is some feedback between the two
individuals?


> 
> I have previously measured EEG data on persons, but I see little reason to
> do this experiment. From my viewpoint we already have an excellent and
> proven method of recording the hum (with a microphone) so it should be a
> waste of time to mess around with EEGs.
> 

Curious - then why did you do this?, seems like a good experiment -
where did you get access to such equipment for the purpose of comparing
to HUM attributes? Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 19:45:59 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA03506; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 19:29:21 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 19:29:21 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 18:07:35 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703030207.SAA23066@spider.innercite.com>
X-Sender: judycole@spider.lloyd.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: judycole@spider.lloyd.com (Judy Karleen-Cole)
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
Resent-Message-ID: <"SdesX1.0.js.GMa6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/616
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 05:32 PM 3/2/97 +0000, billjaco@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>I thought I read several posts where Hummers completely masked the HUM
>with all sorts of different noises.  Not sure if this qualifies as
>nullifying the HUM experience but maybe there are some Hummers out there
>that can answer that question.

You are correct, and there are a number of ways to "mask" the hum.  Getting
in the car and traveling 35-40 mph or faster on a paved road with the
fan/blower on for good measure offers complete and total relief.  The sound
of running water and certain kinds of music, and running certain kinds of
fans (the noisy ones are best) also seems to "mask" the sound to varying
degrees.  But there is a difference, I think, between "mask" and "nullify".
As it now appears we may have at least two different types of hums to
confuse the issue, I suppose the words we choose are going to become
somewhat important. 

In my search for the reason the hum plays such a widely divergent and
remarkable "tune", I recently discovered (quite by accident, when a friend
made note of the huge geomag disturbance in early January that knocked out
one of our satellites) that really gross hum anomalies seem to occur
concurrently with geomag storms (that one, around 1/10) and apparently other
solar disturbances, most recently with a CME that occurred on Friday, 2/7.
These are not instances of "masking". There is a definite alteration in the
composition of the perceived hum, and many of the frequencies (usually the
mid to higher ones) are simply "not there" and the overall noise level
appears quite reduced and sometimes even not perceptible for short periods.
During these times the normally full-spectrum hum will present with only one
or two quite low frequencies, which, without the others for support, assume
almost a "calling" or "tonal" character rather than a "hum", and the
"diesel" has invariably vanished. This can last for hours, but usually not
more than a day. When geomag/solar weather is quiescent, the hum appears
alive and well on a very consistent basis.  All this time I have been
stymied by hum attenuation at seemingly irrational times for apparently
random periods, when, indeed it might be possible that the hum aberrations
are naturally caused.

I can't prove this, of course.  I have only matched subjective anomalies in
the hum to objective solar data on two occasions, but since January 10, 1997
on a daily basis there has been no activity in either the hum or the
geomag/solar weather to disprove this theory. And I continue to watch this
very closely.  A friend on this list has sent some papers for me to review,
and some members of another list have supplied me with some solar-related
URLs, and I hope to get into some archives of solar data for comparison with
documentated hum irregularities in the past, which seems the fastest way to
document a connection. 

Of course, these observations don't tell us what the hum is, only that it
might be affected by solar activity, and I haven't a clue what that might
tell us about the hum...  Maybe some of the "tekkies" here can toss that one
around...  If anyone is interested, I can keep you posted of my findings.

I still cannot explain why the hum was intermittent for the first couple of
years I heard it, then was absent for a long spell between August 15 and
October ??, 1995; then when it returned it has been present on a daily
basis, 24-hours-a-day, lowest level in the morning, greater during the day,
and most severe at night, which, unfortunately is also a subjective
observation.  Perhaps noteworthy is the observation that the hum so far in
1997 has been significantly louder overall than the hum in 1996.  Might all
this, together with the fact that there are new hummers every year speak to
the existence of a progressively prominent hum source, or perhaps to an
increasingly sensitive human condition?  It would help if there were answers
to these questions, and I have often wondered how my hum experience compares
with the larger picture. But the seeming reluctance of hummers to talk about
these issues has made comparison opportunities rare, and has not supplied
very much information to those of you who might shed some light on our
predicament. 

Judy

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 19:49:06 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA03771; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 19:32:30 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 19:32:30 -0800 (PST)
From: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 13:30:09 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Rife generator
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <01IG2FUDZ9YQ000LO4@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"vN4Jh.0.sw.DPa6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/617
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Anders this is not directed totally at you; it is also directed to those who
keep emailing me privately... 



At 11:05 AM 2/25/97 +0100, you wrote:
>I have now read Mutchg's post about the rife generator and his experience 
>in the library.
>
>Mutchg's description of the experience in the library doesnt convince me of 
>the existence of an unusual ray there.
>
>Clearly there was acoustic noise from the ballast of the fluorescent 
>lightning. Also there was acoustic noise coming into the room through the 
>windows. There were at least two sources of hum. (When more than one hum 
>source is present there are unexplained effects, in the sense that the 
>effect on the individual is not a simple sum of the effects of each hum)

>The hum was peceived to stop when the head was bent. There exist a simple 
>explanation for this. Bending the head will exert some pressure on the ear, 
>which should affect the hearing, in a similar way that pressing on the eyes 
>will affect the vision. The threshold of hearing for the hum may change to 
>just above the level of hum present. So if bending the head stops the hum, 
>it doesnt prove that the hum is caused by some unusual beam. If moving the 
>body in an upright position under the fluorescent light (without moving the 
>head relative to the body) caused abrupt stopping and starting of the hum 
>experience, then it would have been a better indication of an usual beam. 
>But according to mutchg's report, this was not the case. Only bending the 
>head caused starting and stopping of the hum experience. 

[Sacastic mode on, anger mode off, Frustration obvious.]
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!... Self contextual interpretation .... most anouying.
O.K....Lets spell it out... With my head looking straight forward............

Move under the light: HUM HUM HUM (((((())))))

Move away  from the light: NO,NO, NO ,HUM   !  .

This is a library for heavens sake, I could easy hear a pin drop... This is
a 'QUITE ZONE, no-ifs ,no-buts or your OUT of the LIBRARY. I was in a sound
proof room inside the library. They don't make sound proof rooms these days
to let noise in or out, and still call them 'sound proof rooms'... The
library is 3 storey solid concrete: roof ,walls and floor.  

The problem here is not convincing some people on this list that this HUM
could be happening an is very real. The problem is, they (their innerselves)
are choosing blatant denial. They themselves know full well this HUM is
happening for very real reasons; produced by a few very bored people in the
world with little else to do, but out of sheer denial, you are protecting
your last know bastion of sanity, sanctity and possibly sanctuary. You/they
are steadfast on their current beliefs and nothing will rock their precious
little row-boat: that can,(according to them) weather the most virulent of
storms. BIG BAD NEWS for you/them, their little comfort-zone-row-boat has
sprunge a leak, the size of a crater!!!.

As ususal 'Anders' will reply back with a few contextual mis-interpretations
that your limited logical will be able to grasp onto, and that will allow
you to paddle your little self-denial row-boats a while long: happly knowing
you can bask in your understanding comfort-zone for a short period. 

(Appology to the inocent for my frustration ...)


>The experience in the library is therefore no proof that anything outside 
>acoustics was involved in generating the hum. 
<<<<<<< In your opinion """ONLY""".  Please Anders, I wish you would state
that!... Your not a hearer.


>Still the possibility exists that an unknown ray of some sort (A-waves?) 
>increases the sensitivity to acoustic hum in some persons.

LET spell it out AGAIN . Im in CONCRETE assertion this "IS A BEAM"...
(Discription
outside of the normal endoctrinated scientific belief system.) 

In my honest opinion: 

The modulation BEAM is produced from satellite or ground station via
ionspheric bounce. This beam is designed to modulate an amplify the
amplitude of your neuro switch pattern in the brain(which is a very weak
electronic signal). They then send two long elf-wave carriers (one for each
hemisphere of the brain) along the ground in total phase with the modulation
beam and your left and right hemispheres. Your neural switch pattern is
literally modulated or may be hetrodyned(beat mixed) on these two carrier
frequencies. This carrier is then recieved via normal radio electronics;
feed into a computer, and a total make up of your nervous system visual
cortext, auditory cortext is sent to the analysist. In my case I know full
well I'm hooked to a computer. If I'm a 'good little fellow' for the day
they turn the HUM down, but if I've been giving out to much information for
that day; I'm promptly reminded of the fact with a nice big dose of HUM. And
of course the usual brain massage at around 12 mid-night to 4-5am every
moring. They think I'm asleep more fool them. I guess you could call me a
sleep researcher: I (like millions of other people) can go to sleep with a
logic problem at night an wake up with the answer in the morning. They make
damn sure my brain is kept busy for the night. 

I post this material out of respect for others. I seek no monetary gain or
emotional satisfaction of any kind. You people should be more than happy you
have a willing subject that will stand up and explain the finer details of
such and experience.  
This material also helps those other S.O.B's to fine tune their EVIL-link.  
How many others out their, out of fear, or ridicual, are sealed to their
silence ? 
How many are being labled nut-cases (I presume myself included) and put in
asylums ?

If you get all of my old postings and cut-paste them into one paper you will
have at a minimum 51% of your answers to the problem, I'm sure.


I've already assign my-self "to my fait". I definately want the world to
know all of this, and a terrific amount of other information. What you do
with it is your own accord. But in my honest opinion I would mail it to
every single email list I could.

Its so easy to get any thing you want and become a millionare in this world.
The simple formula is HATE every one an attain the cognition that other
people are nothing more than a worthless virus. This makes it so much easier
for these people to sleep at night, while they rape, pillage and plunder
during the day. This formula is only possible because it plays off one of
the weak human emotions: the 'desire to please others'. This desire can hold
up the neccessary 'Fear factor' and the 'imaginary power structures' that
the SOB's need... which when atomised, resemble nothing more than the school
yard bully principle.

I'm afraid I fail the above formula badly...

My only 'so called crime' is: I help other people acheive their goals. Big
deal.!!!

Remember always: "EVIL RAINES WHEN GOOD MEN DO NOTHING". Will you assign
your children /grand children to the fait of the S.O.B's ?
                .
                .
                .
                .
                                
[sincere mode :)]
>The rife generator article is another matter entirely, and is related to 
>A-waves.
>
>I know an engineer who experiments with Rife-like generators, and he 
>testifies that they do heal illnesses in an impressive way. I know more 
>people experimenting with similar subtle energies who tell of miraculous 
>cures. Some of these stories stretches the imagination, and I will leave 
>most of them out. 
>

>I wonder what the plasma toroids are, I dont remember having seen any in a 
>laser tube. To me plasma toroids seem to indicate that something unusual is 
>happening. 

 "Plasma toroids = DONUTS"  Also see Giesler or Crookes tubes... I don't fully
 understand this phenomenon either. 

>
>His comments about electron spin resonance and tachyons make sense, though 
>they are outside ordinary electromagnetic theory.

NOT total outside: they just discribe the same event but at a lower
anatomical level.

>
>The author wants other people to redo his experiments, and I can only 
>recommend that. 

That would be a good project to underatake at some stage. Anybody interested ?

(Glad to get that off my chest.) :)
-G.D.Mutch

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 20:10:38 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA28741; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 19:53:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 19:53:39 -0800
From: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 13:57:22 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Hum acoustic or something else?
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <01IG2GT4IDWI000MO0@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"D1aVQ3.0.y07.2ja6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/618
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 09:52 PM 3/2/97 +0100, you wrote:
>> I know there are
>> many sources of noise.  I realize this. But the Taos hum IMHO is
>> not industrial.  I do not doubt that there are thousands of people
>> suffering from hums that can be explained by industrial noises,
>electrical
>> noises, traffic noises, etc -- but they are not hummers.   I am
>> not sure Anders believes this.  I truly wish he did.
>
>It is some progress that you realize that some Hum is caused by industrial
>noise.
>
>But I think you fail to realize that all Hum COULD be caused by acoustical
>noise. Not all industial, some of it possibly caused by military plants.
>
>We have seen little evidence that any hum is not caused by acoustics.
>Mutchg has mentioned some symptoms which are not typical of acoustic noise.
>Sara has mentioned a single experience with a car, where the hum would
>abruptly stop when you moved away from the car. 


Anders: Just a quick recap:
I sent the text about being tracked while in the car. The signal increases
4-5 times while in the vehical. I hear it when I stop at traffic lights etc. 
It then stops almost dead when I step away from the vehical allot of times
almost 10-20 meters away before it stops. They haven't fine tune their
computer program enough just yet. ;)

To satisfiy every one on this list...  WE will now classify the T/H into 
Natural Accoustic-TH and Artifical Beam T-H. You may shorten to Natural an
Artifical if
you so desire.

Please put reference in your email text to the T-H you are talking about.
Eg. Subject : Blah Blah Blah... (Artifical-TH)


>Regards, Anders
>

G.D.Mutch

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 21:14:50 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA03513; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 20:35:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 20:35:36 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331A0D9E.4A1E@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 1997 23:30:38 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Rife generator
References: <01IG2FUDZ9YQ000LO4@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ihc4R3.0.ps.NKb6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/619
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:(snipped)

> This beam is designed to modulate an amplify the
> amplitude of your neuro switch pattern in the brain(which is a very weak
> electronic signal). They then send two long elf-wave carriers (one for each
> hemisphere of the brain) along the ground in total phase with the modulation
> beam and your left and right hemispheres. Your neural switch pattern is
> literally modulated or may be hetrodyned(beat mixed) on these two carrier
> frequencies. This carrier is then recieved via normal radio electronics;
> feed into a computer, and a total make up of your nervous system visual
> cortext, auditory cortext is sent to the analysist.

Mutch,

So why don't you try using the inverse phase technique and turn off the
effects?  If they are tuning you in through hyper-space I don't think
the beam would be in the library anyway (why follow you around????) -
most likely your house but not the library!  If its real-time I doubt
anyone has the technology to pick up noisy minute signals without some
implant (which is way beyond the scope of this discussion group, and I
can visualize several of our list members rolling their eyes as I write
this anyway).  Just seems like there are some technical things you could
be doing to checkout/protect yourself. bj

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 21:47:17 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA07192; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 21:05:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 21:05:03 -0800
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 21:04:39 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: test, ignore
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95q.970302210408.4868C-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"d5paO1.0.nl1.-lb6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/620
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

yes, ignore.  No secret messages here!   ;)

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  2 22:19:00 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA09998; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 21:18:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 21:18:14 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331A17FD.372F@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 00:14:52 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
References: <199703030207.SAA23066@spider.innercite.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"4bANS.0.9S2.Myb6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/621
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Judy Karleen-Cole wrote:
> 
> Of course, these observations don't tell us what the hum is, only that it
> might be affected by solar activity, and I haven't a clue what that might
> tell us about the hum...

Well for starters, once you confirm the correlation a bit more we can
increase the probability that there is an Rf component to the HUM.  And
if we can get more info into the characteristics of the geomag events we
can begin to look at specific bands as there are plenty of well
researched charts and graphs on how bands are attenuated vs. the
environmental event.  


> I still cannot explain why the hum was intermittent for the first couple of
> years I heard it, then was absent for a long spell between August 15 and
> October ??, 1995;

Maybe your contacts can help look at the launch schedules for NASA over
this 1995 period?

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 00:10:21 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA08526; Sun, 2 Mar 1997 23:59:22 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 2 Mar 1997 23:59:22 -0800 (PST)
From: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 18:03:05 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Cc: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Message-id: <01IG2PDRR5CY000OFN@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"STOlO2.0.552.OJe6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/622
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:14 AM 3/3/97 +0000, you wrote:
>Judy Karleen-Cole wrote:
>> 
>> Of course, these observations don't tell us what the hum is, only that it
>> might be affected by solar activity, and I haven't a clue what that might
>> tell us about the hum...
>
>Well for starters, once you confirm the correlation a bit more we can
>increase the probability that there is an Rf component to the HUM.  And
>if we can get more info into the characteristics of the geomag events we
>can begin to look at specific bands as there are plenty of well
>researched charts and graphs on how bands are attenuated vs. the
>environmental event.  
>
>
>> I still cannot explain why the hum was intermittent for the first couple of
>> years I heard it, then was absent for a long spell between August 15 and
>> October ??, 1995;
>
>Maybe your contacts can help look at the launch schedules for NASA over
>this 1995 period?
>

[Paranoid mode on]
Judy 3 military satellites where taken out at the start of the year:
they where literally wiped out. I don't have much information on it.

Trivia for what it is worth.

-GM


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 04:15:13 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA12808; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 03:42:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 03:42:03 -0800
Message-Id: <199703031141.MAA33082@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 12:19:00 CET
Subject: Hum: cars and rays
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"sscJq3.0.383.Aah6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/623
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>Anders: Just a quick recap:
>I sent the text about being tracked while in the car. The signal increases
>4-5 times while in the vehical. I hear it when I stop at traffic lights 
>etc.
>It then stops almost dead when I step away from the vehical allot of times
>almost 10-20 meters away before it stops. They haven't fine tune their
>computer program enough just yet. ;)

It shouldnt be impossible (but maybe improbable) for the car to have an 
acoustic resonance at 8-20 Hz. That might offer an acoustic explanation, 
though I think it may be a somewhat improbable explanation. 

More probable: the car might emit a signal (acoustic or something else) 
which added to an external acoustic noise, gave a result which was more 
than a simple sum of the two signals. When you add two acoustic signals the 
sum is generally not a simple sum. As an example, two acoustic signals (at 
different frequencies) which are each just below the hearing threshold when 
combined may give a sound which is above the hearing threshold, and a 
nuisance. If your car emits any kind of sound, this sound may "lift" a 
just-below-threshold Hum to an above threshold Hum. This is definitely 
possible with acoustic signals. It might also be possible if your car was 
emitting an EM or perhaps a scalar signal.

A quick question: have you searched the car for radio transponders? Both 
the police here and in England, and probably also elsewhere, sometimes 
secretly place radio transponders under cars to be able to keep track of 
the driver. 

Similar technology is being used commercially. Recently all taxis in the 
capital here were fitted with transponders, which communicate with 
satellites. There are other examples (lorries, expensive cars, and so on). 

Regards, Anders





From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 05:57:40 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA26817; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 05:41:55 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 05:41:55 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703031341.OAA31108@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 14:19:00 CET
Subject: Hum: increase since 1992?
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"6F5LM3.0.vY6.XKj6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/624
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


>Anders (and anybody that has an idea),

>Why, in your mind did the HUM take on such a life of its own in 1989 and
>especially 1992? 

Well, the Hum here is now frequently mentioned in newspapers (10-20 times a 
year?), and in television (1-5 times a year?). It is frequently mentioned 
at pressmeetings (1-5 times a year?) and so on.

This is due to intensive lobbying from a few concerned and tireless 
individuals, who bombard politicians and civil servants with letters and 
questions. The public exposure does not reflect the level of hum present, 
but the political activity of the hummers present.

The hummers have become more politically active, perhaps because of more 
spare time. Large number of people have become redundant and unemployed 
here. Whereas a parent with two screaming kids, and a 8-10 hour workday has 
little energy left for political work, a redundant person with no kids has 
more energy left. The politically active hummers here generally are retired 
or redundant, and without kids, and not part of the rat-race.
 

I have files on quite a number of hummers, containing such info as when 
they first heard the hum. (people phone me out of the blue and tell me of 
their hum problems) I ought to go through my files at this point of time, 
but I am stressed for lack of time. At a time I had the impression that 
many hummers started to hear the hum around 1985, but I no longer have that 
impression. Some heard it before, some heard it later. If very many hummers 
started to hear the hum at the same time, it would be suspicious. But I 
dont think that is the case. The numbers here seem to have increased 
gradually, which could reflect a gradual increase in noise pollution. The 
government here is very permissive regarding lowfrequency noisepollution, 
so the industry has a free hand in the pollution.  

So I am certainly not convinced that there has been a sudden increase in 
hum worldwide. More evidence is required before I believe that.

If it turns out that there has been a sudden worldwide increase in hum, it 
might be possible that some unknown radiation made people more sensitive to 
acoustic hum. This would offer the possibility that the Hum was at the same 
time acoustic and influenced by some Star-Trek type of thing. Suppose some 
worldwide radiation (microwaves, mobile phones, submarine communication, 
whatever) which could in a high doses be heard as sound, was held at a low 
level, below the threshold of hearing. The effect of this would be that the 
level of acoustic noise required to be heard (the threshold of hearing) 
would be reduced. The idea here is that there might be a possibility that 
another radiation "lifted" the acoustic noise from an imperceptible level 
to a perceptible level.

Another line of thought is that maybe the Hum has been perceptible for 
hummers for decades, and perhaps something has changed the way they react, 
from indifference to being severely affected. This would also combine an 
acoustic explanation with another (unknown) influence.

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 05:59:23 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA27032; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 05:47:08 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 05:47:08 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703031351.NAA20073@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 13:46:53 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"Tosan2.0.Jc6.QPj6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/625
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Anders wrote in reply to Bob S.
> 
> I have previously measured EEG data on persons, but I see little reason to 
> do this experiment. From my viewpoint we already have an excellent and 
> proven method of recording the hum (with a microphone) so it should be a 
> waste of time to mess around with EEGs.

I must disagree here, Do we know what the result is on a persons 
brain wave pattern if they experience a signal of the same, or close 
frequency, as their alpha, beta, brain waves? Does beating occur? 
Using EEG testing might reveal interesting results.
(Note that I have not made any distinction between acoustic, 
electromagnetic or other types of signal).
In this field I would not regard any avenues of research as a waste 
of time. Mind you that's just my opinion!

Regards,
Ronald.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 06:54:32 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA01988; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:41:40 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:41:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703031441.PAA26638@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 15:21:00 CET
Subject: Nullifying hum
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"3n1v63.0._U.ZCk6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/627
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>How do you play it back to them - through what type of equipment are you
>playing for example 8Hz?

The proper equipment would be an anechoic chamber with one wall acting as a 
piston. I didnt have that, so I used a poorer (but still expensive) 
solution, the special Sennheiser Linear Headphones (HD265, I think) with an 
extended frequency range (10-40.000 Hz I believe).

>I thought I read several posts where Hummers completely masked the HUM
>with all sorts of different noises.  Not sure if this qualifies as
>nullifying the HUM experience but maybe there are some Hummers out there
>that can answer that question.

There is an important difference between nullifying the hum and masking the 
hum

Nullifying:

HUM + ANTIHUM = SILENCE

Masking:

HUM + PLEASANT_NOISE = PLEASANT_NOISE

>This sounds like the phenomonon of the fellow who recorded tinnitus from
>the external ear - maybe there is some feedback between the two
>individuals?

You can never exclude some transfer of information between individuals in 
the same room. And ideally experiments should be carried out moving hummers 
around to places they havent been informed about before. It has been 
difficult for me to make hummers perform such tests - the scientific 
purpose is usually above their head.

>Curious - then why did you do this?, seems like a good experiment -
>where did you get access to such equipment for the purpose of comparing
>to HUM attributes? Bill J

If you are referring to the EEG measurements, I did those long before 
becoming interested in hum. I was interested in biofeedback then, and there 
was an article in Popular Electronics or some such magazine "Build your own 
EEG monitor" or so. As I found out there were several design-errors in the 
published design. Another guy committed suicide after having tested the 
biofeedback unit, so I guess you could say that the unit didnt prove to be 
much of a success.

Regards, Anders


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 07:13:07 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA24859; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:21:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:21:51 -0800
Message-Id: <199703031421.PAA41458@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 15:07:00 CET
Subject: Hum: EEG measurements worthwhile?
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"SNEn03.0.M46._vj6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/626
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


>I must disagree here, Do we know what the result is on a persons
>brain wave pattern if they experience a signal of the same, or close
>frequency, as their alpha, beta, brain waves? Does beating occur?

A lot of work has been done in this area. A common effect is brainwave 
entrainment. The brainwaves are synchronized to the frequency heard (or 
seen). Flashing lights are as effective as or more effective than sound. 
Some people are severely affected by fluorescent lighting, computer screens 
and such and they often believe they are affected by ELF EM. Other people 
think that the lights affect the person not through ELF EM, but through the 
flickering quality of the light entering through the eyes.
And there is some interrelation between light and sound, though I doubt you 
could change the threshold of hearing with a flashing light. 

>Using EEG testing might reveal interesting results.
>(Note that I have not made any distinction between acoustic,
>electromagnetic or other types of signal)
>In this field I would not regard any avenues of research as a waste
>of time. Mind you that's just my opinion!

All kinds of experiments might reveal interesting results. And you should 
look for the unexpected results once in a while if you do research.

However, there is an economic angle to research. You usually have many 
avenues of research open to you. If you select your avenues of research at 
random, you are not likely to have success. You are likely to run out of 
funds and run out of time before you reach useful results.

If you have a choice between acoustic measurements and EEG measurements, I 
would opt for acoustic measurements as the most promising. Economics being 
as they are, you would probably be unable to do both. 


Regards,
Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 07:13:14 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA03640; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:56:59 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 06:56:59 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <331AA0CD.FCB@tiac.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 09:58:37 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum acoustic or something else?
References: <199703022101.WAA22192@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"vG7KP2.0.fu.uQk6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/628
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:

> It is some progress that you realize that some Hum is caused by industrial
> noise.
> 
> But I think you fail to realize that all Hum COULD be caused by acoustical
> noise. Not all industial, some of it possibly caused by military plants.

I'm not ready to accept this yet.  I currently have no reason to beleive
that I know the cause of the hum, but I think there is strong evidence
that it is not in all cases acoustic.

I have an email from a list member who hears the hum, but who's hearing
tests show that his hearing in not nearly as sensitive (at both low and
high frequancies) as that of his wife, who cannot hear the hum.

How then can we claim that it is possible that "all hum COULD" be
acostic in origin?

> 
> We have seen little evidence that any hum is not caused by acoustics.
> Mutchg has mentioned some symptoms which are not typical of acoustic noise.
> Sara has mentioned a single experience with a car, where the hum would
> abruptly stop when you moved away from the car. This resembles the typical
> acoustic experience of the hum stopping when you go out the front door.
> But otherwise, I dont remember anybody describing a hum experience that
> wasnt typical acoustic?

Any phisiologicalcal effects of infrasound can be produced by other
means, such as pulsed VLF / magnetic fields, etc.  

We should not use the dscriptions of the effects alone as evidence for
or against an acoustic source.

Clearly when people with superior low frequancy hearing do not hear the
hum, while others in the same home with inferior hearing do not, we must
have an unusual acoustic situation, or a non-acoustic phenomena.

Is there any reasonable explaination why the person with better low
frequancy hearing does not perceive the hum in such a case (assuming
it's acoustic)?
 
> A hummer who is affected by acoustic noise (usually industrial) cannot
> easily tell whether the hum is caused by acoustics or by some strange ray.
> He cannot tell from which direction it comes. He cannot locate the source.
> He thinks that maybe it is earth-rays, maybe he is insane, maybe it's
> mobile phones, maybe it is strange rays from transformer stations, maybe it
> is pipelines with natural gas, maybe it is martians, maybe it is submarine
> communication, etc.
> 
> The hummer will get earplugs, and he will still hear the hum, so he may
> become quite convinced that the hum is no sound at all.
> 
> I have seen cases, who believe the hum is caused by strange rays, and
> usually I can prove the hum is acoustic.
> 
> So I have come to believe that all Hum COULD be acoustic (whether the
> source is secret military installations or your next door shopping mall)
> 
> Have you any evidence that your Hum (or any other hum, perhaps) is not
> acoustic?
> 
> Regards, Anders

Anders,

I think that many of the reports suggest that the hum is not acoustic,
as in the case outlined above.  Do you have any possible acoustic
explaination for this situation?

Also, if it's acoustic, why have so many attemts to record it failed?

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 07:19:38 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA04060; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:01:41 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:01:41 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703031501.QAA41234@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 15:37:00 CET
Subject: Hum and geomag events
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"MUFMC2.0.N_.KVk6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/629
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>I can't prove this, of course.  I have only matched subjective anomalies 
>in the hum to objective solar data on two occasions, but since January 10, 
> 1997 on a daily basis there has been no activity in either the hum or the
>geomag/solar weather to disprove this theory.

Simple magnetometers have become rather inexpensive lately. I have a couple 
of cheap magnetometers in a drawer somewhere. It wouldnt be impossible to 
set up an automatic unit measuring both acoustic sound and geomagnetism at 
the same time.


>Of course, these observations don't tell us what the hum is, only that it
>might be affected by solar activity, and I haven't a clue what that might
>tell us about the hum...  Maybe some of the "tekkies" here can toss that 
>one around...  

A geologist once tired me with he endless stories about the connections 
between sunspots and the weather, sunspots and cropyields in the fields, 
sunspots and the deathrates, etc.

I seem to remember an article claiming that scalar wave background followed 
the sunspots. There may have been measurements, too.

Another possibility might be to generate an artificial magnetic field 
around a hummer while measuring the hearing threshold for infrasound. 
I already did one experiment where I placed a magnetic coil under the bed 
of a hummer. (It had no effect on the hum, nor on the sleep).

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 08:05:41 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA08324; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:44:09 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:44:09 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <331AABD9.222B@tiac.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 10:45:45 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
References: <199703022101.WAA22184@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"9YPVI.0._12.87l6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/630
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:

<snip>

> >What (subjective) evidence shows the signals recorded to be the same as
> >the hum?
> 
> * Hummers can recognize their hum from the tape
> * If you filter away frequencies below 20 or 30 Hz, they cannot recognize
> their hum from the tape
> * If you play the signal being recorded in real time to the hummer (with
> inverse phase) you can nullify the hum experience. (This is strong proof of
> the hum being acoustic)

This is dead wrong!

Nullification of the perceived sound does not prove that the original
perception was induced by sound, only that we are canceling the nerve
impulses accosicated with the perception of that sound.

Just haw do you maintain the 180 degree phase difference between the
recording and the perceived sound in this testing?

> >Recording infrasound in a hum-plauged home is clearly significant, but
> >how is this infrasound correlated to the human perceived hum?  (not
> >being critical, just asking as I'm new to this field)
> 
> You have a good way of being critical. You ask intelligent questions to
> improve understanding. Not many people here ask intelligent questions
> (whatever the reason may be), and I have been missing such questions.
> 
> Mainly because of lack of equipment, I havent done as many recordings over
> long timeperiods as I would like. But I have for example measured
> constantly in a hummers home for a week. The hummer kept a diary where the
> hum was estimated on a scale 0-5 as frequently as possible. Afterwards I
> compared the diary with the measurements and found a general agreement.
> When the hum was 4-5, the infrasound was heavier. If I remember correctly
> the objective infrasound level changed a factor 10 when the subjective
> changed from 1 to 4.

Now this is strong evidence that the situations you actually measured
was indeed the result of infrasound.  I think we need to be careful
before we extend this to all hum cases, for two reasons.

First, it's a matter of understanding that people are suffering from
this condition, which deserves some attention before we make such
assumptions.

Secondly, it's a matter of good science.  We do have at least one case
where the person with poorer low frequancy hearing hears the hum while
another person in that same home, with superior low frequancy hearing
does not.

I would also think that mine shafts, etc would have a larger effect on
the perception of the hum if it was indeed an acoustic phenomena.  This
does not appear to be the case, but I'm still learing a great deal about
this phenomena, so I easily could be wrong here.
 
> >Would these also be electret microphones?
> 
> No. Measurement microphones are (almost) always condensor microphones with
> 28 V or up to around 200 V between the membrane and the backplate.

Understood.  Capacitve microphones were used.

> >In the archives, I read the line of reasoning that becuase we can play a
> >recorded or simulated hum anti-phase, and a hum hearer will no longer
> >perceive the hum as being conclusive evidence that the hum was acoustic.
> 
> >I disagree.  Anything might stimulate the auditory nerves, and we will
> >preceive this as sound.  The stimuli need not be acoustic.  If we feed
> >in opposed acoustic stimuli, we can cancel out the signals in the
> >auditory nerves.
> 
> You missed the important point. The signal came from a condensor
> microphone. THis is not sensitive to ordinary electromagnetic radiation. It
> is hardly sensitive to scalar waves. The signal measured by the microphone
> is acoustic sound. Only by playing anti-hum which is in anti-phase to
> actual acoustic sound can the hum experience be cancelled. If some scalar
> wave or other unknown radiation was causing a hum experience, the signal
> from the microphone would hardly be in antiphase to it, and therefore
> couldnt cancel it. Furthermore, as the anti-hum is played with
> approximately the same soundpressure as is present as real-hum in the air,
> the presence of acoustic real-hum which is hearable by the hummer is
> proved.

I have a number of problems with this last paragraph:

1. What basis in fact do you have to support the claim that capacitive
microphones are at all insensitive to scalar waves? It's interesting to
note that the sensitive element in the Hodowanec detector design is in
fact a capacitor.  

2. The claim that the signal produced by the microphone "is acoustic" in
origin is what we are questioning, so stateing this as fact is improper
here.
There is no proof that this is the case, nor do I think you have any
conclusive data that capacitve microphones are insensitive to scalar
waves.

This is a statement of an opinion, not of a fact, yet.

3. The sentance "If some scalar wave or other unknown radiation was
causing a hum experience, the signal from the microphone would hardly be
in antiphase to it, and therefore couldnt cancel it." is incorrect.

If indeed the capacitive element of the microphone was acting in a
similar manner as the capacitor in Hodowanec's detector, we would have
an electromagnetic version of the causal signal.  This electromagnetic
copy of the signal can be presented to the subject in phase, or out of
phase.

It is the phase of the presentation to the subject that is important.

What basis in fact supports your assumption that the signal produced (by
what ever means) "would hardly be in antiphase to it, and therefore
couldnt cancel it."?

It is possible to induce the perception of sound by direct stimulation
of the brain, and to canacel that perception of sound by the application
of acoustic energy (sound) that it antiphase to the direct stimulation.

Does this mean that the the original perception of sound was acoustic? 
No, not at all.  We canot yet dismiss such a possibility in the case of
the hum.

4. Anders wrote: "Furthermore, as the anti-hum is played with
approximately the same soundpressure as is present as real-hum in the
air, the presence of acoustic real-hum which is hearable by the hummer
is proved."

This sentance deserves special attention!

How do you know that the anti-hum is being played at the same sound
pressure as the hum?  This assumes that the hum signal detected is
acoustic, which is a point in question in this discussion.

Is this based on the levels detected in recordings? 

This also ingores the fact that a real sound can mask the perception of
sound not produced by acoustic means.  I cannot accept this as proof of
anything at this time, for reasons made clear in this posting.

It is suggestive that Anders may have a (legitimate) bias towards an
acoustic explaination, as acoustic sources have been identified in some
cases.  Of itself, it is not conclusive evidence for an acoustic source
in all cases.

> >I've read that visitors to homes effected by the hum can be (or have
> >been) effected by proximity to the sufferer or the local environment.  I
> >doubt that this is an acoustic phenomena.  Is this at all common in this
> >field?
> 
> I dont know what you mean? A hummer who visits another hummers home can
> hear the hum there.

In the archives, I've found reports that vistors (not described as being
hum hearers) appear to be effected (in subjective ways?) by proximity to
a hum sufferer, or their environment.

Based on prior work, this miht be taken as suggestive of a bioelectric
phenomena, possibly a second order effect though.

> >If we find such EEG data from two hummers in the same geographic area,
> >and the EEG extracted hum frequancies differ, we might conclude that the
> >hum is produced within the subject, rather than detected by the
> >subject.
 
> I have previously measured EEG data on persons, but I see little reason to
> do this experiment. From my viewpoint we already have an excellent and
> proven method of recording the hum (with a microphone) so it should be a
> waste of time to mess around with EEGs.

Where is your EEG data, and conclusions drawn from this data?  Was there
any evidence of cross hemisphearic neural entrainment present? (which
could also result from acoustic sources  must admit) If so, at what
frequancies, etc?

If micrpohones are such a reliable method of recording the hum, why have
many attempts faild, to the point where many web pages and other
referances on this subject describe teh hum as being undetectable with
microphones in general?

Even Bill's web page has a referance to this.

I think at this point we have reached far beyond the actual experimental
data available, which means that we are probably far from the truth of
the matter!

Clearly there is a very great deal of data needed before we can proceed
to any claims of understanding this phenomena.  It is also clear that
some cases are indeed acoustic in origin, but it is also clear that
acoustic sources do not easly fit some of the available data well.

The question remains, is the hum acoustic, or somethign else.  All we
really appear to know at this point is that each case has it's own
answer to this question.

A very interesting situation we have here!

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 08:13:26 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA09405; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:54:33 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 07:54:33 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <331AAE04.7622@tiac.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 10:55:00 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Funny coincidence?
References: <199703022101.WAA22188@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"H3O8r.0.uI2.uGl6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/631
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:

<snip>

> I doubt it has much to do with the hum. The only evidence for that is
> Sara's anonymous scientist, who thought the navy submarine communication
> system might be responsible for some hum. He probably told Sara a good deal
> more that she told us, so Sara probably has better evidence for the
> military causing some hum, than we have.

There are also reports from a list member that describes hum like
phenomena assiciated with microwave experimentation!   We should also
note the problems the Navy has had with high levels of EM exposure on
crew menbers, and their inability to focus concentration under excessive
exposure.

Has Sara left the list?

> I have little doubt that the military has technology that can cause hum,
> but I think the percentage of hum cases caused by the military is overrated
> by many.
> 
> Bearden and other sources talk about psychotronic weapons. If we are to
> believe in them, they exist and are currently being used for purposes we
> dont know about. If so, I think we are better off studying and learning
> about scalar technology and such, otherwise we might end up as victims.
> 
> I dont think such weapons usually create a hum experience.

You might look into Pressingers (sp?) work with weak magnetic fields
effects on human perception.

> But whether scalar waves have any relevance to hum or not, it may be
> relevant to study them.

Agreed!

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 08:48:42 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA12315; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 08:25:27 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 08:25:27 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <331AB53F.4ABE@tiac.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 11:25:51 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
References: <199703031351.NAA20073@mail.enterprise.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"z_TbT.0.H03.qjl6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/632
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Ron Hill wrote:
> 
> Anders wrote in reply to Bob S.
> >
> > I have previously measured EEG data on persons, but I see little reason to
> > do this experiment. From my viewpoint we already have an excellent and
> > proven method of recording the hum (with a microphone) so it should be a
> > waste of time to mess around with EEGs.
> 
> I must disagree here, Do we know what the result is on a persons
> brain wave pattern if they experience a signal of the same, or close
> frequency, as their alpha, beta, brain waves? Does beating occur?
> Using EEG testing might reveal interesting results.
> (Note that I have not made any distinction between acoustic,
> electromagnetic or other types of signal).
> In this field I would not regard any avenues of research as a waste
> of time. Mind you that's just my opinion!
> 
> Regards,
> Ronald.

Excellent questions Rondald,

There are a number of phenomena that are indeed common to all humans in
reaction to stimuli (acoustic, photic, or other) in the range of
frequancies commonly found in the EEG.

This effect is described as the frequancy following phenomena, and it's
commonly applied in so called 'Mind Machines" which often use a
combination of lights and specally phased sounds to produce (at times
profound) changes in neural activity.

This same frequancy following effect is also at work in the effects of a
flickering fire and rythmic chanting common to many primitive
societies.  It is also commonly used to mke people more suggestive, and
receptive to ideas.  This is often used in many forms of presentations
where the goal is to produce a specific behavior in the effected people. 

Often this effect is used (at times, unknowingly) by motivational
speakers, as well as televangelists and the like.

How these signals are presented to the subjects is not nearly as
importnat as their frequancy, phase and modulations are.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 08:48:50 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA12798; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 08:29:29 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 08:29:29 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <331AB67D.6DB0@tiac.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 11:31:09 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Nullifying hum
References: <199703031441.PAA26638@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"sZxgR3.0.v73.dnl6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/633
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:

> If you are referring to the EEG measurements, I did those long before
> becoming interested in hum. I was interested in biofeedback then, and there
> was an article in Popular Electronics or some such magazine "Build your own
> EEG monitor" or so. As I found out there were several design-errors in the
> published design. Another guy committed suicide after having tested the
> biofeedback unit, so I guess you could say that the unit didnt prove to be
> much of a success.
> 
> Regards, Anders

Anders,

If this is the case, how on Earth can you possibly suggest that EEG data
is unworthy of further study in relation to the hum phenomena?

It would appear that you did not analize the EEG data for hum
components, as you were not researching the hum at that time.  At this
rate, we are due for another rash of scientology postings!!!

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 09:25:06 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA15682; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 09:02:32 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 09:02:32 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703031707.RAA14810@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:02:15 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"_8Cjq.0.yq3.dGm6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/635
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Bob Shannon in a reply to Anders said:

> The question remains, is the hum acoustic, or somethign else.  All we
> really appear to know at this point is that each case has it's own
> answer to this question.
> 
> A very interesting situation we have here!
> 
Two or three weeks ago our regional BBC television service 
investigated a house in Laxfield (Essex, UK) where a woman had 
complained that she was being driven crazy by the hum. The BBC 
sent along their engineers with first class recording equipment and 
made recordings throughout the house. The engineers could not hear 
anything themselves. The recordings were sent off to Britain's 
leading noise research laboratory for their analysis. Last week it 
was revealed that the Noise Research Laboratory found nothing on 
the recordings to account for the hum.

Acoustic? It would seem not to be in this case.

(I have contacted the BBC and given them details of the Taos list and 
a range of information that has been posted here - and they have 
promised to have a program devoted to the hum, at a future date.)

Regards,
Ronald.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 10:07:24 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA12172; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 09:02:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 09:02:36 -0800
Message-Id: <199703031707.RAA14801@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:02:16 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Solar Radiation etc.
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"TQnNE2.0.2-2.hGm6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/634
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Following up Judy Karleen Cole's observations on the hum appearing to 
change during periods of solar activity.

This would point the finger at a source of RF energy as being 
implicated in the hum, or part of it. 
Possibilities will include satellite transmissions, ionospheric 
heaters, over-the-horizon radar and other Early Warning systems and 
the whole range of military transmissions. 
I cannot (with respect to Ander's views) see how an acoustic source 
would be affected by solar flares, ion layer disturbances or gamma 
ray storms.

Regards,
Ronald.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 11:00:04 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA26177; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 10:45:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 10:45:38 -0800
Message-Id: <199703031850.SAA00275@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 18:45:15 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Taos Hum disappeared??
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"mhMz01.0.yO6.Hnn6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/636
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

A rather surprising message, reposted here as it seems very 
relevant to us.

Regards,
Ronald.
======================================================
Subject:       Taos Hum less active??  Was Re: Skywatch: Taos "Hum" 

In a message dated 97-03-01 22:30:51 EST, you write: 
<< May I hazard a guess about the origin of the Taos humming sound? 
 Could it be from underground drilling, as underground bases or
 passageways are built or expanded?  >>

  I couple of items re the Taos Hum.  Presented only in the spirit of
information, not advocating belief or disbelief in the storys I heard.
  I got interested in the Hum and called down into the Taos area,
  talking to the Newspaper folks, and some of the folks who lived
  down their. 
 The story seems to be nobody is hearing it anymore (possible that
  nobody is reporting it to) and the people who originally started
  the Taos Hum story had moved out of the area some where in
  Baja area.  Apparently they are now claiming that they are
  "hearing" the hum in Baja or where ever they are.
  I talked to the crew at Los Alamos Labs who went down and
 investigated the Hum with highly technical equipment. 
 They said that they also registered the Hum, but could not locate
 a source for it.  
 Last I heard for all intents and purposes this story is currently
 in the "less active" file.

(reposted from Skywatch Int.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 11:18:00 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA26399; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 10:47:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 10:47:39 -0800
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 10:47:28 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum recording, etc...
In-Reply-To: <199703030535.VAA00048@mail.reninet.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95q.970303104551.15759B-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"MY6xE.0.PS6.9pn6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/637
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sun, 2 Mar 1997, Michael Theroux wrote:

> Hi Bill,
> 
> My name is Michael Theroux from Borderland Sciences. I'm attaching a .wav
> file of the HUM recorded in my area (Bayside, CA). This is an unfiltered,
> raw recording of the HUM using a trancducer/resonant pipe chamber
> configuration (which I can go into in greater detail later). 

This is now linked to the hum page,
http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/hum/hum.html

It's a big file, I'm getting low on room, so I can only leave it here a
few weeks.  Micheal, do you have space on borderlands.com to store this
file more permanently?

.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,.............................
William Beaty  voice:206-781-3320   bbs:206-789-0775    cserv:71241,3623
EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer        http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/
Seattle, WA 98117  billb@eskimo.com           SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 11:30:36 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA03891; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 11:10:12 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 11:10:12 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <331ADC1D.5E38@tiac.net>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 14:11:41 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
References: <199703031707.RAA14810@mail.enterprise.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"XTEai.0.by.G8o6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/638
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Ron Hill wrote:
 
> Bob Shannon in a reply to Anders said:
> 
> > The question remains, is the hum acoustic, or somethign else.  All we
> > really appear to know at this point is that each case has it's own
> > answer to this question.
> >
> > A very interesting situation we have here!
> >
> Two or three weeks ago our regional BBC television service
> investigated a house in Laxfield (Essex, UK) where a woman had
> complained that she was being driven crazy by the hum. The BBC
> sent along their engineers with first class recording equipment and
> made recordings throughout the house. The engineers could not hear
> anything themselves. The recordings were sent off to Britain's
> leading noise research laboratory for their analysis. Last week it
> was revealed that the Noise Research Laboratory found nothing on
> the recordings to account for the hum.
> 
> Acoustic? It would seem not to be in this case.

Very interesting.

I think that this, and some of the data already covered on this list
strongly suggests that acustic energy alone is not the cause of all hum
cases.

What organizations exist (professional or otherwise) that presue hum
related research?  Is there any form of centeral clearing house for hum
research and / or data?

I would be very interested in seeing some spectral data on hum-hearer
(is there a better term?) EEGs, especially if data from both hemispheres
is present.

The equipment to collect EEG data is actually less expensive than many
might suspect. A rather simple, but very effective digital EEG device is
avaialble from Circuit Cellar Inc, known as the HAL-4.  

This simple device collects EEG signals from four points, using
differential probes, and a common ground.  The EEG data is digitized,
and output through a standard RS-232 serial port, where it can be stored
on a PC.  This kit is available for less than most 'decent' audio
recorders, and nearly all really good audio recorders.

If neural entrainment is present, more detailed EEG investigations may
be helpful to located what areas of the brain are being effected.  This
method may shed some light on how the signal is entering and effecting
the brain.  If University level research is being done (Ha!) we might
wish to persue PET (Positron Emission Tomography) scans that graphically
depict neural activity.

Assuming entrainment is induced, locating the most effected regions of
the brain might help in finding the method by which the signal enters
the subject.  Should the auditory areas of the brain show markedly
higher levels of entrainment than others, we might suspect that acoustic
energy is implicated, etc.  This method however is not proof that the
entrainment is being caused by one sensory system in particular however,
but it's a start.

I think that the idea of checking for matches between geomagnetic field
activity and subjective hum activity reports is also a very god aproach
to take.  It is indeed very true that the there are relationships beteen
geomagnetic and bioelectric fields.  Further, there is some data that
suggests that the geomagnetic and bioelectric fields serve some role in
the subconscious exchange of information between people (and possibly
other species such as plants).

I have read (somewhere, in the archives?) that attempts to record the
hum with VLF electrostatic receivers (such as the McGreevy designs) has
not been sucessful, but that there has been some sucess with geomagnetic
coils.  This area should also be investigated throughly, in parallel
with the EEG approach.

The interaction between the geomagnetic and ambient electrostatic fields
and humans can be very complex, especially where there is scalar content
present.

Readers (and hum hearers who suffer concentration problems due to the
hum) would do well to read Dick Sutphen's "The Battle for Your Mind"
(published on the web) for an overview of neural entrainment as it
relates to altering human behavior. Neural entrainment itself is fairly
well covered in the book Megabrain, and it's second release Megabrain
Power.  Referances to scalar induced entrainment, as well as some of the
work by Pressinger (sp?) are covered here as well.

On  historical note, is it not true that the hum only became newsworthy
AFTER the number of reports became significant, rather than the number
of hum reports increased after the hum became newsworthy?

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 12:27:28 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA11591; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 12:11:18 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 12:11:18 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 12:11:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703032011.MAA20339@spider.innercite.com>
X-Sender: judycole@spider.lloyd.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com, taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: judycole@spider.lloyd.com (Judy Karleen-Cole)
Subject: Re: Taos Hum disappeared??
Resent-Message-ID: <"94DC32.0.2r2.b1p6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/639
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 06:45 PM 3/3/97 +0000, Ron wrote:
>A rather surprising message, reposted here as it seems very 
>relevant to us.

<snip>

> The story seems to be nobody is hearing it anymore (possible that
>  nobody is reporting it to) and the people who originally started
>  the Taos Hum story had moved out of the area

Two reactions, Ron... 1) I wish!   2) Maybe I should move to Taos?  Sorry,
don't mind me...I'm just having a bad "hum" day!

Judy


Judy K
El Dorado, CA   
38.663N-120.872W
judycole@spider.lloyd.com

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 16:05:40 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA06021; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 15:39:15 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 15:39:15 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <331B7433.7F17@gramercy.ios.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 17:00:35 -0800
From: jbwebb <jbwebb@gramercy.ios.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
CC: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
References: <199703030207.SAA23066@spider.innercite.com> <331A17FD.372F@ix.netcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"H-n4W1.0._T1.Y4s6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/640
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

billjaco@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> 
> Judy Karleen-Cole wrote:

> > I still cannot explain why the hum was intermittent for the first couple of
> > years I heard it, then was absent for a long spell between August 15 and
> > October ??, 1995;
> 
> Maybe your contacts can help look at the launch schedules for NASA over
> this 1995 period?

MY hum was silent for much of 1996.  How would this correlate with NASA 
and Judy's silence?  BTW HUM REPORT:  Houston - very loud every night.  
Too busy in day to notice, but when I stop to listen, it is there.

Take care.
Joni Webb

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 16:24:50 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA08235; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:00:55 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:00:55 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 09:47:23 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Hum: cars and rays
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970304144723.28c73588@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"eN0um3.0.O02.qOs6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/641
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:19 PM 3/03/97 +0100, you wrote:
>>Anders: Just a quick recap:
>>I sent the text about being tracked while in the car. The signal increases
>>4-5 times while in the vehical. I hear it when I stop at traffic lights 
>>etc.
>>It then stops almost dead when I step away from the vehical allot of times
>>almost 10-20 meters away before it stops. They haven't fine tune their
>>computer program enough just yet. ;)
>
>It shouldnt be impossible (but maybe improbable) for the car to have an 
>acoustic resonance at 8-20 Hz. That might offer an acoustic explanation, 
>though I think it may be a somewhat improbable explanation. 
>
>More probable: the car might emit a signal (acoustic or something else) 
>which added to an external acoustic noise, gave a result which was more 
>than a simple sum of the two signals. When you add two acoustic signals the 
>sum is generally not a simple sum. As an example, two acoustic signals (at 
>different frequencies) which are each just below the hearing threshold when 
>combined may give a sound which is above the hearing threshold, and a 
>nuisance. If your car emits any kind of sound, this sound may "lift" a 
>just-below-threshold Hum to an above threshold Hum. This is definitely 
>possible with acoustic signals. It might also be possible if your car was 
>emitting an EM or perhaps a scalar signal.

>A quick question: have you searched the car for radio transponders? Both 
>the police here and in England, and probably also elsewhere, sometimes 
>secretly place radio transponders under cars to be able to keep track of 
>the driver.  
>Similar technology is being used commercially. Recently all taxis in the 
>capital here were fitted with transponders, which communicate with 
>satellites. There are other examples (lorries, expensive cars, and so on). 
>
>Regards, Anders

Yes I have thought of this ... But when I get out of taxies and other
peoples cars it is exactly the same experience, there is no difference. 
You can't tell me they are all tracked ?
It is becoming quite normal. What I found the other day was: when I stopped
my car the usual hum wasn't there. I found this odd as my mind was use to
hearing it every time I leave the vehicle. The human body is an amazing
piece of architecture: it has the ability to adapt to the most hostile
environments. 
I don't know about the tracking abilities with the other 4 people I know of
locally who have the same HUM as I do. I have not asked them about this. I
assume it is exactly the same, as every other thing we spoke about is identical.

One thing I found just recent... The more I speak out openly the more people
in conventional high places are starting to take notice. It appears my hum is
getting less and less. I may have help them fine tune there EVIL link better I
suspect. Which is exactly what they want... Oh yeah! while we are helping them
I may as well tell you about the thumps on my roof at inexplicable times.
Right this minute I just had a thump on my roof. It is over cast here we
have had a slight drizzle of rain here for about the last 20-30 minutes at a
guest,
and there is no wind or very very slight wind. and yes I have been over my
roof looking for loose sheets of iron. This happens in the middle of the
night or day at inexplicable times this thump will be heard from my roof. I
put it to one side as been the iron expanding in the sun. But this happens
at very early hours in the morning and during rainy days : like just this
minute. I believe this thump may be cause by a heating of a beam on the
iron????. But this is only conjecture. I would also like to share with
people about objects directly behind my head that also make audible noises. 

I will try to explain:
When I'm sitting at my computer and the hum starts to pickup. By the way they
never turn it up in one go, they always turn it up slowly so you don't notice
it. They try to make you believe it is your own stress level or something like
that. If they don't use hum, they will use the high pitch signal. I think it
depends on the atmospheric conditions and the available local noise
interference. Anyway, when I'm sitting at my computer and the hum starts to
pickup, there are objects behind my visual cortex region at the back of my
head that make a thump noise after a certain period into the hum increase.
No I'm not consciously psychic or anything like that. Also when the hum is
up and I go near a normal broadcast radio, I will flatten the radio with
static and white noise: to degree where you will not be able to listen to
the radio. This doesn't happen to all radio's; it does happen with two
radios that I use. It appears the signal rejection is weak in these radios;
they need re-aligning, but nether the less it only happens when I walk near
them, or put my hand on the plastic case.

Remind me to tell you about all the FBT in my computers , televsions and CRO
that have
developed strange behaviour. One of my better computer monitors had the FBT
totally wiped out. I wonder if this is the reason why they no longer shield
computer monitors with aluminum from RF, and why they are not made out of
metal like the computer cases ? 
One of the lectures at my local university explains how to build remoted
computer monitoring equipment... big deal.

More trivia at a later time. 


-G.D.Mutch

=IIII== E-mail: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au ===================================IIII=
  II     _--_|\               *   G.D.&C.M.Mutch |-oo[ New-Age Pioneer ]oo- II
  ||    /    |_\           *    * Rockhampton.   | Alternative : Energy,    ||
  ||    \_.--._/               .  Queensland.    | Health, Wealth ,Personal ||
  II  Great/ s@uthern/ land/  *   Australia.     | & Social Values Today.   II
=IIII====================================================By=Ascii=Arts=====IIII=
Current member of Amnesty International. 
Have the guts to stand UP and say "NO!" to the current use of Bio-telemetry.


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 16:43:17 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA16747; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:25:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:25:49 -0800
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 16:26:22 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
Message-Id: <199703040026.QAA00016@mail.reninet.com>
X-Sender: theroux@borderlands.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: Michael Theroux <theroux@borderlands.com>
Subject: Hum Recordings
Resent-Message-ID: <"7jLrB2.0.W54.Bms6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/642
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hello All,

I've recently uploaded an actual recording of the HUM heard from my local
area (Bayside, CA) to the Taos Hum website. It will also be added to
Borderlands website (http://www.borderlands.com) soon. If you would like to
hear it, I would suggest downloading it as it is quite large (16bit mono
.wav file, 20 secs. duration) at about 1.2 megs. It is also best listened to
with a good set of headphones, or over a stereo system with good bass response.
        This segment is from a larger recording made between the hours of 1
and 2 AM on January 15th, 1997. I have several recordings of it, but this
recording session is the best and most characteristic of the atempic
"deiseling" HUM. Frequency analysis shows peaks from around 21cps (cycles
per second) to 34cps. The spectrogram analysis clearly displays the atempic
rhythmic undulations of the HUM.
        The recording apparatus consists of a tuned bass-reflex port --
stopped similar to a organ diapason for tuning puposes, and to ensure a
deficiency of upper partials. Attached to this port is a suction cup of a
modified telephone pickup coil. A newer tuned-port bass reflex enclosure is
being tested, but lately there has been no occurence of the HUM. A 10ft.
cable was run from the trancducer to the recording machine which is a simple
portable DC powered deck capable of running at different tape speeds. Tuning
of the port was arrived at by formula and empirical experience. The pickup
coil is modified with two neodymium-iron-boron magnets and a second coil
attached to the rear of the unit.
        The system was initially amplified in real time and different tape
speeds were used to ensure the recording was picking up the HUM and not
artifact from the recording apparatus. The sound on the recording is exactly
as experienced. Images of the frequency analysis and spectrogram will be
uploaded to the Borderlands website later this week.
        

===================================================
Michael Theroux                                    
Director - Borderland Sciences Research Foundation   
theroux@borderlands.com                             
http://www.borderlands.com                          
Ph: 707.825.7733 Fax: 707.825.7779  
===================================================

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 16:43:45 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA10861; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:26:03 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:26:03 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 10:13:11 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970304151311.28c7f20e@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"UuxSz2.0.ef2.Qms6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/643
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 05:02 PM 3/03/97 +0000, you wrote:
>Bob Shannon in a reply to Anders said:
>
>> The question remains, is the hum acoustic, or somethign else.  All we
>> really appear to know at this point is that each case has it's own
>> answer to this question.
>> 
>> A very interesting situation we have here!
>> 
>Two or three weeks ago our regional BBC television service 
>investigated a house in Laxfield (Essex, UK) where a woman had 
>complained that she was being driven crazy by the hum. The BBC 
>sent along their engineers with first class recording equipment and 
>made recordings throughout the house. The engineers could not hear 
>anything themselves. The recordings were sent off to Britain's 
>leading noise research laboratory for their analysis. Last week it 
>was revealed that the Noise Research Laboratory found nothing on 
>the recordings to account for the hum.
>
>Acoustic? It would seem not to be in this case.
>
>(I have contacted the BBC and given them details of the Taos list and 
>a range of information that has been posted here - and they have 
>promised to have a program devoted to the hum, at a future date.)
>
>Regards,
>Ronald.

Yes what would be the best way of removing all implications that point the
finger directly to the government /military ?
Give the Hum problem to a big heap of inocent people that have nothing to do
with
the military. That would remove the spot light totally off the govt./military.  
Broadcast it in the press that all the old grannies have developed a new from of
alzymers... That would be that case closed...  No more point the finger.

-Gm

=IIII== E-mail: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au ===================================IIII=
  II     _--_|\               *   G.D.&C.M.Mutch |-oo[ New-Age Pioneer ]oo- II
  ||    /    |_\           *    * Rockhampton.   | Alternative : Energy,    ||
  ||    \_.--._/               .  Queensland.    | Health, Wealth ,Personal ||
  II  Great/ s@uthern/ land/  *   Australia.     | & Social Values Today.   II
=IIII====================================================By=Ascii=Arts=====IIII=
Current member of Amnesty International. 
Have the guts to stand UP and say "NO!" to the current use of Bio-telemetry.


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 17:00:51 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA19567; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:46:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:46:13 -0800
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:45:09 -0800 (PST)
From: T N <isotope@itsa.ucsf.edu>
Reply-To: T N <isotope@itsa.ucsf.edu>
To: TaosHum List <taoshum-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Funny coincidence?
In-Reply-To: <331AAE04.7622@tiac.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.A41.3.95.970303160031.63388A-100000@itsa.ucsf.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"A2FLl.0.cn4.K3t6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/644
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Mon, 3 Mar 1997, Bob Shannon wrote:

> 
> You might look into Pressingers (sp?) work with weak magnetic fields
> effects on human perception.
> 

Persinger, Michael references:

http://www.clas.ufl.edu/anthro/noetics/persinger.html

Most of his articles are found in _Perceptual and Motor Skills_.  His TS
theory mainly describes a very loose correlation between seismic activity
and cases of reported sightings of UFOs.  There is still no working theory
of the mechanism of EM affecting neurophysiology to such an extent that it
causes one to see UFOs or hallucinate.


Sound can be perceived by stimulating any part of the auditory pathway.
We can send an acoustic signal that gets transduced during the 
*conductory* phase of hearing (i.e. everything from the air to the outer
ear to the middle ear).  Once the signal is mechanically felt by the hair
cells in the Organ of Corti, the signal continues on towards the auditory
cortex in the *neurosensory* phase of hearing.  There is little evidence
that electromagnetic radiation can cause neural cells to be stimulated
(unless of course they are photoreceptive cells such as those in the  
retina).   


Although a bit different from the subject of EM and auditory stimulation,
take a look at the work of David Rudiak on magnetic neural stimulation (he
mainly deals with magnetostimulation of vision and basically concludes
that it is extremely difficult to cause people to see anything with the
use of EM).

Marg, E. and Rudiak, D.   Phosphenes induced by magnetic stimulation 
over occipital brain:  description and probable site of stimulation.  
Optom. Vis. Science, 1994;  71: 301-11.  (Describes type of induced 
phosophenes and mechanism of induction)

Rudiak, D. and Marg, E.  Finding the depth of magnetic brain 
stimulation:  a revaluation.  EEG and Clin. Neurophys., 1994, 5: 358-71 
(Some minor discussion of visual magnetic stimulation and where it 
arises in the occipital cortex area)    .

Marg, E.  Magnetostimulation of vision:  direct noninvasive stimulation 
of the retina and visual brain.  Optom. Vis. Science, 1991; 68:  427-40.  
(Historical review of magnetic stimulation of the visual system)

Dr. Rudiak states:

"Most papers, however, on the applications of neuromagnetic stimulators 
to the study of vision are on SUPPRESSION of visual response, not 
stimulation.  It's damnably hard to get people to see even simple 
flashes of light.  Forget about triggering complex, prolonged 
hallucinations."


Regards,
Thomas

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 17:07:40 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA19871; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:48:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 16:48:35 -0800
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 10:35:24 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: EMF Detector.
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: Taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970304153524.28c7ebd0@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"G2UK_2.0.Ps4.X5t6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/645
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


     Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Detector 
http://www.goldmine-elec.com/Weekspec.htm
                                         

 Now you can electronically see invisible electromagnetic fields with this
sensitive and sophisticated
 EMF detector. Remember when everyone was so concerned about the EMF
radiation emitted by
 power lines, TVs, computer monitors, etc.? Well this is a complete EMF
detector utilizing 3 SMD
 ICs and 10 bright LEDs that indicate relative strength of EMF energy.
Operates on one 9V battery
  (not included). As soon as you press the "on/off" button, the unit runs a
"self-test" by lighting all 10
 LEDs, then it resets itself and indicates the relative strength of EMF
energy by quantity and color of
 LEDs that light up. The weak EMF fields will start lighting the first four
green LEDs. Stronger fields
 start lighting up each red LED one at a time until maximum EMF intensity
(all 6 red LEDs and all 4
                              Green LEDs) light up.

 Size of unit is about 3 5/16'' x 2 3/8''. These are brand new and prime,
but without the outer plastic
   case.They were manufactured in 1995, and feature some of the latest in
portable relative EMF
 detection technology. We suspect that when the board was installed in the
case, the completed unit
 sold for between $80 and $100 retail. Now you can buy it for a fraction of
that price and make your
   own case (if you wish). We were amazed by the EMF energy emitted even
from a small laptop
                          computer within close proximity.

  These are prime, brand new circuit boards that were ready to be placed
into their attractive cases
 (which we don't have) for completion, however, we make no claim as to the
potential harm of EMF
 energy, nor do we know anything about this devices accuracy in indicating
EMF energy. You'll need
  to determine that for yourself. We have no data or schematics, but all you
need to do is connect a
                 9V battery and you're in business. Super Blowout Price!

G8317- 

Catalog price-$8.95

Web Special Price-$5.00


---------------------------------- insert
------------------------------------------
Haven't had a chance to get a look at this site... I'm a bit strapped for time.

-G.D.Mutch
=IIII== E-mail: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au ===================================IIII=
  II     _--_|\               *   G.D.&C.M.Mutch |-oo[ New-Age Pioneer ]oo- II
  ||    /    |_\           *    * Rockhampton.   | Alternative : Energy,    ||
  ||    \_.--._/               .  Queensland.    | Health, Wealth ,Personal ||
  II  Great/ s@uthern/ land/  *   Australia.     | & Social Values Today.   II
=IIII====================================================By=Ascii=Arts=====IIII=
Current member of Amnesty International. 
Have the guts to stand UP and say "NO!" to the current use of Bio-telemetry.


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 17:42:58 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA16794; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:23:54 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:23:54 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331B322D.56F@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 20:18:52 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
References: <2.2.16.19970304151311.28c7f20e@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"NZts-1.0.L64.ect6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/646
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

G.D.Mutch wrote:
> Give the Hum problem to a big heap of inocent people that have nothing to do
> with....


Sometimes the best ideas come from people 'out of the box' so to speak -
finger pointing is irrelevant until we have a better handle on what is
causing the (artificial) HUMs.Right now I personally welcome the BBC to
learn what they can, report what they learn in an objective way and
perhaps use their contacts to further the HUM research.

One idea I have not seen discussed here is the potential for frequency
hopping to account for the variations in HUM intensity.

Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 17:46:40 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA17795; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:31:27 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:31:27 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331B342B.5448@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 20:27:22 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: cars and rays
References: <2.2.16.19970304144723.28c73588@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"83WZX2.0.wL4.ijt6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/647
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

G.D.Mutch wrote:
> Also when the hum is up and I go near a normal broadcast radio, I will > flatten the radio with static and white noise: to degree where you 
> will not be able to listen to the radio. This doesn't happen to all 
> radio's; it does happen with two radios that I use. It appears the   
>signal rejection is weak in these radios; they need re-aligning, but 
>nether the less it only happens when I walk near them, or put my hand 
>on the plastic case.

G.D.,

We might have something to research here. AM or FM or some other BAND?
What vintage are the two radios - trasistorized? or older?  What happens
if you change the tuning while you hear the white noise?  What happens
if you are bare feet - or if you remove static charge from your person
first?  Are they AC or battery powered - do you have other radios nearby
that are never affected? Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 18:06:33 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA31292; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:54:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:54:13 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331B399F.37C0@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 20:50:39 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: cars and rays
References: <2.2.16.19970304144723.28c73588@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"YjaIA.0.te7.33u6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/649
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

G.D.Mutch wrote:
> >>It then stops almost dead when I step away from the vehical allot of >>>times almost 10-20 meters away before it stops. 

Anders writes:
>>>>It might also be possible if your car was
> >emitting an EM or perhaps a scalar signal.


Since you also hear lightning ( and other things as well) you may very
well be sensitive to waves from DC to1 MHz or so - the alternator whine
for instance is picked up by an unfiltered receiver up to about 20 feet
away - if you are that sensitive you are going to feel you are being
controlled whether intentional or not, right? Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 18:07:47 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA28821; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:42:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 17:42:59 -0800
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 11:29:24 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic or other?
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970304162924.0867fb88@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"3JeKd1.0.u17.Wut6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/648
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 05:00 PM 3/03/97 -0800, you wrote:
>billjaco@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>> 
>> Judy Karleen-Cole wrote:
>
>> > I still cannot explain why the hum was intermittent for the first couple of
>> > years I heard it, then was absent for a long spell between August 15 and
>> > October ??, 1995;
>> 
>> Maybe your contacts can help look at the launch schedules for NASA over
>> this 1995 period?
>
>MY hum was silent for much of 1996.  How would this correlate with NASA 
>and Judy's silence?  BTW HUM REPORT:  Houston - very loud every night.  
>Too busy in day to notice, but when I stop to listen, it is there.
>
>Take care.
>Joni Webb

My hum was at its asolute worst through 1996...
-GM

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 19:12:07 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA13832; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 18:53:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 18:53:06 -0800
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 12:39:19 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Hum: cars and rays
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Cc: Taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970304173919.086775a0@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"e4IMH.0.ZN3.Fwu6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/650
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 08:50 PM 3/03/97 +0000, you wrote:
>G.D.Mutch wrote:
>> >>It then stops almost dead when I step away from the vehical allot of
>>>times almost 10-20 meters away before it stops. 
>
>Anders writes:
>>>>>It might also be possible if your car was
>> >emitting an EM or perhaps a scalar signal.
>
>
>Since you also hear lightning ( and other things as well) you may very
>well be sensitive to waves from DC to1 MHz or so - the alternator whine
>for instance is picked up by an unfiltered receiver up to about 20 feet
>away - if you are that sensitive you are going to feel you are being
>controlled whether intentional or not, right? Bill J
>

Magnet inductance in a coil collapses at the speed of light(?), and some how
don't believe it would still be evident at 10-20 meters away from a stopped
vehicle. You are constantly thinking Bill, I can respect that.

-GM



From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 20:14:22 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA00623; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 20:03:07 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 20:03:07 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <331BB33C.6476@gramercy.ios.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 1997 21:29:32 -0800
From: jbwebb <jbwebb@gramercy.ios.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win16; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: 1996 hum
References: <2.2.16.19970304162924.0867fb88@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"btONF2.0.f9.wxv6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/651
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

G.D.Mutch wrote:
> 
> At 05:00 PM 3/03/97 -0800, you wrote:
> >billjaco@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> >>
> >> Judy Karleen-Cole wrote:
> >
> >> > I still cannot explain why the hum was intermittent for the first couple of
> >> > years I heard it, then was absent for a long spell between August 15 and
> >> > October ??, 1995;
> >>
> >> Maybe your contacts can help look at the launch schedules for NASA over
> >> this 1995 period?
> >
> >MY hum was silent for much of 1996.  How would this correlate with NASA
> >and Judy's silence?  BTW HUM REPORT:  Houston - very loud every night.
> >Too busy in day to notice, but when I stop to listen, it is there.
> >
> >Take care.
> >Joni Webb
> 
> My hum was at its asolute worst through 1996...
> -GM

Now how does one explain that?  GM where were you living in 1996?

Joni

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 21:34:43 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA14778; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 21:26:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 21:26:14 -0800
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 21:25:04 -0800 (PST)
From: T N <isotope@itsa.ucsf.edu>
To: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
cc: TaosHum List <taoshum-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Simple experiment
In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19970304170011.38d7b414@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.A41.3.95.970303211741.48340A-100000@itsa.ucsf.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"JC5sR.0.nc3.r9x6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/652
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Tue, 4 Mar 1997, G.D.Mutch wrote:

> At 04:45 PM 3/03/97 -0800, you wrote:
> >On Mon, 3 Mar 1997, Bob Shannon wrote:
> >
> >Dr. Rudiak states:
> >
> >"Most papers, however, on the applications of neuromagnetic stimulators 
> >to the study of vision are on SUPPRESSION of visual response, not 
> >stimulation.  It's damnably hard to get people to see even simple 
> >flashes of light.  Forget about triggering complex, prolonged 
> >hallucinations."
> 
> Dr Rudiak is wrong... It is very easy to get people to see flashes of light.
> Try this. Put two alligator clips on a nine volt battery. Place one clip 
> on a piece of metal(tin) about 25x25mm square dimensions not critical.
> Place the spare alligator clip in your mouth and place the clip with the piece
> of tin on your third eye in the middle of you forehead. Close your eyes
> and repeatedly touch the tin off and on the middle of your forehead. You
> will see flashes of light without any effort at all. 
> 
> In our experiment we use a square wave from a function generator at 100hz -
> 30khz and amplified it 10volts at around one amp. Which left about 66ma
> across the person in the test.  
> 
> Yes I'm expecting all the usual warnings and flames that will accompany this
> post.
> I've heard most of them before. Like the mercury fillings. The unknown factor.
> The stimulus of the optic nerve.(which is the truth I might add). 
> 
> The point I make is that you can stimulate light into you visual cortex via
> an electrical or electromagnetic stimuli. How this is done is obvious. I
> just wish
> to show that it can be done really easily.
> 
> -G.D.Mutch
>

Hello GMutch,

Nothing was said about electrically stimulating tissues or cells.  The
only contention made was that the visual cortex was difficult to
stimulate using only EM *radiation* or magnetic fields.  It is obvious
that neural tissue communicates signals electrically.

Regards,
Thomas

p.s. No flames intended.


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 22:20:54 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA21253; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 22:12:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 22:12:03 -0800
From: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 16:16:13 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
Subject: Re: 1996 hum
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <01IG3ZXMQO360001HS@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"h4jUp1.0._B5.oqx6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/653
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>> 
>> My hum was at its absolute worst through 1996...
>> -GM
>
>Now how does one explain that?  GM where were you living in 1996?
>
>Joni
>
I'm sorry, did I miss something here ???
-GM

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar  3 23:57:14 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA31930; Mon, 3 Mar 1997 23:44:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 1997 23:44:24 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331B8BBC.76EA@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 02:41:00 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: 1996 hum
References: <01IG3ZXMQO360001HS@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"kAFmc2.0.mo7.MBz6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/654
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au wrote:
> 
> >>
> >> My hum was at its absolute worst through 1996...
> >> -GM
> >
> >Now how does one explain that?  GM where were you living in 1996?
> >
> >Joni
> >
> I'm sorry, did I miss something here ???
> -GM


I think we are trying to correlate to an artificial HUM experience by
date and geographic region - I brought up the satelite launch question
to stimulate the potentiality of a geostationary origin for the HUM
carrier and the possibility of the cariers generator needing maintenance
etc. bj

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 00:30:51 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA02686; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 00:22:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 00:22:03 -0800
Message-Id: <199703040821.JAA24218@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 09:16:00 CET
Subject: Mutchg's boadcast radio
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"wuRr21.0.uf.gkz6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/655
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

G.D.Mutch wrote:
> Also when the hum is up and I go near a normal broadcast radio, I will > 
flatt
en the radio with static and white noise: to degree where you
> will not be able to listen to the radio. This doesn't happen to all
> radio's; it does happen with two radios that I use. It appears the
>signal rejection is weak in these radios; they need re-aligning, but
>nether the less it only happens when I walk near them, or put my hand
>on the plastic case.

You ought to make a systematic observation of the phenomenon.
Approach the radio three times a day a write down date,time,hum strength on 
a scale 0-5, and radio static on a scale 0-5. 

If you can really establish a reliable connection between hum and radio 
static, there might be a possibility of gething further along that road.

Regards,

Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 00:50:13 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA24052; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 00:41:41 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 00:41:41 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703040841.JAA34452@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 09:19:00 CET
Subject: BBC recording
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"_gwqD.0.lt5.21-6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/656
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>Two or three weeks ago our regional BBC television service
>investigated a house in Laxfield (Essex, UK) where a woman had
>complained that she was being driven crazy by the hum. The BBC
>sent along their engineers with first class recording equipment and
>made recordings throughout the house. The engineers could not hear
>anything themselves. The recordings were sent off to Britain's
>leading noise research laboratory for their analysis. Last week it
>was revealed that the Noise Research Laboratory found nothing on
>the recordings to account for the hum.

You cannot conclude anything reliably from this.

We need to see a report from the engineers detailing equipment used, 
methods used (including calibration method), frequency band looked at, and 
actual spectrograms.

Can you get hold of this information?

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 01:10:56 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA25125; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 01:01:32 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 01:01:32 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703040901.KAA46958@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 09:49:00 CET
Subject: Hum: acoustic or something else
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"DIYe92.0.W86.hJ-6p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/657
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


>I have an email from a list member who hears the hum, but who's hearing
>tests show that his hearing in not nearly as sensitive (at both low and
>high frequancies) as that of his wife, who cannot hear the hum.

>How then can we claim that it is possible that "all hum COULD" be
>acostic in origin?

I dont think one say that a person who is "not nearly as sensitive (at both 
low and high frequancies" is necessarily not as sensitive at infrasound 
frequencies.

The threshold of hearing is very rarely measured at the relevant 
frequencies (5-19 Hz).

I can only remember one case mentioned here where a measurement was done in 
the relevant frequency range. Carlos told he had done a single measurement 
of a hearing threshold of a hummer at 10 Hz. This was not mentioned in the 
report I got from the UNM. I dont think Carlos told us the result of the 
measurement either. And the method used was questionable in two ways.

I therefore find it unlikely that the list member you mention has actually 
had the hearing tested at the frequency range 5-9 Hz. I dont doubt that 
he/she has had his/her hearing tested at a low frequency. 100 Hz is a low 
frequency, but it is hardly relevant for the hum.

The possibility therefore exists that if the hearing of the hummer was 
tested at the frequency range 5-19 Hz, it would be shown to be more 
sensitive to average.

Measurements of the threshold of hearing at infrasound frequencies of 
hummers are badly needed. 

Another angle to this is that measurements are usually done with sinus 
tones, and the hum is usually not a sinus tone. It is questionable how 
relevant a measurement with a sinus tone is, when we are dealing with 
non-sinus hum. As the effect of two added sounds is not a simple arithemtic 
addition, it is not quite simple to conclude from sinus measurements to hum 
sensitivity.


>Clearly when people with superior low frequancy hearing do not hear the
>hum, while others in the same home with inferior hearing do not, we must
>have an unusual acoustic situation, or a non-acoustic phenomena.

>Is there any reasonable explaination why the person with better low
>frequancy hearing does not perceive the hum in such a case (assuming
>it's acoustic)?

See above

>I think that many of the reports suggest that the hum is not acoustic,
>as in the case outlined above.  Do you have any possible acoustic
>

See above

>Also, if it's acoustic, why have so many attemts to record it failed?

We have explained this in some detail several times. I will shortly recap:

If people use the right equipment with a flat frequency response from 2 Hz 
- 5000 Hz, and a low noiselevel, and a spectrometer, they do find and 
record infrasound. But civil servants and noise technicians usually say 
something like "everybody knows that no-one can hear infrasound, so the 
infrasound detected cannot be the cause of the hum"

If people use ordinary sound equipment, broadcast sound equipment, BBC 
equipment, they are not using the right equipment. Most broadcast sound 
equipment contain filtering that filters away infrasound. A broadcast (BBC) 
microphone has a lower frequency cutoff which filters away infrasound and 
dampens all sound below 100 Hz or 50 Hz. A broadcast microphone 
preamplifier has a low frequency cutoff, and so on.

Regards, Anders


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 02:11:31 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA12380; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 02:01:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 02:01:56 -0800
Message-Id: <199703041001.LAA47014@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 10:43:00 CET
Subject: Hum: acoustic or not?
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"moYun1.0.J13.IC_6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/658
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>> * If you play the signal being recorded in real time to the hummer (with
>> inverse phase) you can nullify the hum experience. (This is strong proof 
>of
>> the hum being acoustic)

>This is dead wrong!

No, it is dead right! (Assuming the microphones react to acoustic sound, 
not to scalar waves, which is a reasonable assumption)

>Nullification of the perceived sound does not prove that the original
>perception was induced by sound, only that we are canceling the nerve
>impulses accosicated with the perception of that sound.

You are still missing the important point in the reasoning.

If there is infrasound present, which can be described as p = A*sin(w*t 
-k*x), and the hummer hears HUM.
And if you add the anti-sound panti =  A*sin(w*t -k*x + PI), and the hummer 
hears SILENCE, you have proven that the hummer is sensitive to the 
antisound A*sin(w*t -k*x + PI). The hummer must then also be sensitive to 
the original infrasound A*sin(w*t -k*x). Furthermore he must be able to 
hear this as hum.

The only way I can see to avoid this conclusion is to claim that the 
microphone was 
A. reacting to some unknown radiation causing the hum
B. Had the same sensitivity to this radiation (relative to the sensitivy to 
sound) as the human ear
C. HAd the same phase response to this radiation (relative to sound) as the 
human ear.

It would be extremely unlikely that all three conditions were fulfilled, as 
the sensor element in the microphone and in the human ear are very 
different in many ways. 

>Just haw do you maintain the 180 degree phase difference between the
>recording and the perceived sound in this testing?

That is a good question. The manufacturer of the measurement microphone 
documents the phase error of the microphone at all frequencies from 2 Hz to 
5000 Hz, or whatever the frequency range of the microphone is. This is 
something that sets a measurement microphone apart from a broadcast 
microphone.  The phase error is typically below 5 degrees. A phase error is 
likely to occur in the cheap (and expensive) headphones I used. The 
manufacturer of the headphones didnt specify the phase error. And I didnt 
measure it. It is probably much higher than the error in the microphone.

>Secondly, it's a matter of good science.  We do have at least one case
>where the person with poorer low frequancy hearing hears the hum while
>another person in that same home, with superior low frequancy hearing
>does not.

I have dealt with this in another message. It is not conclusive that the 
non-hummer had a superior infrasound frequency hearing.

However if it turns out that the non-hummer has a superior infrasound 
frequency hearing it DOES require a non-acoustic or an unusual acoustic 
explanation.

>I would also think that mine shafts, etc would have a larger effect on
>the perception of the hum if it was indeed an acoustic phenomena.  This
>does not appear to be the case, 

I have insufficient data on mineshafts to conclude anything from mine 
shafts stories. 



>1. What basis in fact do you have to support the claim that capacitive
>microphones are at all insensitive to scalar waves? 

Measurement microphones are designed to be sensitive to acoustic sound and 
nothing else. They have been tested, tested and tested again to see if they 
were sensitive to anything else than acoustics.

Scalar waves are basically an unknown radiation to me, I couldnt of course 
exclude the possibility that scalar waves might affect measurement 
microphones. 


>2. The claim that the signal produced by the microphone "is acoustic" in
>origin is what we are questioning, so stateing this as fact is improper
>here. There is no proof that this is the case, nor do I think you have any
>conclusive data that capacitve microphones are insensitive to scalar
>

I can agree to that. With a largely unknown factor like scalar waves almost 
anything is hypothetically possible.


>3. The sentance "If some scalar wave or other unknown radiation was
>causing a hum experience, the signal from the microphone would hardly be
>in antiphase to it, and therefore couldnt cancel it." is incorrect.
>If indeed the capacitive element of the microphone was acting in a
>similar manner as the capacitor in Hodowanec's detector, we would have
>an electromagnetic version of the causal signal.  This electromagnetic
>copy of the signal can be presented to the subject in phase, or out of
>phase.
>It is the phase of the presentation to the subject that is important.

Right

>What basis in fact supports your assumption that the signal produced (by
>what ever means) "would hardly be in antiphase to it, and therefore
>couldnt cancel it."?

None, really. That's why I used the word "hardly". With scalar waves (which 
I dont know from personal experience) I am dealing with probabilities. I 
find it improbable that a measurement microphoned designed to be sensitive 
to acoustic sound and insensitive to anything else, should

B. Have the same sensitivity to this radiation (relative to the sensitivy 
to sound) as the human ear
C. HAve the same phase response to this radiation (relative to sound) as 
the human ear.



>4. Anders wrote: "Furthermore, as the anti-hum is played with
approximately the same soundpressure as is present as real-hum in the
>air, the presence of acoustic real-hum which is hearable by the hummer
>is proved."

>This sentance deserves special attention!

>How do you know that the anti-hum is being played at the same sound
>pressure as the hum?  This assumes that the hum signal detected is
>acoustic, which is a point in question in this discussion.

Again, you are asking intelligent questions, which are not being asked by 
anyone else!

It has not actually been measured that the replayed hum is in exactly the 
same soundpressure as the original hum. I havent yet been able to measure 
exactly what comes out of the headphones. I need a dummy head, with 
measurement microphones instead of ears, and that I dont have.
TO adjust the volume in the headphones I have a switch with 18 settings. So 
I have 18 different sound volumes (including 0 or silence). It has been 
necessary by human ear to select the switch position giving approximately 
the same soundpressure in the earphones as near the microphone.


>This also ingores the fact that a real sound can mask the perception of
>sound not produced by acoustic means.  

I am not masking the sound, but nullifying it in the experiment. Masking is 
quite different from nullifying...


>It is suggestive that Anders may have a (legitimate) bias towards an
>acoustic explaination, as acoustic sources have been identified in some
>cases.  Of itself, it is not conclusive evidence for an acoustic source
>in all cases.

I agree, and I havent claimed that all cases was caused by acoustic 
sources. But I still havent seen much evidence of other sources..



>Where is your EEG data, and conclusions drawn from this data?  Was there
>any evidence of cross hemisphearic neural entrainment present? (which
>could also result from acoustic sources  must admit) If so, at what
>frequancies, etc?

I havent done EEG measurement in connection with Hum, only previously to 
being interested in Hum.

>If micrpohones are such a reliable method of recording the hum, why have
>many attempts faild, to the point where many web pages and other
>referances on this subject describe teh hum as being undetectable with
>microphones in general?

I have explained this in detail several times before, and today in another 
message.

>I think at this point we have reached far beyond the actual experimental
>data available, which means that we are probably far from the truth of
>the matter!

Yes, there really is much talk and little measurement.

>Clearly there is a very great deal of data needed before we can proceed
>to any claims of understanding this phenomena.  It is also clear that
>some cases are indeed acoustic in origin, but it is also clear that
>acoustic sources do not easly fit some of the available data well.

True

>The question remains, is the hum acoustic, or somethign else.  All we
>really appear to know at this point is that each case has it's own
>answer to this question.

OK

>A very interesting situation we have here!

Oh, yes. But also at times tiring and timeconsuming.

Regards, Anders


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 03:18:54 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA15331; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 02:55:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 02:55:13 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331BB86A.3902@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 05:51:37 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: acoustic or something else
References: <199703040901.KAA46958@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"TsD9q1.0.Ul3.G-_6p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/659
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:

> I dont think one say that a person who is "not nearly as sensitive (at both
> low and high frequancies" is necessarily not as sensitive at infrasound
> frequencies.


Anders is correct here - there were no tests run anywhere near
infrasound frequencies (~80-8K; its been many years ago)- I responded to
a question from a post questioning whether anyone here had been tested
and from a post suggesting that only the high end is lost - we have free
testing close by - the audiologists set-up shop with so many retirees so
I may take a retest soon.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 03:44:26 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA00957; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 03:20:46 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 03:20:46 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331BBE84.E12@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 06:17:39 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: acoustic or something else
References: <199703040901.KAA46958@sdn5.csc.dk> <331BB86A.3902@ix.netcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"ugjrF3.0.uE.DM07p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/661
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

billjaco@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> 
> I3683 wrote:
> 
> > I dont think one say that a person who is "not nearly as sensitive (at both
> > low and high frequancies" is necessarily not as sensitive at infrasound
> > frequencies.
> 
> Anders is correct here - there were no tests run anywhere near
> infrasound frequencies (~80-8K; its been many years ago)- I responded to
> a question from a post questioning whether anyone here had been tested
> and from a post suggesting that only the high end is lost - we have free
> testing close by - the audiologists set-up shop with so many retirees so
> I may take a retest soon.

Add - if they will test to much lower frequencies. bj

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 03:44:27 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA00885; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 03:18:19 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 03:18:19 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331BBDDB.1979@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 06:14:50 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: acoustic or not?
References: <199703041001.LAA47014@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"qJxGw3.0.mD.vJ07p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/660
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:
> 
> Again, you are asking intelligent questions, which are not being asked by
> anyone else!

You would not have the time to answer so called intelligent questions
from many sources, so why are you making the effort to keep pointing
this out?  You are in the role as the teacher now - correct?
I hope our teachers do not talk daily to our students as you do here.
Since I for one - and I am certain others as well (at least in their
mind), asked what equipment you used to play back the anti-hum we had
already crossed the bridge in our thinking of the very question that Bob
had asked- and which you made the above comment - so what is your point?
Please be specific and not rhetoric. Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 04:03:57 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA19488; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 03:41:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 03:41:51 -0800
Message-Id: <199703041141.MAA35380@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 12:25:00 CET
Subject: Hum acoustic or something else?
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"A4eLn3.0.Im4.-f07p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/662
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>I hope our teachers do not talk daily to our students as you do here.
I agree

>Please be specific and not rhetoric. Bill J
OK

Regards, Anders
'

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 04:19:02 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA19682; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 03:44:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 03:44:00 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331BC3F2.26F2@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 06:40:49 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: acoustic or something else
References: <199703040901.KAA46958@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"FitV42.0.Tp4._h07p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/663
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:
> 
> If people use ordinary sound equipment, broadcast sound equipment, BBC
> equipment, they are not using the right equipment. Most broadcast sound
> equipment contain filtering that filters away infrasound. A broadcast (BBC)
> microphone has a lower frequency cutoff which filters away infrasound and
> dampens all sound below 100 Hz or 50 Hz. A broadcast microphone
> preamplifier has a low frequency cutoff, and so on.
> 
> Regards, Anders

At the same time - to remove the assumption that the mics are not
picking up scalar (or other waves) than BBC or anyone else needs to
ensure that they have any available detectors when they make their
measurements - just to ensure they are infrasound and not something else
correct?  With all the dispute over infrasound or not infrasound seems
like the logical thing; to provide your well-trained research crew with
the right tools, correct?  And they should probably receive their
training from equipment manufacturers with no affiliation to the HUM so
as not to be biased one way or the other?  Certainly would want the BBC
to have less of a start than the UofNM ended up with from this list.bj

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 04:34:02 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA03836; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 04:21:38 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 04:21:38 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703041221.NAA44638@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 13:05:00 CET
Subject: Michael Theroux's recording
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"rGsbR.0.px.FF17p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/664
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Nice to se somebody recording the hum!

HEre are some questions which might clarify the setup for me:

>        The recording apparatus consists of a tuned bass-reflex port --
So you have a loudspeaker enclosure with a bass unit?
End in the enclosure a bass-reflex port, a tube, the length of which is 
tuned to the desired frequency?

>stopped similar to a organ diapason 
Does this mean that a moving piston has been fitted into the port?

>Attached to this port is a suction cup of a
>modified telephone pickup coil. 
Attached to the piston in the port?

> A 10ft.
>cable was run from the trancducer to the recording machine which is a 
>simple
>portable DC powered deck capable of running at different tape speeds. 
What is the frequency response of the tape deck?

>The pickup
>coil is modified with two neodymium-iron-boron magnets 
The magnets were stationary relative to the enclosure, and the coil was 
moving?
How were the two magnets positioned relative to the coils and relative to 
each other?

>and a second coil
>attached to the rear of the unit.
A coil was attached to each side of the piston?


Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 04:51:06 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA23996; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 04:41:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 04:41:43 -0800
Message-Id: <199703041241.NAA34544@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 13:20:00 CET
Subject: Hum, making recordings
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"w87TZ.0.ss5.6Y17p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/665
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>At the same time - to remove the assumption that the mics are not
>picking up scalar (or other waves) than BBC or anyone else needs to
>ensure that they have any available detectors when they make their
>measurements - just to ensure they are infrasound and not something else
>correct? 

This may be unrealistic, but it would be nice if they had
one of Bob Shannon's Barkhausen detectors, one of Bruce Cohen's proton 
magnetometers, and so on.

>And they should probably receive their
>training from equipment manufacturers with no affiliation to the HUM so
>as not to be biased one way or the other?  

Training is considered an important factor in measuring sound. 
There exist courses in making acoustic measurements, and you can get a 
diploma in this. There is a tendency that the government here doesnt trust 
anyone who havent got the diploma in using the government approved sound 
measurement procedures.

Using Bob Shannon's Barkhausen detector, it would be good to have training 
from Bob Shannon, certainly....

Am I detecting some irony or sarcasm here?

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 09:03:36 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA14383; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 08:22:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 08:22:00 -0800
Message-Id: <199703041621.RAA28030@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 17:17:00 CET
Subject: Questions on scalar technology
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"IkK3p3.0.eW3.dm47p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/666
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here are some questions for Bob, if he can find the time to answer them. I 
hope they are not too stupid.


>For a scalar transceiver, a design
>known as a field interference detector is the most practical design I am
>aware of for home experimentation.

>I have documentation on this design, but its unpublished at this time.
>It would take some time to collect this data and prepare it for release.

I and probably others would like to see the documentation on the field 
interference detector! Could you use any help in preparing this for 
release? 

Can you point text(s) describing the basic principles in field interference 
detectors? The term doesnt immediately identify a particular class of 
detectors to me.

>For the frequancy range of the hum phenomena, the Barkhausen effect
>design will cover any magnetostatic scalars, but we will need a VLF
>electrostatic detector as well, or a VLF field interference detector
>that responds to scalar E, B, and EM waves.

Do you have recommendations for VLF electrostatic detectors?
It is a long time since I have seen an electrostatic field strength meter. 
I can hardly remember a typical design.

>In a well made bifilar coil, there is nearly no magnetic field in the
>core what so ever, as vector superposition effects the whole of the
>field rather than acting only to confine it to the core.

Are you able to use a bifilar coil as a generator of sclar waves, and 
detect them with the BArkhausen detector?
Say, if I wind a bifiliar coil over a pencil with 1000 (bifilar) windings, 
and load it with 1 kHz sinus, 1 A AC eff, would I then be able to detect 
this from a distance of 10 meters with the Barkhausen detector?

>If complete EM waves undergo vector superposition and sum to zero, we
>will yeild a mre complex scalar EM wave.  This latter complex form is
>what Mr. Bearden most often describes.

I assume "mre" here means "more"?

>I've intended to release this (super-regen) design next.  A pair ot
>these would also be an excellent choice.

I (probably we) am looking forward to this.

>It is unclear that 'speed of the signal' is appropriate for scalar
>waves. Scalar waves do not appear to 'propogate' through space as EM
>waves do, and for this reason often do not apear to follow the square of
>the distance rule for sphearical wave front EM emitters.

If scalar waves do not propagate, have they any wave properties at all?
Do show show interference phenomena?
Do they show refraction?
Do they have a wavelength?

>If the wave does not propogate in the same manner as an EM wave, but
>produces action at a distance (as in the Aharnov-Bohm effects, both
>magnetic and electrostatic cases) then 'beamlike' or 'omnidirectional'
>propogation is not clearly applicable to scalar waves.

Has distance no effect on scalar waves?
Will they happily jump from the US to Iraq (or the other way), as easily as 
from one room to the next?

If distance in space has little effect on scalar waves, does it then have 
any meaning to try to measure the amount of scalars in a room?

>The degree of pair coupling between source and detector has more to do
>with the detected signal strenght than physical distance, or so it
>appears.

Pair coupling between elementary particles, or some other kind of pair?

Suppose we have two humans in a home. And a scalar source 5 miles away. 
Would the humans be similarly affected, or would the indifference to 
distance mean that it was impossible to predict the effect on the humans?


>  It's interesting to note that we quickly run
>out of dimensions for all our potential configurations in 3-space.

Yes, you sometimes get the impression that the idea of three space 
dimensions and one time dimension is becoming oldfashioned and limiting.

>>A Whittaker-scalar-magnetic-potential has occured in electromagnetic
>> speculations, but I havent seen it being used for anything practical. It
>> seemed to remain a speculation. It was a scalar magnetic potential field
>> (of a hypothetical nature). Perhaps it could be used for a mathematical
>> model of scalar waves...

>Not quite so fast, the magnetic potential appears in Maxwell's
>equations!

The magnetic vector potential does, but the 
Whittaker-scalar-magnetic-potential doesnt. As I remember it does occur in 
some equations that form an alternative to Maxwell's equations.

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 09:58:04 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA22187; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 09:10:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 09:10:58 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331C108B.1C1C@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 12:07:39 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum, making recordings
References: <199703041241.NAA34544@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"SO9SF1.0.cQ5.XU57p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/667
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:
> 
> Am I detecting some irony or sarcasm here?
> 
> Regards, Anders

No more than you intended I hope!  Regardless, if
this list will help humanize all of us just a little bit
more - who knows?! And meanwhile -I will try and ask more intelligent
questions if you will do your best to honestly answer them.

Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 10:16:50 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA28793; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 09:45:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 09:45:48 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331C17E7.7C3F@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 12:39:03 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Questions on scalar technology
References: <199703041621.RAA28030@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"-uplp1.0.g17.9_57p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/668
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:
> 
> I assume "mre" here means "more"?

Don't disappoint here Bob - expecting to see magnetically resonant
entropy. bj  (just some lightening up)

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 10:43:25 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA06902; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 10:28:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 10:28:55 -0800
Message-ID: <331C222C.2A2E@tiac.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 13:22:52 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Is the hum acoustic...
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"UZOPS.0.nh1.bd67p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/670
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:

<snip>

> I dont think one say that a person who is "not nearly as sensitive (at both
> low and high frequancies" is necessarily not as sensitive at infrasound
> frequencies.
> 
> The threshold of hearing is very rarely measured at the relevant
> frequencies (5-19 Hz).

<snip>

> I therefore find it unlikely that the list member you mention has actually
> had the hearing tested at the frequency range 5-9 Hz. I dont doubt that
> he/she has had his/her hearing tested at a low frequency. 100 Hz is a low
> frequency, but it is hardly relevant for the hum.
> 
> The possibility therefore exists that if the hearing of the hummer was
> tested at the frequency range 5-19 Hz, it would be shown to be more
> sensitive to average.

>From the data I have to date, hearing loss takes two basic forms.  There
can be specific frequcncies that are effected, and the more common form
where a range of frequancies is effected.  Normally, as the ear ages,
high frequancy response begins to drop off more dramatically than low
frequancy response (which is also effected).

While it is possible that the person with better (overall) low frequancy
response is less sensitive to a specific hum frequancy than the other
person with overall poorer low frequancy response, this appears highly
improbable in this case for several reasons.

First, the hum is not a single, pure frequancy, but has harmonic
content.  These harmonics and modulations would likley fall outside a
specific frequancy preception deficit.

It's imprortant to keep in mind that many receptors within the ear fire
for any given frequancy.  The ear discriminates these frequancies only
by the specific population of stimulated receptors, so specific
frequancy impairments are not highly frequancy specific, especially at
lower frequancies.  (This is part of the reason why we have such a hard
time getting a specific frequancy from the hum matching process.)

I would tend to find the idea that a specific, frequncy selective
hearing loss, that was not detected, prevents the person with the
generally better low frequancy hearing from perceiving the hum while the
other person does not, well,  rather trekkish.

I think detailed evidence would be needed to support an acoustic
explaination in this case, but it is true that conventional audiology
equipment does not extend as far down into the frequancy domain as we
might like.
 
> Another angle to this is that measurements are usually done with sinus
> tones, and the hum is usually not a sinus tone. It is questionable how
> relevant a measurement with a sinus tone is, when we are dealing with
> non-sinus hum. As the effect of two added sounds is not a simple arithemtic
> addition, it is not quite simple to conclude from sinus measurements to hum
> sensitivity.

The use of a sine wave is essential to proper testing of teh frequancy
response, due to the method used by teh ear to encode frequancy (pitch)
information as a population of triggered receptors.  Harmonics would
only complicate matters needlessly.

 
> >Is there any reasonable explaination why the person with better low
> >frequancy hearing does not perceive the hum in such a case (assuming
> >it's acoustic)?
> 
> See above

Ok, I'll ask again.  

Is there any evidence for the type of frequancy selective hearing loss
postulated above?

What about the harmonics and modulations?

> >Also, if it's acoustic, why have so many attemts to record it failed?
> 
> We have explained this in some detail several times. I will shortly recap:
> 
> If people use the right equipment with a flat frequency response from 2 Hz
> - 5000 Hz, and a low noiselevel, and a spectrometer, they do find and
> record infrasound. But civil servants and noise technicians usually say
> something like "everybody knows that no-one can hear infrasound, so the
> infrasound detected cannot be the cause of the hum"

The detection of infrasound is not yet clearly the same thing as
recording
the hum (for all cases).  You might postulate that it is the same, but
this remains to be proven true for all cases.

Do you claim that any attempt made with the equipment listed above will
sucessfully record the hum?  Has there ever been an attempt made that
meets these specifications that has failed to record the hum
specifically, rather than infrasound in general?

The specifications listed are not hard to meet, or to better with
equipment I have on hand.

I have a nice old TEAC (FM) instrumentation recorder that covers DC to
100 khz, and a digital low frequancy spectrum analizer with fractional
hertz resolution.  All I need is a good microphone, right?  DC premps
are easy enough.

> If people use ordinary sound equipment, broadcast sound equipment, BBC
> equipment, they are not using the right equipment. Most broadcast sound
> equipment contain filtering that filters away infrasound. A broadcast (BBC)
> microphone has a lower frequency cutoff which filters away infrasound and
> dampens all sound below 100 Hz or 50 Hz. A broadcast microphone
> preamplifier has a low frequency cutoff, and so on.
> 
> Regards, Anders

True enough, but instrumentation recorders are fairly common surplus
items.  A good FM deck (with frequancy response down to DC!)

Commercial audio equipment CAN also be used, provided we up-convert the
low frequancy signal, as is commonly done with geomagnetic coil detector
circuits.  This is a bit demanding, but within the range of the more
skilled home experimenters.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 10:54:20 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA06310; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 10:26:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 10:26:11 -0800
Message-ID: <331C22FC.5A0D@tiac.net>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 13:26:20 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: Acoustic or not?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"AiISz2.0.XY1.2b67p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/669
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:
> 
> >> * If you play the signal being recorded in real time to the hummer (with
> >> inverse phase) you can nullify the hum experience. (This is strong proof
> >of
> >> the hum being acoustic)
> 
> >This is dead wrong!
> 
> No, it is dead right! (Assuming the microphones react to acoustic sound,
> not to scalar waves, which is a reasonable assumption)
> 
> >Nullification of the perceived sound does not prove that the original
> >perception was induced by sound, only that we are canceling the nerve
> >impulses accosicated with the perception of that sound.
> 
> You are still missing the important point in the reasoning.
> 
> If there is infrasound present, which can be described as p = A*sin(w*t
> -k*x), and the hummer hears HUM.
> And if you add the anti-sound panti =  A*sin(w*t -k*x + PI), and the hummer
> hears SILENCE, you have proven that the hummer is sensitive to the
> antisound A*sin(w*t -k*x + PI). The hummer must then also be sensitive to
> the original infrasound A*sin(w*t -k*x). Furthermore he must be able to
> hear this as hum.

Understood, but infrasound can be preceived in many ways.  All we know
from the experiment is that we eliminated the perception of the sound. 
We may not yet know all there is to know about how it's being perceived.

Unless we really know for sure how the hum is being perceived, we cannot
claim that the anti-phase experiment shows that the original hum is
being perceived in the same manner as the anti-hum.

This is the part I'm interested in learning more about.

> The only way I can see to avoid this conclusion is to claim that the
> microphone was
> A. reacting to some unknown radiation causing the hum
> B. Had the same sensitivity to this radiation (relative to the sensitivy to
> sound) as the human ear
> C. HAd the same phase response to this radiation (relative to sound) as the
> human ear.

I disagree.

The lack of perceived hum may be due to the oddities of human perception
of sound, some of which are very complex, and vary from person to person
to some extent.  These variations are a subject of ongoing research, as
documented in a recent Scientific American article.

We are dealing with an untrustworthy detector, and it's not the human
ear, but the neural processing performed on data from the ear.  Hummers
suffer from a perception of a sound, which may not actually be a 'sound'
in the classical sense.

<snip> 

> >Just haw do you maintain the 180 degree phase difference between the
> >recording and the perceived sound in this testing?
> 
> That is a good question. The manufacturer of the measurement microphone
> documents the phase error of the microphone at all frequencies from 2 Hz to
> 5000 Hz, or whatever the frequency range of the microphone is. This is
> something that sets a measurement microphone apart from a broadcast
> microphone.  The phase error is typically below 5 degrees. A phase error is
> likely to occur in the cheap (and expensive) headphones I used. The
> manufacturer of the headphones didnt specify the phase error. And I didnt
> measure it. It is probably much higher than the error in the microphone.

It seems I was unclear with my question.  How do we keep the playback of
the recording antiphase to the real time infrasound?  Or does the hum
elimination only work if the infrasound is played back antiphase in real
time, and not from a recording?  

Both should be tested, as a check on the human perception process.

<snip>

> >I would also think that mine shafts, etc would have a larger effect on
> >the perception of the hum if it was indeed an acoustic phenomena.  This
> >does not appear to be the case,
> 
> I have insufficient data on mineshafts to conclude anything from mine
> shafts stories.

I read a report that decending in a shaft did not reduce the perception
of the hum.  We might expect some attenuation due to the shaft
geometery, etc.  I beleive that in fact the perceived hum might be
(subjectivly) louder, but it's unlikley that the shaft was acting as a
resonant cavity, but that is possible.
 
> >What basis in fact supports your assumption that the signal produced (by
> >what ever means) "would hardly be in antiphase to it, and therefore
> >couldnt cancel it."?
> 
> None, really. That's why I used the word "hardly". With scalar waves (which
> I dont know from personal experience) I am dealing with probabilities. I
> find it improbable that a measurement microphoned designed to be sensitive
> to acoustic sound and insensitive to anything else, should
> 
> B. Have the same sensitivity to this radiation (relative to the sensitivy
> to sound) as the human ear

What about the amplification used?  Why would we assume that the
sensitivities were at all the same?

> C. HAve the same phase response to this radiation (relative to sound) as
> the human ear.

Do we know how close we need to be with the phase to get the
canacelation effect?
 
> >This also ingores the fact that a real sound can mask the perception of
> >sound not produced by acoustic means.
> 
> I am not masking the sound, but nullifying it in the experiment. Masking is
> quite different from nullifying...

Correct, I used the wrong word, I should have written nullified rather
than masking.  I used masking as I was thinking that the sources of the
perception of the hum and anti-hum might not be one and the same.  It's
a possibility that should be explored.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 11:57:29 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA24231; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 11:36:17 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 11:36:17 -0800
Message-Id: <199703041940.TAA01255@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 19:35:48 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Microphone resistance
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"lOF3x1.0.Vw5.kc77p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/671
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Anders,
What is the DC resistance of the microphone which you use for your 
hum recordings?

Regards,
Ronald.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 12:20:48 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA24442; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 11:37:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 11:37:24 -0800
Message-Id: <199703041940.TAA01242@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 19:35:48 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: BBC recording
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"NILZ21.0.jz5.nd77p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/672
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


> >Two or three weeks ago our regional BBC television service
> >investigated a house in Laxfield (Essex, UK) where a woman had
> >complained that she was being driven crazy by the hum. The BBC
> >sent along their engineers with first class recording equipment and
> >made recordings throughout the house. The engineers could not hear
> >anything themselves. The recordings were sent off to Britain's
> >leading noise research laboratory for their analysis. Last week it
> >was revealed that the Noise Research Laboratory found nothing on
> >the recordings to account for the hum.
> 
> You cannot conclude anything reliably from this.
> 
> We need to see a report from the engineers detailing equipment used, 
> methods used (including calibration method), frequency band looked at, and 
> actual spectrograms.
> 
> Can you get hold of this information?

I am hoping that when the BBC do the follow-up program there may be 
more information available.

Regards,
Ronald.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 14:50:44 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA02676; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 14:30:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 14:30:18 -0800
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 08:17:32 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Mutchg's boadcast radio
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970305131732.28c748dc@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"MiDu72.0.lf.v9A7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/673
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 09:16 AM 4/03/97 +0100, you wrote:
>G.D.Mutch wrote:
>> Also when the hum is up and I go near a normal broadcast radio, I will > 
>flatt
>en the radio with static and white noise: to degree where you
>> will not be able to listen to the radio. This doesn't happen to all
>> radio's; it does happen with two radios that I use. It appears the
>>signal rejection is weak in these radios; they need re-aligning, but
>>nether the less it only happens when I walk near them, or put my hand
>>on the plastic case.
>
>You ought to make a systematic observation of the phenomenon.
>Approach the radio three times a day a write down date,time,hum strength on 
>a scale 0-5, and radio static on a scale 0-5. 
>
>If you can really establish a reliable connection between hum and radio 
>static, there might be a possibility of gething further along that road.
>
>Regards,
>
>Anders

Yes that is an idea... I never gave it any thought. I would have to carry
a note pad around with me. I'm a bit pressed for time on many occausions I
don't know how long I would keep it up to date.

-GM
=IIII== E-mail: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au ===================================IIII=
  II     _--_|\               *   G.D.&C.M.Mutch |-oo[ New-Age Pioneer ]oo- II
  ||    /    |_\           *    * Rockhampton.   | Alternative : Energy,    ||
  ||    \_.--._/               .  Queensland.    | Health, Wealth ,Personal ||
  II  Great/ s@uthern/ land/  *   Australia.     | & Social Values Today.   II
=IIII====================================================By=Ascii=Arts=====IIII=
Current member of Amnesty International. 
Have the guts to stand UP and say "NO!" to the current use of Bio-telemetry.


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 16:37:45 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA03385; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 16:19:40 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 16:19:40 -0800 (PST)
From: LGrant44@aol.com
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 19:18:55 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970304191854_952114101@emout03.mail.aol.com>
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Subject: T.Hum. Born to be flamed
Resent-Message-ID: <"nVCMP.0.pq.RmB7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/674
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

While this is mostly directed toward G.D. Mutch, others may find the
discussion interesting as it's not far from the Hum.  Excess flames and
disagreement can be directed at the nearest large body of water where they
might prove interesting.

Hi G.D., the experiences you are having, while not a lot of fun for you, are
proving very interesting.  There are a couple of things I would ask you to do
which might prove revealing, but then again as all matters in this unusual
area, they might not.

First of all, do you happen to have a small compass handy?  I suggest that
you set it in a place where you can keep an eye on it whilst working on your
computer, which is when you are noticing things like the thumps on the roof.
 Carrying a compass is something some Crop Circle researchers do when in the
field as the results are sometimes interesting.  The reason for a small
compass rather than something left over from an aircraft, for example, is
that a tiny standard compass has a small inertia and is likely to respond to t
he kind of fast transient which could cause thumps, especially in an iron
roof, which it sounds like you have.

Alternately any small coil fed through an amplifier such as one used for
magnetic phonographs could be handy, although local power-grid hum might make
results a bit difficult to sort out.  While the frequency response curve of
such an amplifier is not 'flat' it would still be possible to pick up
magnetic transients like a thump with it.  The point is to show whether or
not some kind of sudden local magnetic change is causing the thumps.  Note
that the mentions of odd Hum effects related to cars is also saying 'related
to a large chunk of magnetically active iron.'

This is not to say the Hum is magnetic, but that something about magnetism
may have a relationship with it, or something about Iron.

In commercial radio broadcasting, the actual sending of radio waves not the
frequently terrible esthetic content, a constantly used technique is field
strength measurement which means surrounding a transmitter with measurements
made by a calibrated receiver at a distance of one or two miles
(AM transmission on standard broadcast bands around 1 MHz.) in order to see
exactly what kind of equipotential 'pattern' can be plotted on paper.  This
is required because due to physical placement many transmitters use carefully
planned patterns with null areas to protect other stations whose signals
might be interfered with, and those null areas must be proven by actual
measurement.  

The point here is that if you are perceiving a signal of one kind or another
directionality and pattern can reveal a bit, as you've suggested by the
library experiment.  

You might consider, however, that the pattern you're looking for could be
more readily understood if you think of it in three dimensions and use
yourself as the three dimensional receiver.  This could be difficult because
if the source of your signals is very far away there will be little
perceivable change, but perhaps you could find out a bit more by changing
floors in the library if possible and see if the beam continues below or
above.  Also you may wish to explore the 2D pattern of the beam and map out
for yourself the exact shape of the edge of the beam on paper.  Is it sharply
circular, oval, or uneven like the beam from a flashlight?  Precisely how
sharp are the edges of the pattern in relation to the size of the pattern?  A
beam projected from any distance could be expected to have a fairly fuzzy
edge, a very sharp edge might be telling us something about signal source.
Is there a sensible center to the pattern again as with a flashlight beam?

You might also do the same with your interference effect on radios, if you
back off until the interference can just be detected by the radio, then walk
around the radio in a circle what kind of pattern results?  Is it circular
etc.?  Additionally you might stand at the edge of interference reception and
rotate (spin) yourself slowly or rapidly around and see if you are
'radiating' some pattern which can be perceived as increases or decreases in
interference.  The reason for operating at the interference edge is that the
internal Automatic Gain Control on the receiver is likely to be inoperative
at this level and the received interference will be more accurately
reproduced in relation to its levels.

I find it interesting that you mention an awareness that your Hum and other
effects are being tuned in a way which causes the perception that active
agents work against you to suppress your activity.  While it is relatively
easy to suspect geostationary satellites you might try using a model which
brings the issue much closer to home.  Over the years that I've studied Crop
Circles I've heard this complaint a number of times in relation to powerfully
negative effects experienced by Crop Circle researchers which is so frequent
it must have a basis in a reality of some kind.  

Many people have had the experience of 'Bringing something home' from the
circles, which can begin with raps in the walls (not unlike your thumps) and
escalate into full-blown 'hallucinations,' although that seems a biased and
only faintly accurate word.  The key trigger in this experience in a few
cases is working on studying or researching or talking about the Crop
Circles.  Once you've brought something home from the circles it can stay for
years.  I'm not saying you've been in a Crop Circle but some of your
descriptions sure sound like others I've heard from that area, especially the
feeling that one's mental processes are being observed in some way, and that
research is actively opposed.

One person I know can actually find the source of her experiences with a
compass, it's in her bedroom, apparently lodged in the window, and projects a
compass detectable magnetic field as far as the door.  'Something' comes at
night infrequently from this magnetic anomaly and serially triggers the
various fire alarms in her house.  This something also ruins electronic
equipment and has cost her quite a sum in repairs.  We've agreed over time
that the anomaly appears to be some kind of gateway or portal for an active
being which is invisible, but forceful enough to make thumping and humming
sounds from her stereo systems' speakers, even when they are disconnected
from the stereo.  It takes out telephone answering devices, faxes, usually
destroying the power supplies.  I don't have many more details of her
experiences as she lives in the Crop Circle areas of Britain and to say the
least I ain't there.

While compasses can be tricky because they also are attracted to large iron
bodies by their own inherent magnetism you might want to do a compass search
of your house and surrounding near area to see if anything obvious shows up,
her's is quite plain and is not near any iron or other magnetic objects.

Have you seen or had anyone nearby report glowing spheres or odd lighting
effects? These can be highly magnetic, and also transitory, your iron roof
may be indicating some activity like that.  The real point here is to broaden
the range of models you are using with which to search your surrounding
environment.  There are many very peculiar things which have quite unexpected
effects and are not easily worked with because they are quite aware and stay
out of sight when hunted for.  You might want to be generally aware of the
various activities you report and notice whether they seem truly tuned in to
your mental processes.

While I know it's a tendency to blame all kinds of secret research for these
effects the secret research is apparently based in an area which also has
other more ancient occupants, and that's an accurate word.  These ancient
effects may however be coming from the earth beneath your house rather than
from above and you may find it interesting to incorporate that possibility in
your search for the sources of your experiences.  

For some this may seem incomprhensible gibberish and worthy of disagreement
but after long experience in a number of related areas I've found that there
is something further around us than just spooooks.  That something is also
sentient and quite interactive although the interaction seems to depend to
some degree on genetics and previous capabilities of your ancestral line.  

Please study your effects and experiences carefully as you may need to
discern
between gov't projects and this other thing which trails back into history
farther perhaps than civilization and farther than man.  Which is which?  I
don't know but you may be able to discover for yourself and us.

Thanks for your time, keep analyzing and stuffing it into Taos Hum-L, and
also watch the levels and variety of your experiences over the next month or
two.

Thanks.    Larry Grant      LGrant44@aol.com

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 17:24:37 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA09973; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 17:13:25 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 17:13:25 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331C81A0.2BD2@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 1997 20:10:08 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: T.Hum. Born to be flamed
References: <970304191854_952114101@emout03.mail.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"n__Iv.0.lR2.pYC7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/675
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Welcome back Larry.  I did not know you personally (as EMail allows, of
course) but I had read all your postings long before I joined the list
and am glad to see your return.

Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 19:49:47 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA25625; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 19:38:51 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 19:38:51 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 13:38:20 +1000
Message-Id: <9703050338.AA11711@janus.cqu.edu.au>
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: zeropoint <zap@dnai.com> (by way of "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>)
Subject: Rife homepagee
Resent-Message-ID: <"AmN_V.0.KG6.9hE7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/676
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Specifically, the law says it cannot be sold with the claim that it will
cure anything. Legal remedies are being sought; as with chiropractic who
sued the AMA and won after ten years of fighting suppression.  It is
interesting to see what medicine has done to society since 1923, when it
moved away from basic mumbo-jumbo, only to find that Edgar Cayce was
stunningly efficient and basically illiterate.  

The cost is $1,000.  The file indicates much less.  The device can actually
kill users. It may do things like the microwave oven, which was discovered
when an airman walked infront of the fire-control device in the nose of a
B-52 when it was on...  the fellow was cooked.  Same with Rife.  It is all
in the tuning of the device.  One would want to catalogue the shatter-points
of viruses or cells desired to be killed.  

I mentioned months ago this approach to health.  The method l referred to is
the ability to generate radio waves with ones own fingers, by rubbing palms,
and by placing the fingers on the eyes of certain blind persons, depending
on their problem, one can gradually restore sight.  One has to shake the
fingers vigorously and rub them again after an "application", so as to
eliminate the "bad vibrations" from the eyes with with the fingers had been
in contact. 

<---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 16:12:11 -0800 (PST)
To: zap@dnai.com
From: Bruce Meland <etimes@teleport.com>
Subject: Rife homepagee

It a no no for anyone to say someone is selling such a device as Dr Baers
Rife Device. The FDA is really cracking down on such revolutionary devices.
assume he might be selling a kit or instructions, I hope- what is his web
site? Bruce Meland, editor Electrifying Times http://www.teleport.com/~etimes/ 
>Subject: Rife homepagee
>To: zap@dnai.com
>
>Dr James Baer has a homepage on Rife machinery and therapy.
>
>" Each cell (virus too) is like a crystal,  the Rife machine zeroes in on
that frequency and eliminates the cell. "
>
>The machines are selling for about $1,000 (homemade).
>
>




<----  End Forwarded Message  ---->


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 22:02:57 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA08190; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 21:53:47 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 21:53:47 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703050554.VAB00016@mail.reninet.com>
X-Sender: theroux@borderlands.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 02:15:47 -0800
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com, taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: Michael Theroux <theroux@borderlands.com>
Subject: Re: Rife homepagee
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ml7bI1.0.v_1.ffG7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/677
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

At 01:38 PM 3/5/97 +1000, zeropoint wrote:
>Specifically, the law says it cannot be sold with the claim that it will
>cure anything. Legal remedies are being sought; as with chiropractic who
>sued the AMA and won after ten years of fighting suppression.  It is
>interesting to see what medicine has done to society since 1923, when it
>moved away from basic mumbo-jumbo, only to find that Edgar Cayce was
>stunningly efficient and basically illiterate.  

Does this statement mean anything?

>The cost is $1,000.  The file indicates much less.  The device can actually
>kill users. It may do things like the microwave oven, which was discovered
>when an airman walked infront of the fire-control device in the nose of a
>B-52 when it was on...  the fellow was cooked.  Same with Rife.  

This is complete nonsense.

><---- Begin Forwarded Message ---->
>Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 16:12:11 -0800 (PST)
>To: zap@dnai.com
>From: Bruce Meland <etimes@teleport.com>
>Subject: Rife homepagee
>It a no no for anyone to say someone is selling such a device as Dr Baers
>Rife Device. The FDA is really cracking down on such revolutionary devices.
>assume he might be selling a kit or instructions, I hope- what is his web
>site? Bruce Meland, editor Electrifying Times http://www.teleport.com/~etimes/ 
>>Subject: Rife homepagee
>>To: zap@dnai.com
>>Dr James Baer has a homepage on Rife machinery and therapy.
>>
>>" Each cell (virus too) is like a crystal,  the Rife machine zeroes in on
>that frequency and eliminates the cell. "
>>
>>The machines are selling for about $1,000 (homemade).

This is more nonsense. Anyone can sell a device. It just can't be labeled as
device used for healing. In the case of Dr. Bare's (correct sp.) device, one
could certainly promote it as a water purifier. Prior art demonstrates a
plethora of such devices.

The machines do not sell for $1000 as there are no machines for sale. Dr.
Bare has written a book "Resonant Frequency Therapy -- Building the Rife
Beam-Tube Device" detailing instructions on how to build such a unit, and
has done an excellent video - the first half showing microbe disintegration
under darkfield illumination using the beam-tube device at specific mortal
oscillatory "rates". 

This seems off the HUM topic, but I hate to see information passed around
that is so full of errors and so poorly researched.

===================================================
Michael Theroux
Borderland Sciences Research Foundation
http://www.borderlands.com
theroux@borderlands.com
===================================================

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar  4 23:31:58 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA15909; Tue, 4 Mar 1997 23:22:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 4 Mar 1997 23:22:24 -0800
Message-Id: <199703050721.IAA42932@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 08:14:00 CET
Subject: Hum:acoustic or not?
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"mOeDH1.0.Tu3.lyH7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/678
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>Unless we really know for sure how the hum is being perceived, we cannot
>claim that the anti-phase experiment shows that the original hum is
>being perceived in the same manner as the anti-hum.

It is sometimes discussed whether infrasound is perceived with the ears or 
with other body parts. You can easily get into doubt, especially when 
discovering that earplugs dont seem to block the perception of infrasound.

I dont at the moment remember all the reasoning (being short of time) but I 
remember the verdict is that infrasound is perceived by the ears not by 
other bodyparts. That is also the result of the anti-phase experiment. By 
applying anti-phase hum to the ears only, you nullify the perception of the 
hum, which shows the hum is perceived by the ears, not other parts of the 
body.


>It seems I was unclear with my question.  How do we keep the playback of
>the recording antiphase to the real time infrasound?  Or does the hum
>elimination only work if the infrasound is played back antiphase in real
>time, and not from a recording?

The antiphase nullification only works when the sound is picked up in real 
time with a microphone, not when a recording is used. (I tried both) This 
gives some possibility of experimenting with the distance between the 
microphone and the head.


>What about the amplification used?  Why would we assume that the
>sensitivities were at all the same?

Because is amplification is not right, you dont get nullification.
If you increase the strength of the antiphase signal from zero you get:

0: Hum (from the surroundings)
1: less hum
2: less hum
3: less hum
4: little hum
5: no hum
6: little hum
7: more hum
8: more hum
9: more hum
10:more hum
11: much hum (from the headphones)
12: ....


>Do we know how close we need to be with the phase to get the
>canacelation effect?

I cannot vary the phase, except by moving the microphone. 
No, we dont know from experiments how close we need to be with the phase.

Regrads, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 01:06:28 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA29563; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 00:56:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 00:56:58 -0800
Message-Id: <199703050801.JAA30336@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 08:51:00 CET
Subject: Hum: acoustic or not
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZsXPg.0.rD7.PLJ7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/679
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>While it is possible that the person with better (overall) low frequancy
>response is less sensitive to a specific hum frequancy than the other
>person with overall poorer low frequancy response, this appears highly
>improbable in this case for several reasons.

We have cases of persons who can hear the hum, but doesnt find it 
troublesome at all. Sometimes the difference between a hummer (a troubled 
one) and a non-hummer (one that isnt troubled) is in the reaction to the 
sound. I can sometimes hear the hum, but it doesnt trouble me. When the hum 
doesnt trouble you it can go unnoticed. So the non-hummer is unaware of 
hearing the hum, though it is above his threshold. 

>I would tend to find the idea that a specific, frequncy selective
>hearing loss, that was not detected, prevents the person with the
>generally better low frequancy hearing from perceiving the hum while the
>other person does not, well,  rather trekkish.

There may be more than one mechanism responsible for the low frequency 
cut-off of the hearing. It has already been mentioned that backventilation 
of the inner ear would give a low frequency cutoff. You mention that the 
sensitive cells may have a low frequency cutoff. If there is more than one 
mechanism for the low frequency cutoff, you cannot reliably from one 
parameter (low frequency sensitivity (80-200 Hz)) to the sensitivity at 8 
Hz.  


>The use of a sine wave is essential to proper testing of teh frequancy
>response, due to the method used by teh ear to encode frequancy (pitch)
>information as a population of triggered receptors.  Harmonics would
>only complicate matters needlessly.

If this implies a belief that one can easily conclude from the sensitivity 
to sine waves to the sensitivity to complex signals, I disagree.

>Is there any evidence for the type of frequancy selective hearing loss
>postulated above?

If by that you mean: Do I have evidence that non-hummers have a selective 
hearing loss at 8 Hz? Then the answer is no.

>What about the harmonics and modulations?

I dont quite understand the question


>Do you claim that any attempt made with the equipment listed above will
>sucessfully record the hum?  Has there ever been an attempt made that
>meets these specifications that has failed to record the hum
>specifically, rather than infrasound in general?

If you "the equipment listed above" mean a low-noise measurement microphone 
covering 2 Hz - 160 Hz (usually more, f. ex -5000 Hz), a wideband (2 Hz - 
160 Hz or more,low noise) amplifier and a spectrometer, yes any attempt 
with this instrumentation out to succeed (if the hum is acoustic).

I have two cases where this has failed to reliably record the hum. 

In one case I measured in the home of a senile couple. I couldnt reliably 
communicate with them, they couldnt easily understand me, and I couldnt 
make sure that they could recognize the hum on the tape. So the case is 
undetermined.

In another case I measured in the home of an old lady, and she could hear 
hum on the recording, but she didnt clearly express that she recognized the 
hum. I tried the antiphase experiment, but couldnt nullify the hum. When I 
came home I discovered the equipment had broken down. SO the case is 
undetermined.



>The specifications listed are not hard to meet, or to better with
>equipment I have on hand.

>I have a nice old TEAC (FM) instrumentation recorder that covers DC to
>100 khz, 

This is close to ideal for recording. (Now DAT recorders are more ideal)

>and a digital low frequancy spectrum analizer with fractional
>hertz resolution.  

This should be ideal

>All I need is a good microphone, right?  DC premps
>are easy enough.

Yes. ACO PAcific is the place (if you live in the US) to get a measurement 
microphone. The half inch type with frequency range 2Hz and up will do. I 
can find the model number and telephone number for you, if you wish.


>Commercial audio equipment CAN also be used, provided we up-convert the
>low frequancy signal, as is commonly done with geomagnetic coil detector
>circuits.  This is a bit demanding, but within the range of the more
>skilled home experimenters.

I think up conversion is too demanding. It should be avoided.

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 01:07:20 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA29592; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 00:57:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 00:57:03 -0800
Message-Id: <199703050741.IAA31522@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 08:19:00 CET
Subject: Hum: microphone resistance
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"SRPko2.0.JE7.ULJ7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/680
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The DC resistance of the measurement microphone is more than one Gigaohm.

A measurement microphone is (almost) always followed by a unity voltage 
gain impedance conversion amplifier, which changes the high impedance to a 
low impedance. 

This is standardized internationally to the degree that you can swap the 
microphone capsule from one manufacturer with one from another 
manufacturer, and so be using a capsule from one company with the 
corresponding unity gain amplifier from another company.

Regards, Anders



From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 01:12:07 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA27092; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 01:01:38 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 01:01:38 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703050901.KAA32330@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 09:36:00 CET
Subject: Baudrate til Brooks baadkomputer
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"HMVmO.0.8d6.jPJ7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/681
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Jeg har set paa Deputy. Den kan ikke uden omkodening understoette ny 
baudrates. (Men omkodning er simpel)

Baudrates udregnes saadan:

Divisor = 115200 / Oensket_Baudrate

Faktisk_Baudrate = 115200/Divisor

Oensket baudrate var f. eks. 14000 baud. (Jeg husker ikke precist hvad B&G 
baadkomputeren brugte)

Divisor = 115200/14000 = 8

Faktisk_baudrate = 115200/8 = 14400

Paa den maade kan du regne ud om vi kan ramme den oenskede baudrate.

Jeg har foroevrigt kopieret det meste Linux ud paa et hav af disketter 
(43), som jeg tror maa vere nok. 

mvh Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 01:40:12 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA00738; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 01:30:16 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 01:30:16 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 19:17:38 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Baudrate til Brooks baadkomputer
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970306001738.084fe490@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"bcbwV1.0.QB.dqJ7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/682
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 09:36 AM 5/03/97 +0100, you wrote:
>
>Jeg har set paa Deputy. Den kan ikke uden omkodening understoette ny 
>baudrates. (Men omkodning er simpel)
>
>Baudrates udregnes saadan:
>
>Divisor = 115200 / Oensket_Baudrate
>
>Faktisk_Baudrate = 115200/Divisor
>
>Oensket baudrate var f. eks. 14000 baud. (Jeg husker ikke precist hvad B&G 
>baadkomputeren brugte)
>
>Divisor = 115200/14000 = 8
>
>Faktisk_baudrate = 115200/8 = 14400
>
>Paa den maade kan du regne ud om vi kan ramme den oenskede baudrate.
>
>Jeg har foroevrigt kopieret det meste Linux ud paa et hav af disketter 
>(43), som jeg tror maa vere nok. 
>
>mvh Anders
>

Interesting message who else recieve this message ????
Is this the language of the COS ... :) [humour]

-GM





From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 03:30:57 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA08531; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 03:15:07 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 03:15:07 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703050921.KAA44002@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 09:45:00 CET
Subject: Hum:Thanks to Larry
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"bXNvw1.0.D52.wML7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/683
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Thanks for an excellent and enjoyable message.

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 05:45:45 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA15475; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:29:36 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 05:29:36 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 14:19:20 GMT
From: Julie Parsons <J.E.Parsons@uea.ac.uk>
Subject: sinus tones
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Message-Id: <ECS9703051420A@imap.uea.ac.uk>
Priority: Normal
Delivery-Receipt-To: Julie Parsons <e439@imap.uea.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"hptYm.0.jn3.-KN7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/684
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Could someone please explain what sinus tones are?



Cheers



Julie Parsons
j.e.parsons@uea.ac.uk





From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 06:32:19 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA17714; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 06:08:02 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 06:08:02 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703051412.OAA12989@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 14:07:50 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Hum: cars and rays
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"YYati3.0.jK4.1vN7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/685
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

GD Mutch said in part:
> I will try to explain:
> When I'm sitting at my computer and the hum starts to pickup. By the way they
> never turn it up in one go, they always turn it up slowly so you don't notice
> it. They try to make you believe it is your own stress level or something like
> that. If they don't use hum, they will use the high pitch signal. I think it
> depends on the atmospheric conditions and the available local noise
> interference. Anyway, when I'm sitting at my computer and the hum starts to
> pickup, there are objects behind my visual cortex region at the back of my
> head that make a thump noise after a certain period into the hum increase.
> No I'm not consciously psychic or anything like that. Also when the hum is
> up and I go near a normal broadcast radio, I will flatten the radio with
> static and white noise: to degree where you will not be able to listen to
> the radio. This doesn't happen to all radio's; it does happen with two
> radios that I use. It appears the signal rejection is weak in these radios;
> they need re-aligning, but nether the less it only happens when I walk near
> them, or put my hand on the plastic case.
> 
> Remind me to tell you about all the FBT in my computers , televsions and CRO
> that have
> developed strange behaviour. One of my better computer monitors had the FBT
> totally wiped out. I wonder if this is the reason why they no longer shield
> computer monitors with aluminum from RF, and why they are not made out of
> metal like the computer cases ? 
> One of the lectures at my local university explains how to build remoted
> computer monitoring equipment... big deal.
>

 
By a strange coincidence I have just been reading the book "Allergies 
and Aliens" by Albert Budden,
He describes how some people become electrically hypersensitive after 
exposure to an electrical or electromagnetic field, such as pylons or 
RF transmitting antennae and during that time eat or drink (or be 
exposed to)something that they are already allergic to., such as domestic gas.
Their body then "remembers" the frequency of the field whilst they are
reacting to the allergen, in this example, domestic gas, and when they are 
exposed to thios same frequency again on its own, they react 
allergically. It is as if the allergy to the gas had "rubbed off" 
onto the signal. Then if they are consuming something, or are exposed 
to a substance that they are NOT allergic to, and are irradiated by 
the same frequency as the "allergic field", they will then develop an 
allergy to what they had consumed (or experienced). 
He explains that the onset of hallucinatory experiences, which have 
been referred to as the paranormal, herald the beginning of a further 
chronic stage in an allergic individual's sensitivity to 
electromagnetic and electrical fields. These come from not only RF 
transmitters, but from pylons, underground power cables,electrical 
sub-stations, many domestic appliances such as television sets, 
computers, overhead planes etc. Eventually the individual becomes 
electrically hypersensitive (EH).

Now came the part that made me look twice at GDM's messages - 
(shortened extracts)
"The EH individuals find they cannot bear fluorescent light...They 
can get shocks from door handles very readily....watches do not work 
properly...A further development is the acquired ability to hear 
sounds outside of the normal range, and the microwave signals from 
antennae or radar installations may register as clicks, humming, 
hissing, buzzing or a high-pitched whine. Also lightning may cause 
panic attacks."
"........Probably the most unusual effect of EH however, is the 
emission of electromagnetic fields from the bodiy of these 
individuals, as part of an allergic reaction. In effect, they 
themselves are able to "zap" electrical equipment causing it to 
malfunction in some way. Washing machines speed through their 
programes, tape recorders may refuse to work, or the recording comes 
out distorted. " 

Their is much more of interest along the same lines as these brief 
extracts and I felt that there may be a resemblance to GDM's 
experiences.

Note to Larry.... Hi again,  Off topic slightly but do I sense a 
relationship between the type of Electrical Hypersensitivity 
described which can cause zapping electrical equipment, and the
effects some people claim to experience on entering crop circles? 
And the problems found with video cameras, flattened batteries
and tape recorders which refuse to work or become faulty in
formations?
Are some areas of Hum, electrical hypersensitivity and crop circle 
phenomena converging here?

Regards,
Ronald.  

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 07:29:42 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA15632; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 07:08:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 07:08:58 -0800
Message-ID: <331DA0B2.3370@gramercy.ios.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 08:34:58 -0800
From: jbwebb <jbwebb@gramercy.ios.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I; 16bit)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Baudrate til Brooks baadkomputer
References: <2.2.16.19970306001738.084fe490@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"JMHMv2.0.Bq3.9oO7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/686
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

G.D.Mutch wrote:
> 
> At 09:36 AM 5/03/97 +0100, you wrote:
> >
> >Jeg har set paa Deputy. Den kan ikke uden omkodening understoette ny
> >baudrates. (Men omkodning er simpel)
> >
> >Baudrates udregnes saadan:
> >
> >Divisor = 115200 / Oensket_Baudrate
> >
> >Faktisk_Baudrate = 115200/Divisor
> >
> >Oensket baudrate var f. eks. 14000 baud. (Jeg husker ikke precist hvad B&G
> >baadkomputeren brugte)
> >
> >Divisor = 115200/14000 = 8
> >
> >Faktisk_baudrate = 115200/8 = 14400
> >
> >Paa den maade kan du regne ud om vi kan ramme den oenskede baudrate.
> >
> >Jeg har foroevrigt kopieret det meste Linux ud paa et hav af disketter
> >(43), som jeg tror maa vere nok.
> >
> >mvh Anders
> >
> 
> Interesting message who else recieve this message ????
> Is this the language of the COS ... :) [humour]
> 
> -GM


I don't think its funny. 

Take care
Joni

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 08:15:50 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA28549; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 07:49:04 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 07:49:04 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <331D4F98.369@tiac.net>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 10:48:56 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Questions on scalar technology
References: <199703041621.RAA28030@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"qrdKA3.0.0-6.jNP7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/687
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

I3683 wrote:

> >For a scalar transceiver, a design
> >known as a field interference detector is the most practical design I am
> >aware of for home experimentation.
> 
> >I have documentation on this design, but its unpublished at this time.
> >It would take some time to collect this data and prepare it for release.
> 
> I and probably others would like to see the documentation on the field
> interference detector! Could you use any help in preparing this for
> release?

A winning set of lottery numbers would be a very great assistance!!!

> Can you point text(s) describing the basic principles in field interference
> detectors? The term doesnt immediately identify a particular class of
> detectors to me.

Filed interference scaalr detectors are shockingly simple devices.  The
basis for the design is taken right from the pages of T.E. Bearden's
TOwards a New Electromagnetics series, although Mr. Bearden documents
the theory, he does not appear to be aware of the practical
implementations of his early works.

The field interference detector consists of a scalar translator and a
conventional coil placed in proximity to each other within a Faraday
cage to sheild any incident EM radiation.  An external signal source
delivers (RF) energy to the scalar translator, which in turn produces a
local scalar field around the translator and conventional coil.  

This scalar has no direct effect on the conventional coil.

Any incident scalar wave that enters the local scalar field will couple
to that field, and superposition may take place, yeilding a vector (EM)
result.  This EM result (often descruibed as EM bleedoff) will induce
electromagnetic currents into the conventional coil.  This EM current
will be a reproduction of the incident scalar wave, with any modulations
of that scalar wave present in the electromagnetic copy induced into the
conventional coil.

In practice, a signal generator drives the scalar translator with a very
low powered signal.  Conventional communications receivers can be
connected to the EM pickup coil.  In this arangement, the field
interference detector acts in a similar manner as a 'receiver converter'
common to Ham radio applications.

The incident signal is hetrodyned, and translated into an
electromagnetic version of the original signal.  By controlling the
signal generator and receivers frequancy, we can tune the detector to
specific scalar frequancies.

The field interference detectors were 'discovered' rather than invented,
during my investigation of the EM bleedoff surrounding scalar
translators, where the EM bleedoff contained signals and frequancies not
present in the energy input to the scalar translators.
 
> >For the frequancy range of the hum phenomena, the Barkhausen effect
> >design will cover any magnetostatic scalars, but we will need a VLF
> >electrostatic detector as well, or a VLF field interference detector
> >that responds to scalar E, B, and EM waves.
> 
> Do you have recommendations for VLF electrostatic detectors?
> It is a long time since I have seen an electrostatic field strength meter.
> I can hardly remember a typical design.

There are a number of excellent electrometer chips made just for this
type of work.  Some older designs used a vacuum tube grid connection as
the sensitive element.

You might also look into the Electrostatic Scalar Gradiometer design on
Bill's web page.
 
> >In a well made bifilar coil, there is nearly no magnetic field in the
> >core what so ever, as vector superposition effects the whole of the
> >field rather than acting only to confine it to the core.
> 
> Are you able to use a bifilar coil as a generator of sclar waves, and
> detect them with the BArkhausen detector?

Yes.  You might read the Barkhausen effect detector article on Bill's
web page for this type of data. Detailed construction plans with photos
are freely available.

> Say, if I wind a bifiliar coil over a pencil with 1000 (bifilar) windings,
> and load it with 1 kHz sinus, 1 A AC eff, would I then be able to detect
> this from a distance of 10 meters with the Barkhausen detector?

Pobably not.  For the resulatant scalar to 'propogate', or more
correctly to couple to the detector at a distance, we need to be more
efficient in the production of the scalars.

Your concept for the translator is prefect, but your not feeding it
correctly.
We need to have a waveform with a fast delta-V / delta-t, that is a fast
change in voltage in a short ammount of time.  If you were to use 1 khz,
1 A pulses with a fast rise time, 10 meters is easy to acheive, even
through substancial EM sheilding.

> >If complete EM waves undergo vector superposition and sum to zero, we
> >will yeild a mre complex scalar EM wave.  This latter complex form is
> >what Mr. Bearden most often describes.
> 
> I assume "mre" here means "more"?

Correct, sorry for the typos.
 
> >It is unclear that 'speed of the signal' is appropriate for scalar
> >waves. Scalar waves do not appear to 'propogate' through space as EM
> >waves do, and for this reason often do not apear to follow the square of
> >the distance rule for sphearical wave front EM emitters.
> 
> If scalar waves do not propagate, have they any wave properties at all?

They do not propogate in the same manner as EM waves, that is they do
not appear to be limited to 3-space, linear wave front propogation at C. 

> Do show show interference phenomena?

Yes, destructive interference between opposed scalars yeilds EM
radiation, while destructive interference between opposed EM waves
yeilds scalars.

This is where the physical significance of Whittaker's papers enters the
picture.

> Do they show refraction?

Hmmmmm.  This is a really good question.  MY first reaction was to say
'no', as how could something that does not propogate in a linear fassion
be refracted, yet is is often the case that a scalar field will be
distorted by an electroatatic graident, and the scalar field will appear
to 'flow' along that graident.

This effect could be akin to some form of refraction, but I speculate
here.

> Do they have a wavelength?

Yes, but scalar wavelenght can be a complex function rather than a
simple value.  This is becuase we can have more than a simple pair of
potentials which sum to zero, each with a specific frequancy.

In this case, we must describe this as frequancy rather than wavelenght,
due to the odd form of 'propogation' present.

It is also very possible to have standing scalar waves, which do have a
physical wavelenght just as EM waves do.  Again again, we have a mirror
image of EM waves which have wavelenght in free space, but have a
physical lenght in a conductor that is a function of the circuits
velocity factor, etc.
 
> >If the wave does not propogate in the same manner as an EM wave, but
> >produces action at a distance (as in the Aharnov-Bohm effects, both
> >magnetic and electrostatic cases) then 'beamlike' or 'omnidirectional'
> >propogation is not clearly applicable to scalar waves.
> 
> Has distance no effect on scalar waves?

Not directly it seems.  However the longer distance across which we try
to couple the source and detector, the larger the total energy of the
quantum vacuum fluxuations through.  Depending on the internal
substructure of the potnetials which produced our scalar, we may have
substancial coupling to the vacuum flux which could be an obstacle to
signal detection.

> Will they happily jump from the US to Iraq (or the other way), as easily as
> from one room to the next?

A potential, as described by current theory, extends to infinity.  The
answer is yes, within the limitations outlined above.  In practice, the
answer is again, yes they can.

> If distance in space has little effect on scalar waves, does it then have
> any meaning to try to measure the amount of scalars in a room?

Think of the question "How much temprature is in the room?"  We know
this is an improper question, we need to ask how much heat is in the
room, which is a bit different thing.  Temprature is a scalar value,
while heat is energy, but the two are not quite the same things.
 
> >The degree of pair coupling between source and detector has more to do
> >with the detected signal strenght than physical distance, or so it
> >appears.
> 
> Pair coupling between elementary particles, or some other kind of pair?

It appears to be the same coupling as with particles.  If it often
tempting to describe scalars as being macroscopic quamtum fields. (I
subscribe to this theory personally)

> Suppose we have two humans in a home. And a scalar source 5 miles away.
> Would the humans be similarly affected, or would the indifference to
> distance mean that it was impossible to predict the effect on the humans?

This is a function of the content of that signal.  It is quite possible
to produce a scalar that would effect any and all persons in the area,
or to produce a more selective signal be controlling the internal
substructure of opposed potentials.

It may well also be possible to couple the transmitter to a specific
target (person) such that their physical location and distance from the
transmitter was simply not a major factor.
 
> >  It's interesting to note that we quickly run
> >out of dimensions for all our potential configurations in 3-space.
> 
> Yes, you sometimes get the impression that the idea of three space
> dimensions and one time dimension is becoming oldfashioned and limiting.

Agreed!  Note that EM waves (3D) from a dipole fall off at the square of
the distance, or d^n-1, where n=3 for the three spatial dimensions. 
some Nuclear forces however fall off at the cube of the distance, or
d^n-1, where n=4.

Is this inter-nuclear force telling us it's 'propogating' in four
spatial dimensions?
 
> >>A Whittaker-scalar-magnetic-potential has occured in electromagnetic
> >> speculations, but I havent seen it being used for anything practical. It
> >> seemed to remain a speculation. It was a scalar magnetic potential field
> >> (of a hypothetical nature). Perhaps it could be used for a mathematical
> >> model of scalar waves...
> 
> >Not quite so fast, the magnetic potential appears in Maxwell's
> >equations!
> 
> The magnetic vector potential does, but the
> Whittaker-scalar-magnetic-potential doesnt. As I remember it does occur in
> some equations that form an alternative to Maxwell's equations.

I'll have to profess ingorance on this point.  I have heard many
contradictory stories about the magnetic vector potential and Whittaker
potential in this respect.  I have also heard that it is important to
use the original format of Maxwell's equation rather than the Heaviside
(sp?) derivations that are used today in place of the originals.

I have also heard that this is pure bunk.  Not being strongly oriented
with the math envolved, I much prefer to let experiments show me the
truth rather than theory.  

For me, the best use of theory is to suggest experiments that teach us
truth.  It's important to know that theory is only a model of reality,
and not reality itself.  My understanding of scalar technology comes
from hands-on work and experimentation rather than any specific set of
theory.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 10:29:22 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA07372; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 09:22:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 09:22:19 -0800
Message-Id: <199703051721.SAA22362@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 18:17:00 CET
Subject: Question to scalar technology
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZS0Ie2.0.3p1.AlQ7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/688
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Bob, 

Do you have the artwork for PCBs, or should I try my own hand for the 
layouts?

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 12:18:53 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA02271; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 11:56:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 11:56:49 -0800
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 11:56:35 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703051956.LAA24197@spider.innercite.com>
X-Sender: judycole@spider.lloyd.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
From: judycole@spider.lloyd.com (Judy Karleen-Cole)
Subject: 3/5 hum anomalous
Resent-Message-ID: <"XTL652.0.QZ.00T7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/689
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

OK, Hum-Netters,

The hum is tweaked and has been since at least 5 a.m. this morning PST.  I
woke up at 6:45, noticed the hum was different and went immediately to my
computer to check the solar list... The last forecast was posted last night
and didn't seem terribly remarkable, but what I did find was a letter from
another west coast hummer telling me that hum was different at 5 a.m. this
morning PST.  It is now 9:20 a.m. and the hum is still affected.  Actually
it is so soft I have to strain to hear it, and there are multiple
frequencies missing.

Would appreciate anyone letting me know if you discover anything different
about this morning that it has been for the last several days.


Judy K
El Dorado, CA   
38.663N-120.872W
judycole@spider.lloyd.com

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 14:20:49 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA18160; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 14:04:46 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 14:04:46 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703052209.WAA14310@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 22:04:32 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Questions on scalar technology
CC: bshannon@tiac.net
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"FOTQG1.0.hR4.ytU7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/690
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Anders wrote:

> > Has distance no effect on scalar waves?

Bob replied:
  
> Not directly it seems.  However the longer distance across which we try
> to couple the source and detector, the larger the total energy of the
> quantum vacuum fluxuations through.  Depending on the internal
> substructure of the potnetials which produced our scalar, we may have
> substancial coupling to the vacuum flux which could be an obstacle to
> signal detection.
> 
> > Will they happily jump from the US to Iraq (or the other way), as easily as
> > from one room to the next?
> 
> A potential, as described by current theory, extends to infinity.  The
> answer is yes, within the limitations outlined above.  In practice, the
> answer is again, yes they can.

Forgive my abysmal ignorance about scalar waves but does it mean 
that if distance has no effect on scalar waves then they propagate 
instantaneously from transmitter to receiver?  If this were so then 
aren't we getting into the area of Schrodinger's cat and the uncertainty
principle - if we cannot say what a particle does when we are not 
looking at it , neither can we say it exists when we are not looking 
at it, and it is reasonable to claim that nuclei and positrons did 
not exist prior to the 20th century, because nobody before 1900 ever 
saw one.
"In the quantumn world, what you see is what you get, and nothing is 
real. The best you can hope for is a set of delusions that agree with 
one another "(John Gribbon)
The strangest thing about the standard "Copenhagen interpretation" of 
the quantumn world is that it is the act of observing a system that 
forces it to select one of its options which then becomes real.

I can't help feeling that the hum and scalar waves  may not be far 
different from Mr Schrodinger's cat!

(Sorry if I have got the wrong end of the stick!).

Regards,
Ronald. 

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 14:40:59 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA20863; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 14:24:32 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 14:24:32 -0800 (PST)
From: LGrant44@aol.com
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 17:23:46 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <970305172342_509933597@emout01.mail.aol.com>
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Sinus Tones
Resent-Message-ID: <"MHvlN3.0.w55.TAV7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/691
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In answer to the Parsons' question about 'what are sinus tones,' I think from
what I've seen so far Anders means 'Sine Waves,' or 'Sinusoidal Waves.' These
are terms used to describe tones, waves, etc., usually in the audio spectrum,
which have little or no harmonic content.  The closest description might be
to compare the sound waves from a flute which is played with a very soft
note, as opposed to the triangular waveforms of a violin for example.  A
Standard instrument used in audio research and applied audio is a 'Sine Wave
Oscillator,' a device for making pure sine waves of various frequencies.
 Many of these electronic instruments will also, by switched selection, allow
the generation of triangular waves and square waves. 

The terms used are, I suppose, from the use of oscilloscopes which allow a
visual observation of the generally invisible operation of electronic gear.
 My Webster's Ninth defines Sine Wave as: 'a waveform that represents
periodic oscillations in which the amplitude of displacement at each point is
proportional to the sine of the phase angle of the displacement and that is
visualized as a sine curve.'  After reading that definition I don't know what
it means either.  Webster might have mentioned that probably the most
commonly observed sine wave is ripples on water, or low rollers on the ocean
surface.  

Sine waves are very useful in electronics, especially for testing amplifiers
and audio systems.  If you put a very pure sine wave into an amplifier and
get a distorted waveform out you can suspect that the equipment is
malfunctioning although the problem may be less than the ear can detect.
 Sine waves are also the ideal output of radio transmitters because harmonic
content means part of the transmitted power is going into frequencies other
than the one desired, a nasty no-no in radio communications as the results
can be interference with other communications signals at unexpected
frequencies.

If Taos Hum were a pure sine wave it would probably be easier to research
because it is fairly easy for many people to tell when two sine waves are
closely matched in frequency and we might determine clusters or some basic
frequency to the hum more directly than has been the case so far.  A pure and
steady sine wave would also tend to implicate technological rather than
natural sources for the Hum because Mom's nature doesn't provide many sounds
which are pure and steady sine waves.  

Harmonic content is part of what makes a sound distinguishable from other
sounds, as with the violin and flute example, but there are other
characteristics to sounds which allow us to pick each one from the others.

Sine wave also refers to the basic circularity of the wave, possibly
visualized as the point at which the driving rod of a steam engine joins the
wheels, a single point which is rotating through a circle over and over,
purity of tone or low harmonic content would relate to the roundness of the
circle.

Sinus tones, on the other hand, might also refer to the major instrument used
in the production of both Country and Western music, which I've noticed
depends sometimes on the size of the sinus cavities for it's unique twang, or
at least for the popularity of a few of its performers.  

That's a rough-cut on it, not a definitive treatment, although I think
Webster should have spent more time with his soldering iron and oscilloscope
before taking on the definition.  Further explanations would be welcome.

I know many of us tekkies tend to simply throw out what are to us familiar
terms  

and concepts without considering that electronics, as many other scientific
pursuits, has a jargon which creates a kind of magical priesthood even though
that's not intended.  When you add local or regional differences such as Sine
wave or Sinus wave then even the conjurers get a bit tangled for a minute.
This must have been exciting when 'eye of newt' got mixed up with 'tail of
jackass,' it's surprising ancient magic wasn't more dangerous than it was.
 Computerese also has the same problem; Bytes, Baudy houses, our modern age
turns these sometimes confusing modifications out at an alarming rate.  I'm
still trying to get the reflex of WYSIWIG and 'Out of Gamut' used with
computer graphics.

Larry       LGrant44@aol.com

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 19:12:38 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA26404; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 18:58:50 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 18:58:50 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 18:59:33 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
Message-Id: <199703060259.SAA00140@mail.reninet.com>
X-Sender: theroux@borderlands.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=====================_857616592==_"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com, taoshum-L@eskimo.com
From: Michael Theroux <theroux@borderlands.com>
Subject: Re: Michael Theroux's recording
X-Attachments: F:\HUM\TUBE1.GIF;
Resent-Message-ID: <"DiRZQ2.0.QS6.eBZ7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/692
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

--=====================_857616592==_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 01:05 PM 3/4/97 CET, I3683 wrote:
>Nice to se somebody recording the hum!
>
>HEre are some questions which might clarify the setup for me:
>
>>The recording apparatus consists of a tuned bass-reflex port --
>So you have a loudspeaker enclosure with a bass unit?
>End in the enclosure a bass-reflex port, a tube, the length of which is 
>tuned to the desired frequency?
>>stopped similar to a organ diapason 
>Does this mean that a moving piston has been fitted into the port?

The system is simply a series of large diameter ABS tubes (we have to use
different tubes on different occasions dependant upon the signature of the
HUM at the time of recording as it varies) with a moveable plunger or piston
fitted into the port for tuning. A newer application uses a box enclosure
with a port, but this design has not proven itself yet.

>>Attached to this port is a suction cup of a
>>modified telephone pickup coil. 
>Attached to the piston in the port?

No. Attached midway on the outside of the tube.

>>portable DC powered deck capable of running at different tape speeds. 
>What is the frequency response of the tape deck?

I don't have that information as it is an old deck and the manual does not
give that info. It is a standard audio tape deck, though, which I would
assume would possess a crude freq. response.

>>coil is modified with two neodymium-iron-boron magnets 
>The magnets were stationary relative to the enclosure, and the coil was 
>moving?

Not a voice coil. The coil does not move. It is a simple telephone induction
pickup coil.

>How were the two magnets positioned relative to the coils and relative to 
>each other?
>>and a second coil attached to the rear of the unit.
>A coil was attached to each side of the piston?

I have attached a .gif file of an early sketch of the setup. This should
clarify things. From an audio point of view, some of this may seem
anomalous, but rather than laboring too much on theory, we jumped into
design which has then been modified based on our empirical findings. I fully
expect the theoreticians to pick it apart, and welcome the incursion as it
may help understanding the HUM phenomenon.

--=====================_857616592==_
Content-Type: image/gif; name="TUBE1.GIF";
 x-mac-type="47494666"; x-mac-creator="4A565752"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="TUBE1.GIF"
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=
--=====================_857616592==_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


===================================================
Michael Theroux                                    
Director - Borderland Sciences Research Foundation   
theroux@borderlands.com                             
http://www.borderlands.com                          
Ph: 707.825.7733 Fax: 707.825.7779  
===================================================

--=====================_857616592==_--

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar  5 19:15:17 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA26868; Wed, 5 Mar 1997 19:02:00 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 1997 19:02:00 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 1997 19:02:40 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
Message-Id: <199703060302.TAA00144@mail.reninet.com>
X-Sender: theroux@borderlands.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: Michael Theroux <theroux@borderlands.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"IlzGp1.0.lZ6.dEZ7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Unidentified subject!
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/693
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

This new book title is due for release in late May 1997:


MYSTERY OF THE HUM
by Michael Theroux and Gerry Vassilatos
COPYRIGHT 1997 
Published by Borderland Sciences Research Foundation

BRIEF TABLE OF CONTENTS:

CHAPTER   TITLE
	
1    ANCIENT TONES
2    INDUSTRIAL AGE HUM
3    20TH CENTURY HUM EVENTS
4    INFRASOUND AND NATURAL ELF
5    MILITARY ELF
6    MEUCCI AND PHYSIOPHONIC TONE
7    MEASURING THE HUM
8    NEUTRALIZING THE HUM

===================================================
Michael Theroux                                    
Director - Borderland Sciences Research Foundation   
theroux@borderlands.com                             
http://www.borderlands.com                          
Ph: 707.825.7733 Fax: 707.825.7779  
===================================================

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 00:23:28 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA25049; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 00:13:27 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 00:13:27 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 00:13:28 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703060813.AAA29023@spider.innercite.com>
X-Sender: judycole@spider.lloyd.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
From: judycole@spider.lloyd.com (Judy Karleen-Cole)
Subject: Is this 3 for 3?
Resent-Message-ID: <"xWZrK.0.K76.cod7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/695
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi, everyone,

This morning the hum sounded strange, and was not really normal for most of
the day.  As late as 5 p.m. this evening (PST) it was much quieter than
usual.  However, at this time, 00:10 PST, it is at normal levels.

The following solar report was posted today.  So far there still appears
there may be a solar connection.

JOINT USAF/NOAA REPORT OF SOLAR AND GEOPHYSICAL ACTIVITY
SDF NUMBER 064 ISSUED AT 2200Z ON 05 MAR 1997
IA.  ANALYSIS OF SOLAR ACTIVE REGIONS AND ACTIVITY FROM  04/2100Z
TO 05/2100Z:  SOLAR ACTIVITY REMAINED VERY LOW. HOWEVER, SEVERAL     
SMALL B-CLASS X-RAY BURSTS OCCURRED. IT IS LIKELY THESE BURSTS WERE  
FROM A REGION ABOUT TO ROTATE ONTO THE DISK NEAR N04. ACTIVE SURGING 
AND BRIGHT KNOTS OF H-ALPHA EMISSION WERE OBSERVED OVER THIS AREA.   
IB.  SOLAR ACTIVITY FORECAST:  SOLAR ACTIVITY SHOULD REMAIN AT VERY  
LOW LEVELS. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY OF C-CLASS EVENTS FROM THE REGION 
BEYOND THE NORTHEAST LIMB. A BETTER ASSESSMENT OF FLARE POTENTIAL    
CAN BE MADE ONCE THE SUNSPOT GROUP APPEARS.                          
IIA.  GEOPHYSICAL ACTIVITY SUMMARY FROM 04/2100Z TO 05/2100Z:
THE GEOMAGNETIC FIELD WAS QUIET UNTIL NEAR 05/1630Z. AFTER THAT TIME,
GENERALLY UNSETTLED TO ACTIVE CONDITIONS WERE OBSERVED WITH ISOLATED 
MINOR STORMING OBSERVED AT A FEW HIGH LATITUDE SITES. RECENT SOLAR   
WIND DATA SHOW INCREASING DENSITY AND VELOCITY. THE SOURCE OF THIS   
DISTURBANCE IS UNKNOWN. ENERGETIC ELECTRON FLUXES WERE HIGH FOR MOST 
OF THE PERIOD BUT DROPPED TO MODERATE LEVELS AFTER 05/1930Z.         
IIB.  GEOPHYSICAL ACTIVITY FORECAST:  THE GEOMAGNETIC FIELD IS       
FORECAST TO BE PREDOMINANTLY QUIET TO UNSETTLED FOR THE NEXT THREE   
DAYS. ISOLATED ACTIVE CONDITIONS ARE POSSIBLE DURING 06 MAR.         
III.  EVENT PROBABILITIES 06 MAR-08 MAR
CLASS M    01/01/01
CLASS X    01/01/01
PROTON     01/01/01
PCAF       GREEN
IV.  PENTICTON 10.7 CM FLUX
OBSERVED           05 MAR 075
PREDICTED   06 MAR-08 MAR  077/079/080
90 DAY MEAN        05 MAR 075
V.  GEOMAGNETIC A INDICES
OBSERVED AFR/AP 04 MAR  004/004
ESTIMATED AFR/AP 05 MAR  007/008
PREDICTED AFR/AP 06 MAR-08 MAR  010/010-005/005-010/010
VI.  GEOMAGNETIC ACTIVITY PROBABILITIES 06 MAR-08 MAR
A.  MIDDLE LATITUDES
ACTIVE                20/10/15
MINOR STORM           15/05/05
MAJOR-SEVERE STORM    05/01/01
B.  HIGH LATITUDES
ACTIVE                20/10/20
MINOR STORM           10/10/05
MAJOR-SEVERE STORM    05/01/01


Judy K
El Dorado, CA   
38.663N-120.872W
judycole@spider.lloyd.com

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 02:06:12 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA29524; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 01:55:02 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 01:55:02 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703060841.JAA24304@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 09:33:00 CET
Subject: Re: Michael Theroux's recording
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"VuYkI1.0.FD7.sHf7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/696
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>HUM at the time of recording as it varies) with a moveable plunger or 
>piston
>fitted into the port for tuning. A newer application uses a box enclosure
>with a port, but this design has not proven itself yet.

The way I understand it the second induction coil is not connected. The two 
wire ends are not connected to anything, and not connected to each other.

The two magnets are magnetized axially, and are attached to each other 
axially, so that N of one and S of the other touch each other.
The two pickup coils dont have a hollow center, but are encapsulated in 
plastic. The magnets are glued to the plastic encapsulation of the 
induction coils and therefore cannot move relative to the induction coils

The suction cup allows the induction coil assembly to vibrate relative to 
the ABS-plastic tube.

The ABS-plastic tube is closed in the lower end with a plate, in the upper 
end it has a movable piston. The ABS-plastic tube is a single tube, not 
several tubes inside each other.

Does the orientation of the tube or the location of the tube have any 
significance?

If it is oriented horizontally, does it matter?
If it is open in the lower end does it matter?

What voltages are output by the induction coil? 

What are the physical dimensions of the ABS-tube, and of the magnets?

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 02:07:26 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA29632; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 01:57:13 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 01:57:13 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703060901.KAA49506@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 09:46:00 CET
Subject: Hum + neon tube device
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"yzofP2.0.xE7.uJf7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/697
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


The neon tube device was used in another home. A hummer is living in the 
home, and she has the symptom of electrical tinkling among other symptoms.

The (semidetached) house was not at all as electricified as the first 
house, but some EM was found. All the water pipes for tap water, for the 
bathroom, and for the central heating were emitting EM. 

The neigbouring home was not electrified, and the waterpipes there did not 
emit EM.

An official arrived with a digital meter. Reportedly he made a coil around 
a waterpipe and found that voltage was generated in the coil.

No explanation for the phenomenon has been found so far.

A few homes of non-hummers have been tested, and EM was found in one, where 
a TV set in the bedroom covered half the room (and half the bed) with 
detectable EM. In this home the microwave oven also emitted EM.

Overhead powerlines were tested, and EM was detected up to 50-60 meters 
from the lines. Even in a metal car driving under the powerlines the EM was 
very clearly detected.

A house was situated inside the belt of detectable EM. The man in the house 
came out and chatted about the EM and the device. He told his wife was 
always sick and always had a headache.

Dug-down powerlines could not be detected.

The two hummers from the previously mentioned plate-capacitor-home became 
sick when spending time under the overhead powerlines.

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 02:48:17 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA01048; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 02:32:27 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 02:32:27 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 11:28:00 GMT
From: Julie Parsons <J.E.Parsons@uea.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Sinus Tones
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Cc: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Message-Id: <ECS9703061100A@imap.uea.ac.uk>
Priority: Normal
Delivery-Receipt-To: Julie Parsons <e439@imap.uea.ac.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"0XCtR2.0.JG.xqf7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/699
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Dear Larry

Thanks for the description.  I've read it a few times and now think I get the drift, sort of!!

Cheers



Julie Parsons


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 02:48:53 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA26111; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 02:21:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 02:21:49 -0800
Message-Id: <199703061021.LAA49352@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 11:03:00 CET
Subject: Hum: infrasound hearing threshold
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"NEQJi3.0.bN6.xgf7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/698
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


I looked up a research paper from the 1973 Inter-noise conference, authored 
by Olesen & Kjaer. 

The research was (in our terms) acoustic hum research. Among other 
experiments the measurement of the hearing threshold of a hummer for 
infrasound was measured.

The hummer had an abnormal hearing.

It had a narrow peak at 12 Hz. At 10 Hz and at 14 Hz the sensitivity of the 
hummer was much less. At 12 Hz the hummer was unusually sensitive.

There was another anomaly of hearing which was detected. The hearing 
threshold depended on the time of exposure. If you exposed the hummer to 
infrasound for a couple of hours, the hummer became more sensitive, and 
could detect lower levels of infrasound.

Regards, Anders
 

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 02:53:18 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA01389; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 02:43:03 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 02:43:03 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 20:28:49 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Question to scalar technology
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970307012849.28ff4a68@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"Y0gfr1.0.eL.s-f7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/701
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 06:17 PM 5/03/97 +0100, you wrote:
>Bob, 
>
>Do you have the artwork for PCBs, or should I try my own hand for the 
>layouts?
>
>Regards, Anders

Yes I too would be interested in schematics and artwork, if you're in
agreement Bob.
-Grant

=IIII== E-mail: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au ===================================IIII=
  II     _--_|\               *   G.D.&C.M.Mutch |-oo[ New-Age Pioneer ]oo- II
  ||    /    |_\           *    * Rockhampton.   | Alternative : Energy,    ||
  ||    \_.--._/               .  Queensland.    | Health, Wealth ,Personal ||
  II  Great/ s@uthern/ land/  *   Australia.     | & Social Values Today.   II
=IIII====================================================By=Ascii=Arts=====IIII=
Current member of Amnesty International. 
Have the guts to stand UP and say "NO!" to the current use of Bio-telemetry.


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 02:56:14 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA01359; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 02:42:55 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 02:42:55 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 20:28:44 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Hum: cars and rays
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970307012844.084fba62@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"iDtlG2.0.AL.k-f7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/700
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>> Remind me to tell you about all the FBT in my computers , televsions and CRO
>> that have
>> developed strange behaviour. One of my better computer monitors had the FBT
>> totally wiped out. I wonder if this is the reason why they no longer shield
>> computer monitors with aluminum from RF, and why they are not made out of
>> metal like the computer cases ? 
>> One of the lectures at my local university explains how to build remoted
>> computer monitoring equipment... big deal.
>>
>
> 
>By a strange coincidence I have just been reading the book "Allergies 
>and Aliens" by Albert Budden,
>He describes how some people become electrically hypersensitive after 
>exposure to an electrical or electromagnetic field, such as pylons or 
>RF transmitting antennae and during that time eat or drink (or be 
>exposed to)something that they are already allergic to., such as domestic gas.
>Their body then "remembers" the frequency of the field whilst they are
>reacting to the allergen, in this example, domestic gas, and when they are 
>exposed to thios same frequency again on its own, they react 
>allergically. It is as if the allergy to the gas had "rubbed off" 
>onto the signal. Then if they are consuming something, or are exposed 
>to a substance that they are NOT allergic to, and are irradiated by 
>the same frequency as the "allergic field", they will then develop an 
>allergy to what they had consumed (or experienced). 
>He explains that the onset of hallucinatory experiences, which have 
>been referred to as the paranormal, herald the beginning of a further 
>chronic stage in an allergic individual's sensitivity to 
>electromagnetic and electrical fields. These come from not only RF 
>transmitters, but from pylons, underground power cables,electrical 
>sub-stations, many domestic appliances such as television sets, 
>computers, overhead planes etc. Eventually the individual becomes 
>electrically hypersensitive (EH).
>
>Now came the part that made me look twice at GDM's messages - 
>(shortened extracts)
>"The EH individuals find they cannot bear fluorescent light...They 
>can get shocks from door handles very readily....watches do not work 
>properly...A further development is the acquired ability to hear 
>sounds outside of the normal range, and the microwave signals from 
>antennae or radar installations may register as clicks, humming, 
>hissing, buzzing or a high-pitched whine. Also lightning may cause 
>panic attacks."

And they stand on one leg on "Tuesdays" and hop to shop backwards,
to pick up a the local paper that was delivered yesterday. Yes you forgot
this one Ron.


>"........Probably the most unusual effect of EH however, is the 
>emission of electromagnetic fields from the bodiy of these 
>individuals, as part of an allergic reaction. In effect, they 
>themselves are able to "zap" electrical equipment causing it to 
>malfunction in some way. Washing machines speed through their 
>programes, tape recorders may refuse to work, or the recording comes 
>out distorted. " 
>
>Their is much more of interest along the same lines as these brief 
>extracts and I felt that there may be a resemblance to GDM's 
>experiences.


>Note to Larry.... Hi again,  Off topic slightly but do I sense a 
>relationship between the type of Electrical Hypersensitivity 
>described which can cause zapping electrical equipment, and the
>effects some people claim to experience on entering crop circles? 
>And the problems found with video cameras, flattened batteries
>and tape recorders which refuse to work or become faulty in
>formations?
>Are some areas of Hum, electrical hypersensitivity and crop circle 
>phenomena converging here?
>
>Regards,
>Ronald.  

[sincere mode ]
Yes thanks for the disinformation RON!. Looks like you cut and paste 'some'
of my email messages verbatim. Disinformation is designed to mislead and to
satisfy the sheep people with simple understanding.

So you are suggesting I just developed an allergy ? Oh!... I knew there was
something simple to all this. We can all pop this in to a simple mental slot
now. Ah, that's it, we all feel better now we have slotted the problem. Once
you slot something (file into your understanding) you can kick it around
rather easily like a football. You can easily belittle or exaggerate some
thing once every one has a grip on the understanding. Once you slot some
thing you can convince others to follow you like sheep. Tv advertising is a
classical example.

Example of sheep advertising.
1. If you don't own NIK'E your nothing. 
2. Are you man enough to give up your gun. 
 (Yes citizen's gun removal is well under way world wide)

[Paranoid mode on. Factual mode on.]
 Isn't it amazing how all these Nutters went gun crazy world wide at all the
same period of time. How absolutely convenient ???

 Only the true hearers know the incredible frustration and anger Heavy Hum
builds up in a person, until you literally explode. <<<< FACT >>>> , but
there is a simple release, that requires dedication. 

IMHO:
Introduce as many dial up Nutters you will need to get the desired laws
introduced world wide ?? Too easy.

Ask yourself why the Federal government is forcing pharmacists to install
"COMPUTER" databases an ID.cards of all their customers: soon to be law in
OZ. They wish to know of the Nutters/Fruit-loops they can keep track of (may
be to work over more easily) ? Who is going to believe a Nutter on a regular
prescription. An absolute infinite smorgasbord of controllable and easily
fully influenced people. They wish know which ones are well and truly ripe
for the picking. And the public response to this: "So what!, the gunman was
a Nutter on a prescription, they should shoot the bastard", a sad, sad, sad
fact...
He was/is just a pawn in the game. It is a well and truly documented fact
that PROZAC among other drugs produce heightened anxiety an violence as a
side affect. Couple this with a dose of T-H and what have you got ????

Now I'm not that naive to believe there is not natural nutters, but I'm also
not the gullible to not believe there is not Artificial pre-agenda nutters
either. Its just a big game to a "small hand-full" of bored little people
with nothing else to do. They uphold their egos with the self-justification
by saying it's for national security, and thus, the people need new laws and
protection from themselves. For the sheep people:
"This is for your own good", as you will be told.

[Paranoid mode off. Factual mode off.]


Ron I agree your post may be a little off the Topic as is this post.
However your post is note worthy Ron. Please don't be offended if I choose
not to take your post seriously. When my T-H arrived, it arrived in one all
mighty <<< wack!!!>>> within minutes of my going to bed one night. It was
NOT a natural progress of stages, which I would have been aware of for years
had this been the case. But instead it was limited to minutes or days as in
my case. It was a very, very, artificial event. My T-H arrived 3 days after
releasing valuable information into the mainstream public. 
<<<< FACT >>>

-G.D.Mutch



=IIII== E-mail: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au ===================================IIII=
  II     _--_|\               *   G.D.&C.M.Mutch |-oo[ New-Age Pioneer ]oo- II
  ||    /    |_\           *    * Rockhampton.   | Alternative : Energy,    ||
  ||    \_.--._/               .  Queensland.    | Health, Wealth ,Personal ||
  II  Great/ s@uthern/ land/  *   Australia.     | & Social Values Today.   II
=IIII====================================================By=Ascii=Arts=====IIII=
Current member of Amnesty International. 
Have the guts to stand UP and say "NO!" to the current use of Bio-telemetry.


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 03:34:10 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA03234; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 03:21:55 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 03:21:55 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703061121.MAA24888@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 12:07:00 CET
Subject: Hum: Mutchg's hum. 
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"PLuXq1.0.Po.IZg7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/702
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>had this been the case. But instead it was limited to minutes or days as 
>in
>my case. It was a very, very, artificial event. My T-H arrived 3 days 
>after releasing valuable information into the mainstream public.

I have sometimes wondered why you would deserve speciel treatment from 
secret agencies. What did you release?

Documents on Rife technology?
Some free energy machine papers?
Some papers on alien activity?
A list of OZ agents in foreign countries?
A newspaper article on corruption in your government?

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 03:50:26 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA30490; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 03:34:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 03:34:16 -0800
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 21:21:28 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Moving on
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970307022128.28ff99ba@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"CSKaI1.0.LS7.tkg7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/703
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi all
        Seems the list may be on track for discovering the true problems
at hand. Lets only hope they stay on track. If things stay focused I hope
to unsubscribing from the list in the not to distant future. Failing that,
any aditional problems and I may stay on the list a while longer. I'm subscribed
to a few lists and replying to them all is taking up to much valuable time at
the moment.

sincerely
-G.D.Mutch
=IIII== E-mail: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au ===================================IIII=
  II     _--_|\               *   G.D.&C.M.Mutch |-oo[ New-Age Pioneer ]oo- II
  ||    /    |_\           *    * Rockhampton.   | Alternative : Energy,    ||
  ||    \_.--._/               .  Queensland.    | Health, Wealth ,Personal ||
  II  Great/ s@uthern/ land/  *   Australia.     | & Social Values Today.   II
=IIII====================================================By=Ascii=Arts=====IIII=
Current member of Amnesty International. 
Have the guts to stand UP and say "NO!" to the current use of Bio-telemetry.


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 04:20:28 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA05107; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 04:03:31 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 04:03:31 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 21:50:50 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Hum: infrasound hearing threshold
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970307025050.084fcd64@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"zWxfd.0.hF1.IAh7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/704
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:03 AM 6/03/97 +0100, you wrote:
>
>I looked up a research paper from the 1973 Inter-noise conference, authored 
>by Olesen & Kjaer. 
>
>The research was (in our terms) acoustic hum research. Among other 
>experiments the measurement of the hearing threshold of a hummer for 
>infrasound was measured.
>
>The hummer had an abnormal hearing.
>
>It had a narrow peak at 12 Hz. At 10 Hz and at 14 Hz the sensitivity of the 
>hummer was much less. At 12 Hz the hummer was unusually sensitive.
>
>There was another anomaly of hearing which was detected. The hearing 
>threshold depended on the time of exposure. If you exposed the hummer to 
>infrasound for a couple of hours, the hummer became more sensitive, and 
>could detect lower levels of infrasound.
>
>Regards, Anders
 
Yes I will agree with this... When the Hum is at its worst your hearing
becomes hypersensitive. But its not like hearing the sound, its more like
you feel the sound. You feel a vibration, before the real sound is heard.
To coin a well know phrase : its like you are slightly telepathic.
Heavy T-H definitely hightens your ESP. And it is my beleif instead of 
pumping Humming sound waves at you they could just as easily put voice patterns
directly into you mind. It is my beleif this is exactly how the advanced
submarine ELF communications work. Direct brain link via computer/radio
communication with the distant operator. But that is only my beleif.

If any of you have play with Flanagans Neurophone you will know what I mean.
It is exactly the same feeling as the HUM. If I played HUM through the
neuro-phone device I bet I would sense the same feelings. This device only
modulates a small portion of your skin due to the very low power levels
However the military's device with increased power levels modulates you
entire skin an aura field. But then again how do you prove it. 

-GM




From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 04:59:00 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA06850; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 04:46:20 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 04:46:20 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331E758A.4C23@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 07:43:06 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: cars and rays
References: <2.2.16.19970307012844.084fba62@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"6ysPO.0.yg1.Roh7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/705
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

G.D.Mutch wrote:

My T-H arrived 3 days after
> releasing valuable information into the mainstream public.
> <<<< FACT >>>
> 
> -G.D.Mutch

G.D.,

If you can make the time find a copy of "An Experiment In Time"
(originally written  ~1928) by JW Dunne - it is as well researched as
anything today.  After reading, take a second look at what you stated
above.
Respectfully, Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 05:55:11 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA03509; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 05:10:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 05:10:12 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331E7B1F.1D93@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 08:06:56 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: infrasound hearing threshold
References: <2.2.16.19970307025050.084fcd64@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"HxLJI3.0.ms.p8i7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/706
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

G.D.Mutch wrote:
> However the military's device with increased power levels modulates you
> entire skin an aura field. But then again how do you prove it.
> 
> -GM

A Designed Experiment in Taos New Mexico or other artificaial HUM site

1) SQUID
2) Galvanometer
3) BBB purtebations -
4) Mu
5) MagFlux Null field 

Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 06:28:45 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA10607; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 05:41:41 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 05:41:41 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703061341.OAA25020@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 14:26:00 CET
Subject: Hum: A Designed Experiment?
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"Mw0tC3.0.db2.Kci7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/708
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

This doesnt make much sense to me:

>A Designed Experiment in Taos New Mexico or other artificaial HUM site

>1) SQUID
>2) Galvanometer
>3) BBB purtebations -
>4) Mu
>5) MagFlux Null field

>Bill J

I assume you suggest that somebody else should carry out an expensive 
experiment. 

But what exactly do you suggest?

A SQUID can be used in several ways. A modification is the Josephson 
Junction Interferometer which is usable to detect A-waves.

So can a galvanometer (be used in several ways)

What is "BBB purtebations" ??

Mu-metal presumably means enclose a hummer in a coffin of mumetal. 
(Mehabucks expense...)

What is "MagFlux Null field" ??

Regards, ANders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 06:29:26 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA04684; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 05:22:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 05:22:24 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331E7DFB.698E@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 08:19:07 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: cars and rays
References: <199703051412.OAA12989@mail.enterprise.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"NtkTd.0.791.GKi7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/707
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Ron Hill wrote:

Albert Budden,
> He describes how some people become electrically hypersensitive after
> exposure to an electrical or electromagnetic field, such as pylons or
> RF transmitting antennae and during that time eat or drink (or be
> exposed to)something that they are already allergic to., such as domestic gas.
> Their body then "remembers" the frequency of the field whilst they are
> reacting to the allergen

Ron,

Thanks for sharing this info - I will read the book.  In "A Holographic
Universe" the author alludes to this throughout.
This may spell RELIEF for future generations by 'remembering' more
pleasant 'fields' while reacting to an allergen. Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 06:41:00 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA11815; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 05:52:35 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 05:52:35 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703061357.NAA05580@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 13:52:24 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Is this 3 for 3?
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"55cSY1.0.Yu2.Ymi7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/709
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Judy wrote: 

> This morning the hum sounded strange, and was not really normal for most of
> the day.  As late as 5 p.m. this evening (PST) it was much quieter than
> usual.  However, at this time, 00:10 PST, it is at normal levels.
> 
I have tacked on below yesterday's earthquake report. There seems to 
have been an earthquake at around 5 am when you noticed the hum vary. 
(if my conversion from UTC to SPT is right). There is probably no 
connection but it is always worth keeping an eye open for any 
relationships, do you think?

Regards,
Ron.

The following near-real-time Earthquake Bulletin is provided by the
National Earthquake Information Service (NEIS) of the U. S. Geological
Survey Mar 5 08:58:36 MST 1997.

 DATE-(UTC)-TIME    LAT    LON     DEP   MAG  Q  COMMENTS
  yy/mm/dd hh:mm:ss   deg.   deg.     km

97/02/28 06:06:48   8.83S 107.88W  10.0 4.7Mb B  CENTRAL EAST
PACIFIC RISE
97/02/28 11:32:14  44.04N 147.66E   5.9 5.7Mb A  KURIL ISLANDS
97/02/28 12:57:22  38.10N  47.79E  33.0 6.1Ms A  NORTHWESTERN IRAN
97/03/01 06:04:20  40.32N  76.47E  33.0 5.4Mb C  KYRGYZSTAN-XINJIANG
97/03/01 06:45:13  51.18N 178.66W  33.0 4.9Ms A  ANDREANOF ISL,
 ALEUTIAN IS.
97/03/01 22:13:58  59.63N 152.88W 103.9 4.4Mb A SOUTHERN ALASKA
97/03/02 14:01:33  18.26N 146.45E  33.0 5.5Mb B MARIANA ISLANDS
97/03/02 17:39:22  53.54N 166.66W  59.5 5.4Mb A  FOX ISLANDS,
 ALEUTIAN ISLANDS 
97/03/02 18:29:47  38.06N  47.69E  33.0 4.8Mb B  NORTHWESTERN IRAN
97/03/03 02:28:34  29.56N  68.38E  33.0 5.0Mb C  PAKISTAN 
97/03/03 21:40:32  14.54S 169.73E  33.0 4.9Mb VANUATU ISLANDS 
97/03/03 22:33:44   6.35S 156.36E  47.8 5.5Mb A SOLOMON ISLANDS 
97/03/04 03:51:29  35.48N 139.18E  10.0 5.3Mb B  NEAR S. COAST OF
 HONSHU, JAPAN
97/03/04 04:40:30   7.19S 129.16E  33.0 5.4Mb B  BANDA SEA 
97/03/04 05:51:42  38.78N 122.74W   5.0 3.3Ml A NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 
97/03/04 07:53:09  24.13S  67.01W 166.2 4.9Mb B CHILE-ARGENTINA
 BORDER REGION 
97/03/04 13:03:47  29.43N  68.70E  33.0 5.9Ms A  PAKISTAN ****!
97/03/04 14:22:56  39.20N  41.00E  10.0 4.2Mb TURKEY 
97/03/04 21:41:58  34.40N  36.82W  10.0 5.2Mb A  NORTHERN
MID-ATLANTIC RIDGE 
97/03/05 02:28:55   3.61S  80.41W  33.0 4.7Mb B PERU-ECUADOR
 BORDER REGION 
97/03/05 13:55:52  13.40S 166.39E  33.0 5.4Ms B  VANUATU ISLANDS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----- Explanation of earthquake parameters:

     DEP  Depth in kilometers
     MAG  Magnitude, with method used to calculate it:
          Ml   local, the original Richter magnitude
          Lg   mblg
          Md   duration
          Mb   body wave
          Ms   surface wave
          Mw   moment
     Q    Location Quality: A is good, B is fair, C is poor, D is bad

----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 08:17:39 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA30118; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 07:57:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 07:57:32 -0800
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 07:57:24 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Rife homepagee
In-Reply-To: <199703050554.VAB00016@mail.reninet.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95q.970306075439.17812D-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"cE0PK.0.XM7.gbk7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/710
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


> At 01:38 PM 3/5/97 +1000, zeropoint wrote:
> >Rife Device. The FDA is really cracking down on such revolutionary devices.
> >assume he might be selling a kit or instructions, I hope- what is his web
> >site?

The website for the rife/bare discussion group is on
http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/

Dr. Bare was a subscriber as of a couple of months ago (I haven't
subscribed for awhile.)

Coincidentally, the current Seattle Weird Science meeting will feature one
of Bare's device designs, built by a local guy.  Local people are welcome
to attend.  Info on Weird Science page, link near the top.

.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,.............................
William Beaty  voice:206-781-3320   bbs:206-789-0775    cserv:71241,3623
EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer        http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/
Seattle, WA 98117  billb@eskimo.com           SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 10:32:30 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA06932; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 10:00:40 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 10:00:40 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331EBF20.2F58@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 12:57:04 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: A Designed Experiment?
References: <199703061341.OAA25020@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"y-RaG3.0.zh1.1Pm7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/712
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:
> 
> This doesnt make much sense to me:
> 
> >A Designed Experiment in Taos New Mexico or other artificaial HUM site
> 
> >1) SQUID
> >2) Galvanometer
> >3) BBB purtebations -
> >4) Mu
> >5) MagFlux Null field
> 
> >Bill J
> 
> I assume you suggest that somebody else should carry out an expensive
> experiment.

Yes (I wish it were different or we could work together in some
organized fashion)  - I see no immediate alternative given the scope of
possibilities for the 'artificial hum'.  As well - to simulate all the
known signals that may be causing the HUM would mandate a repeat of the
test for each type of signal and/or combination of signals - I wish I
had the time and money; I would certainly try to round-up the expertise
and run such an experiment.
> 
> But what exactly do you suggest?

Something like this:

A) Select 5 hum hearers from 6 separate regions (30 total;preferably
wide age range; 30 is probably the minimum I would use to make any
definitive statement on anything the experiment showed)

B)Assemble Portable lab and sequentially use the same equipment at each
of the 6 hum regions (Ship It to the next site once finished).  All
sites should be from suspected artificial hum (ie. Taos, Judy's area
etc.)

C) Perform a SQUID map over X minutes on each individuals skullcap (as
opposed to using as a field detector) in quiet area, followed by a HUM
area, repeat inside MuCoffin (Hum area) as you highlight below and again
in the magnetically nulled field.

D) Repeat for galvanometer (I may have the wrong instrument or term here
- I am referring to the detection of very minute electrical signals on
the skin) at three locations --the eyelid, skull right behind the left
ear and at the base of the spine. Repeat as above in each of the areas.

E) Take tissue samples from lab animals and perform a
blood-brain-barrier test in all areas as in above - this will have to be
repeated for 21 days to compare against current work in the field.
Subtle Electromagnetic fields seem to have as * an effect on BBB
intrusion as high level fields, so this test is very sensitive and may
prove correlary to existing data. I would really like to perform the
tests with the exotic fields we have been discussing lately as a
benchmark - to date I have seen no published material on BBB with
anything other than conventional fields (60Hz AC; 900 MHz).

F) MuCoffin As suggested; Before and after and preferably some benchmark
figures from generated (conventional sound, infrasound aka ELF/ULF,
scalar etc) to compare against.I have may found some conventional
instrumentation sources used in the field of Material Testing.

G) The Null field creates a  zero flux density measurement in its center
(I guess the compass needle just sort of floats by friction and gravity
only) - the information gained would add or eliminate certain candidates
from the list of potential HUM causing signals.

Fire Away (I'm sure there are holes),

Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 14:15:43 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA02732; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 13:43:06 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 13:43:06 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <331EF409.3800@tiac.net>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 16:42:49 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Question to scalar technology
References: <2.2.16.19970307012849.28ff4a68@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"jlrDn3.0.Kg.Lfp7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/713
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

G.D.Mutch wrote:
> 
> At 06:17 PM 5/03/97 +0100, you wrote:
> >Bob,
> >
> >Do you have the artwork for PCBs, or should I try my own hand for the
> >layouts?
> >
> >Regards, Anders
> 
> Yes I too would be interested in schematics and artwork, if you're in
> agreement Bob.
> -Grant

No artwork currently exists for the Barkhausen effect detector nor for
the gradiometer.

The Barkhausen effect design is completely rock solid, and does not
demand PC layout work.  Breadboard construction will do nicely, so long
as microphponics are kept to a practical minimum as discussed in the
design article.

The gradiometer in another matter completely.  MAny gradiometer builders
have had significant difficulty in keeping stray capacitance from making
the device devilishly difficult to calibrate.

It is also importat to understand that the gradiometer flirts with the
very edge of instability as a normal part of it's design, and it does
take some time to become comfortable with adjusting the bias control.

Rather than develop A PCB for the existing gradiometer design, several
associates and I are looking into developing a significantly improved
version of the gradiometer that would be microprocessor driven,
eliminating the bias control and making calibration much simpler. (no
more gimmick trimming?)

It it hoped that the new and improved Gradiometer-2 would be made
available in kit form, with a pre-programed microprocessor, and solid
state display.  This would greatly simplifiy gradiometer construction
and operation for a modest increase in construction costs.

There is currently no time table for this design work.

As of the begining of this week, I have been promoted into a principle
engineering position within my department, which places far greater
demands on my time and energy.  Once I've gotten a good grasp of my new
job responsibilities, I will have a better idea of when this re-design
of the gradiometer can proceed.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 15:34:47 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA13384; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 15:04:56 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 15:04:56 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 1997 07:06:15 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Hum: Mutchg's hum.
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au (Unverified)
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970307120615.084f583c@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"PVTsn3.0.2H3.Msq7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/714
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:07 PM 6/03/97 +0100, you wrote:
>>had this been the case. But instead it was limited to minutes or days as 
>>in
>>my case. It was a very, very, artificial event. My T-H arrived 3 days 
>>after releasing valuable information into the mainstream public.
>
>I have sometimes wondered why you would deserve speciel treatment from 
>secret agencies. What did you release?
>
>Documents on Rife technology?
>Some free energy machine papers?
>Some papers on alien activity?
>A list of OZ agents in foreign countries?
>A newspaper article on corruption in your government?
>
>Regards, Anders

Not a bad guess... As you are well aware I'm very much an environmentalist,
human rights activist. I believe in the most basic human rights, and it has
nothing to do with land rights or racial problems either. This includes
nearly all of the above.  But as you may well guess it goes a little deeper.
Most of what you have listed above is well and truly known in OZ. 50+% of
Australians have a very open mind to most of the material listed. 
Contrary to what ever you hear or see in the media I could guarantee it as
dribble.

The above list may come as a surprise to people in other countries but not
here in OZ. It's not hard to see that our basic human rights are being
deviously and cleverly undermined. My 10 year old can even see that !. The
big question is, what do we do about it ? I along with many others have
placed myself on the front line in an effort to lift public awareness. If I
move on to greener/grayer pasturers, then their will be thousands of others
to take my place. It doesn't matter. The word has moved, its in the
mainstream and people are sitting up and taking notice. People in the right
positions are putting the anchors on, and are getting the gumption to
question these decisions that are being made by the minority of the world.
They think by sacking all of these people in these high positions they will
remove the public awareness. I have news for them. It just allows the word
to get out better, because redundant personnel have a lot of spare talking
time. I know the messages that I have spoken about on this list are getting
out to the right areas, this is my intention. There is not one thing I could
do to stop it even if I tried. I'm no hero... not by any means. But if I see
some thing is wrong I will definitely have my bloody say... at any cost. And
if I'm wrong I will take full responsibility for my actions. The job of the
people on this list is to get this information out into the public and not
to let ego and greed cloud your better judgement. 100% of what I have spoken
about is the truth, as I see it, from personal experience. I ashore you I
seek no frame or fortune from this material and persons may use my postings
in any manner they see fit, including full publication if necessary. I will
provide full affidavits of the truth should the need should arise.

Better days ahead....

-G.D.Mutch

 
 


 
 

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Thu Mar  6 18:07:48 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA03203; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 17:43:23 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 17:43:23 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <331F2B72.3A55@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 20:39:14 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Hum: infrasound hearing threshold
References: <199703061021.LAA49352@sdn5.csc.dk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"CTBRe.0.-n.wAt7p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/715
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I3683 wrote:
> 
> I looked up a research paper from the 1973 Inter-noise conference, authored
> by Olesen & Kjaer.
> 
> The research was (in our terms) acoustic hum research. Among other
> experiments the measurement of the hearing threshold of a hummer for
> infrasound was measured.
> 
> The hummer had an abnormal hearing.
> 
> It had a narrow peak at 12 Hz. At 10 Hz and at 14 Hz the sensitivity of the
> hummer was much less. At 12 Hz the hummer was unusually sensitive.
> 
> There was another anomaly of hearing which was detected. The hearing
> threshold depended on the time of exposure. If you exposed the hummer to
> infrasound for a couple of hours, the hummer became more sensitive, and
> could detect lower levels of infrasound.
> 
> Regards, Anders
> 
This is one of the reasons I thought benchmarking with a BBB test in all
(previous post) test conditions would be important.  As I understand
what the BBB test can be used for; the axonal Activity from ELF could
lead to a proliferation of glial cell development (or some change) and
may well be the reason for the improved sensitivity stated above.bj

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar  7 04:32:41 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA15821; Thu, 6 Mar 1997 09:52:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 09:52:42 -0800
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 09:52:28 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703061752.JAA16709@spider.innercite.com>
X-Sender: judycole@spider.lloyd.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com, taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: judycole@spider.lloyd.com (Judy Karleen-Cole)
Subject: Re: Is this 3 for 3?
Resent-Message-ID: <"rEeYO.0.8t3.eHm7p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/711
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 01:52 PM 3/6/97 +0000, Ron Hill wrote:
>
>I have tacked on below yesterday's earthquake report. There seems to 
>have been an earthquake at around 5 am when you noticed the hum vary. 
>(if my conversion from UTC to SPT is right). There is probably no 
>connection but it is always worth keeping an eye open for any 
>relationships, do you think?

Good morning Ron...

I have been watching for a hum/earthquake connection since July, 1995 and
there does not seem to be a reliable, consistent connection. If there DOES
seem to be a connection, the EQ generally follows the hum aberration within
a three day period. On the list you sent, all of the EQs were distant and
fairly small, and I am suspicious would be too small to affect the hum (my
hum) at that distance.  However, I picked up some information from an EQ
list that there apparently is some kind of a connection between EQs and
solar activity, a connection which I have not had time to explore yet.  If
that were indeed the case, there could exist an apparent relationship if
both the hum and EQs were influenced by solar activity.  

There have been times when earthquakes have followed, within three days, a
period of time when the hum was attenuated. This can occur with a relatively
small EQ (as was the case of the M4.7 in Livermore in May, last year) that
is fairly close by, and not occur with a huge M8 that occurs somewhere
distant.  Unfortunately I do not have past solar statistics, and in response
to my earlier question the URLs are rolling in privately, so I hope to have
some research done soon.  That date in May 1996 was one of the ones on my
list.  If there was no solar activity of note within three days before that
quake, then my theory is probably all wet.  It would seem the EQ/Solar
connection could not be present for ALL EQs however, due to the long periods
of solar inactivity and the fact that there are many fairly substantial EQs
somewhere every day.  The occasionally related solar/EQ might explain why
the hum can be anomalous prior to a relatively small EQ and not a large one.

Judy

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar  7 17:45:57 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA04600; Fri, 7 Mar 1997 17:34:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 17:34:47 -0800
Message-ID: <3320C1F5.5746@olypen.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 1997 17:33:41 -0800
From: Denis Jackson <ticn@olypen.com>
Reply-To: ticn@olypen.com
Organization: The Illustrator Collectors News
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Subject: House as electrical  pollution sink?
References: <m0w3AhY-0008gAC@olypen.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"fm7ML1.0.o71.s8C8p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/716
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

> 
> >
> > Hi .... perhaps someone in this group can help me with a question.
> > We live in the Northwest just about 75 miles west of Seattle (as the
> > crow flys). Our fairly new house is at the end of a dirt road and we
> > have underground electric cable servicing us. Of late it seems we have a overabundance of the hum in our home and we are becoming very sensitive to a wide range of electric and electronic noises. It even interfers with sleep.  Light & electronic equip

ment cycle very slowly from bright to dim and back again, 3 phones out in 3 months. Is is possible that our house and it's end of the road location is acting as a electrical backwash sink of some sort and creating a electric polution problem?
> > How could such be determined? It is always worse from about 8:00 in the morning to about 10:00 in the morning. It also can be felt as high frequency and flucuating?  The only other possibility is that our closest neighbor is a ham with a big antenna. 

This would be a RF problem then I suppose.  Any ideas or possible elimination of
possibilities would be appreciated.
> >    I lived in Bayfield Wisc... back in the mid-1970s and was very awareof ELF and felt it's effects while living there. Though that was much different then our present problem.
> >                         DJ

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar  8 00:26:50 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA31529; Sat, 8 Mar 1997 00:19:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 00:19:01 -0800
Message-Id: <199703080823.IAA01955@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 08:18:20 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Is this 3 for 3?
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"umzm_2.0.ai7.q3I8p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/717
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Judy wrote in part:

> There have been times when earthquakes have followed, within three days, a
> period of time when the hum was attenuated. This can occur with a relatively
> small EQ (as was the case of the M4.7 in Livermore in May, last year) that
> is fairly close by, and not occur with a huge M8 that occurs somewhere
> distant.  Unfortunately I do not have past solar statistics, and in response
> to my earlier question the URLs are rolling in privately, so I hope to have
> some research done soon.  That date in May 1996 was one of the ones on my
> list.  If there was no solar activity of note within three days before that
> quake, then my theory is probably all wet.  It would seem the EQ/Solar
> connection could not be present for ALL EQs however, due to the long periods
> of solar inactivity and the fact that there are many fairly substantial EQs
> somewhere every day.  The occasionally related solar/EQ might explain why
> the hum can be anomalous prior to a relatively small EQ and not a large one.

It is unfortunate that we do not have any real database available 
showing the geographical distribution of  hearers of the hum. 
Sufficient statistics might (a big might) show a concentration, or 
othewise, of hearers near fault lines. Just a passing thought.

Regards,
Ron.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar  8 02:32:20 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA00941; Sat, 8 Mar 1997 02:20:12 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 02:20:12 -0800 (PST)
From: juno@interserv.com
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 02:20:13 -0800
Message-Id: <199703081020.AA16040@relay.interserv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: House as electrical  pollution sink?
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22
Resent-Message-ID: <"fvcUU1.0.aE.RrJ8p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/718
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Fri, 07 Mar 1997 17:33:41 -0800
Denis Jackson <ticn@olypen.com> You wrote:

>Hi .... perhaps someone in this group can help me with a question.
>We live in the Northwest just about 75 miles west of Seattle (as the
>crow flys). Our fairly new house is at the end of a dirt road and we
>have underground electric cable servicing us. Of late it seems we have a 
>overabundance of the hum in our home and we are becoming very sensitive to a 
>wide range of electric and electronic noises. It even interfers with sleep.  

>Light & electronic equipment cycle very slowly from bright to dim and back 
>again, 3 phones out in 3 months. Is it possible that our house and it's end of 
>the road location is acting as a electrical backwash sink of some sort and 
>creating a electric polution problem?

>How could such be determined? It is always worse from about 8:00 in the 
>morning to about 10:00 in the morning.

>Any ideas or possible elimination of possibilities would be appreciated.

Hi Denis,

Are you new to the list? If so, welcome. I have not been on the list that long 
myself. I am a "hum" hearer and I have also worked in the electrical power field 
for most of my adult life.

Before getting involved with the "mysteries" of an "electrical backwash sink of 
some sort creating an electric pollution problem", may I suggest that you 
attempt to eliminate any purely electrical problems first?

Have you reported your problem to your power company? If not, I suggest you do 
so. If they do not handle it, I would complain to a consumer affairs department. 

Secondly, it sounds like you are experiencing a voltage sag and or (less likely) 
a frequency deterioration problem. This correlates with the time you say it is 
at its worse, from 8:00 to 10:00 AM. This is when the world is waking up and is 
turning on electrical devices. As the load demand increases, the voltage drops 
and since you are at the end of the road, and most likely at the end of a line, 
you would be effected the most.

In a power company with modern, decent, voltage regulation, static capacitors 
and step type voltage regulators should be coming on at this time and 
compensating for the voltage sag and you should not even be noticing it!

If the regulators are slow (or manually raised by an operator) this could 
explain the "Light & electronic equipment cycling very slowly from bright to dim 
and back again..." 

It "could" be indicative of frequency deterioration, but this should "not" be 
happening in a modern power system. As the load demand increases on a power 
system, generator governing devices should maintain the frequency at 60 Hz, 
within a few tenths of a cycle.

Now, if your power company consists of a diesel generator set down the road, 
with a few lines strung out, it would be understandable.

Also, if you are in a remote location, you may be served by an unmanned 
substation that is experiencing malfunctioning equipment. The power companies 
"depend upon customer calls" to learn of and locate trouble spots so they can 
make repairs.

Also, since your phones are going out too, you may have some shorting in your 
own house wiring involving your telephone circuits as well.

What did the phone company say? Did they give you any reason for the outages?

>It also can be felt as high frequency and flucuating?  The only other 
>possibility is that our closest neighbor is a ham with a big antenna. This 
>would be a RF problem then I suppose.

The power company and the phone company can bring detecting equipment out to see 
if there is RF interference coming from the Ham Operator's equipment. If it is, 
by law he is required to install filters and interference eliminators on his 
equipment.

Eliminate all that and see if you still have a "hum" problem.

>I lived in Bayfield Wisc... back in the mid-1970s and was very aware of ELF and 
>felt it's effects while living there. Though that was much different then our 
>present problem.
>                      DJ

I wonder if you could do a favor and describe as best you can your experiences 
with the ELF there in Wisconsin (sound, feelings, sleep interference, nervous 
reactions, or other kinds of reactions? How many others could hear or experience 
it? Were there any others that could "not" perceive it, etc.?)

Take care and good luck,

Oliver W. Jopling <juno@interserv.com>


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar  8 12:04:21 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA25061; Sat, 8 Mar 1997 11:28:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 11:28:48 -0800
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 1997 11:28:37 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703081928.LAA23752@spider.innercite.com>
X-Sender: judycole@spider.lloyd.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com, taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: judycole@spider.lloyd.com (Judy Karleen-Cole)
Subject: Re: Is this 3 for 3?
Resent-Message-ID: <"z6cDm2.0.W76.ltR8p"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/719
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 08:18 AM 3/8/97 +0000, Ron Hill wrote:
>It is unfortunate that we do not have any real database available 
>showing the geographical distribution of  hearers of the hum. 
>Sufficient statistics might (a big might) show a concentration, or 
>othewise, of hearers near fault lines. Just a passing thought.

Yes, and an interesting one!  As far as I know, no real attempt has been
made in the last couple of years to gather this information, unless someone
in Sara's group is doing this.  A lady I know ran a survey of American
hummers in 1995 and issued a "distribution" map which was pretty
interesting, in that it showed "clusters" of hum reports.  Somehow, I have
misplaced my copy of the map, but as I recall, there were large "hum
clusters" in southern California (laced with faults), the Pacific Northwest
(volcanic+seismic), and Taos (I'm not familiar with the Taos area), and I
believe in Michigan, maybe other areas. I am also suspicious that we have
quite a cluster here as the hum becomes the topic of converation at Little
League games and such...  This area (within 100 mile radius) does have
faults, one of which seems to be fairly active over the last few years
(Markleeville). We do have a heavy concentration of quartz deposits and
iron, and the California gold discovery site is only about 10 miles away.
The gold is not that easy to "capture" anymore, but they say there still is
much more here than they ever took out.  At one point I thought there might
be a quartz/hum connection, but with all the hummers in Texas and Florida
saying there is little if any quartz there, this would not seem to be the case.

If any of the hummers on this list has a copy of Schatzie's map perhaps you
could add to this discussion.  I also would be interested in obtaining
another copy; even though the information was two years old, it was better
than nothing.  If you have one, please write privately; otherwise I can
write to her and get another copy.  Thanks.


Judy K
El Dorado, CA   
38.663N-120.872W
judycole@spider.lloyd.com

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  9 02:42:27 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA15276; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 02:34:06 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 02:34:06 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <332291F3.22D9@olypen.com>
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 1997 02:33:23 -0800
From: Denis Jackson <ticn@olypen.com>
Reply-To: ticn@olypen.com
Organization: The Illustrator Collectors News
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Me and my ELF 
References: <199703081020.AA16040@relay.interserv.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"81MO91.0.dk3.T8f8p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/720
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

juno@interserv.com wrote:
> 
> Fri, 07 Mar 1997 17:33:41 -0800

  Hell-o  Oliver....
     yea, I am new to this area. I have been lurking tho for a number
of months, off and on.

> 
> Are you new to the list? If so, welcome. I have not been on the list that long
> myself. I am a "hum" hearer and I have also worked in the electrical power field
> for most of my adult life.

  What is your hum experience?  

     Scroll down......

> 
> Before getting involved with the "mysteries" of an "electrical backwash sink of
> some sort creating an electric pollution problem", may I suggest that you
> attempt to eliminate any purely electrical problems first?

  Well, first of all I have tried shutting everything down, computers,
copiers, faxes, phones, satelite dishes, frig... tons of stuff. It helps
but, does not get to the root of the problem. 

> 
> Have you reported your problem to your power company? If not, I suggest you do so.

  Any suggestions as to how I should word a verbal complaint?
What would spark their attention. I don't want to sound vague.
  I am having a general electrician coming out this coming monday
after I get his opinion (and hopefully some specific info to tranfer to
the power co..) This may help, and if the problem is in house
electrical. 

 If they do not handle it, I would complain to a consumer affairs
department.
                   Good Idea....!
 
> Secondly, it sounds like you are experiencing a voltage sag and or (less likely)
> a frequency deterioration problem. This correlates with the time you say it is
> at its worse, from 8:00 to 10:00 AM. This is when the world is waking up and is
> turning on electrical devices. As the load demand increases, the voltage drops
> and since you are at the end of the road, and most likely at the end of a line,
> you would be effected the most.
> 
> In a power company with modern, decent, voltage regulation, static capacitors
> and step type voltage regulators should be coming on at this time and
> compensating for the voltage sag and you should not even be noticing it!


  Would that tranlate into slightly flucuating, high frequency noise
(almost out of the high range of hearing, but, irritating to the ears? 
Seeming to come from everything that is turned on except light bulbs
and most strong in florescent lighting? 
> 
> If the regulators are slow (or manually raised by an operator) this could
> explain the "Light & electronic equipment cycling very slowly from bright to dim
> and back again..."  I never timed it, but, about a 5 to 10 minute cycle it seems and for some it is most noticable with lighting upstairs. It takes place sometimes for a hour or more and keeps cycling. 
> It "could" be indicative of frequency deterioration, but this should "not" be
> happening in a modern power system. As the load demand increases on a power
> system, generator governing devices should maintain the frequency at 60 Hz,
> within a few tenths of a cycle.
> 
> Now, if your power company consists of a diesel generator set down the road,
> with a few lines strung out, it would be understandable.
> 
> Also, if you are in a remote location,

 Not very remote.... everything is new and modern...

 you may be served by an unmanned
> substation that is experiencing malfunctioning equipment. The power companies
> "depend upon customer calls" to learn of and locate trouble spots so they can
> make repairs.

   Everything, growing here lots of new homes going in all the time.
Will have to check the possibilities out and get back to you about
this aspect.                               

> 
> Also, since your phones are going out too, you may have some shorting in your
> own house wiring involving your telephone circuits as well.
> 
> What did the phone company say? Did they give you any reason for the outages?

  Yea,  they said trouble on the line.... They are very hard to get
any straight answers from. They always make feeble, non-to-the-point
excuses. 

> 
> >It also can be felt as high frequency and flucuating?  The only other
> >possibility is that our closest neighbor is a ham with a big antenna. This
> >would be a RF problem then I suppose.
> 
> The power company and the phone company can bring detecting equipment out to see
> if there is RF interference coming from the Ham Operator's equipment. If it is,
> by law he is required to install filters and interference eliminators on his
> equipment.

   This is good helpful info.... thanks

> 
> Eliminate all that and see if you still have a "hum" problem.

  Right I believe in the process of elimination in dealing with 
any problem. . .  
> 
> >I lived in Bayfield Wisc... back in the mid-1970s and was very aware of ELF and
> >felt it's effects while living there. Though that was much different then our
> >present problem.
> >                      DJ
> 
> I wonder if you could do a favor and describe as best you can your experiences
> with the ELF there in Wisconsin (sound, feelings, sleep interference, nervous
> reactions, or other kinds of reactions? How many others could hear or experience
> it? Were there any others that could "not" perceive it, etc.?)

   Sure..... Myself and my wife and two daughters bought a old, log
farmhouse built in the late 1800s, bought in the mid-1970s, about a 1/4
mile from Lake Superior, Wisc.. and about 10 miles west of Bayfield, we
only had one neighbor who had a summer cottage close by, no close power
transformers, industries, or anything else that could cause us
electrical or hum problems. Just a nice peaceful quiet area, secluded,
sparely populated area. We would spend off-on week-ends there for a
whole summer. The second year there we decided to spend the whole summer
in the house. After about a month there the hum started... I was the
only one to perceive it. It was like someone turned a switch on, the hum
just started, and never ceased for two more months. the best way to
describe it would be that it was a low, all pervading, very, very low
frequency human OM sound, but, it was obviously not natural, and it was
not a pleasant frequency at all and it was strong! No matter where you
went in the general area it was there all the time, it really was not
heard. It was felt, it was felt like a vibration, that was everwhere in
your body, when things where very still and one was quiet it was the
strongest, or when one was in bed trying to sleep well it was tough
sleeping and the sleep was never as deep as it should been. Feeling wise
I never gave it any real power over me by fixating or strongly coloring
it with any personal ideas, superstitions, paranoia or such. On some
level I knew it was just a strong, unnatural (to me) noise . . . . the
only thing I did not know was it's source, which seemed to be everwhere.
At the time I was writing for my work and not in contact with any
others. Other then my immediate family I did not confide in any others
or neighbors I barely knew. I did wonder if my sanity was at risk.
Finally I just packed everyone up and we moved to Arizona and left this
hum behind. When I left it stayed. It was not until a couple of years
later I read several articles about the Navy ELF system (about 50 miles
away) and their antenna to communicate with submarines, and the similar
experiences of people who suffered from the Hum; everything then clicked
into place. The problem and cause was solved for me.

Nary a steady hum for the past 20 years until lately.....

Why did no one else in my family here that hum?... I do not know why,
But, I have always have sharper vision, hearing, feelings, and subtle
thinking processes then most others around me. As an example while I was
in the Navy during battle conditions on board ship. My station was
always Port Look out, as I could always spot planes and other ships a
minute or two before others. These so called gifts have their
disadvantages as well. 


That was 20 years ago.... the frequency, problem here now is much
different and my wife notices the present one.

Natural hums are all around us and have been with man since day one and
before. Most we have adapted to and are comfortable with. When people in
the past meditated they tuned into these natural frequencies and when
done properly one cause/benefit would be to bring them a quiet, beatific
peace of mind. But, how can one find those frequencies now? They are
being overlayed by a mydrid of electric din. Soon it will be a planet
wide electric chatter with no place natural left. These natural
frequencies are now being polluted, bastertized, like laying a car horn
over a lullabye, a permanent fog horn over the surf, it is a electronic
oversaturated insanity in the making..... todays overlaying hums come
from Billions of different sources. . . . . is it going to lessen or get
worse? You tell me?

Thanks for letting me tell my story........ Denis                        
    
 

any possible electric sources or problems.  
> Take care and good luck,
> 
> Oliver W. Jopling <juno@interserv.com>
>

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  9 02:47:44 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA15443; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 02:39:40 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 02:39:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <33229343.5789@olypen.com>
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 1997 02:38:59 -0800
From: Denis Jackson <ticn@olypen.com>
Reply-To: ticn@olypen.com
Organization: The Illustrator Collectors News
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Oliver
References: <199703081020.AA16040@relay.interserv.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"NeP8B.0.En3.hDf8p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/721
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi once more......
    I am not sure if the message I sent you with my experience is
on your mailing list to others at TAOS-HUM, if not and you think
others may benefit from it please feel free to put it on.
I am new to this process...       Thanks Denis 










juno@interserv.com wrote:
> 
> Fri, 07 Mar 1997 17:33:41 -0800
> Denis Jackson <ticn@olypen.com> You wrote:
> 
> >Hi .... perhaps someone in this group can help me with a question.
> >We live in the Northwest just about 75 miles west of Seattle (as the
> >crow flys). Our fairly new house is at the end of a dirt road and we
> >have underground electric cable servicing us. Of late it seems we have a
> >overabundance of the hum in our home and we are becoming very sensitive to a
> >wide range of electric and electronic noises. It even interfers with sleep.
> 
> >Light & electronic equipment cycle very slowly from bright to dim and back
> >again, 3 phones out in 3 months. Is it possible that our house and it's end of
> >the road location is acting as a electrical backwash sink of some sort and
> >creating a electric polution problem?
> 
> >How could such be determined? It is always worse from about 8:00 in the
> >morning to about 10:00 in the morning.
> 
> >Any ideas or possible elimination of possibilities would be appreciated.
> 
> Hi Denis,
> 
> Are you new to the list? If so, welcome. I have not been on the list that long
> myself. I am a "hum" hearer and I have also worked in the electrical power field
> for most of my adult life.
> 
> Before getting involved with the "mysteries" of an "electrical backwash sink of
> some sort creating an electric pollution problem", may I suggest that you
> attempt to eliminate any purely electrical problems first?
> 
> Have you reported your problem to your power company? If not, I suggest you do
> so. If they do not handle it, I would complain to a consumer affairs department.
> 
> Secondly, it sounds like you are experiencing a voltage sag and or (less likely)
> a frequency deterioration problem. This correlates with the time you say it is
> at its worse, from 8:00 to 10:00 AM. This is when the world is waking up and is
> turning on electrical devices. As the load demand increases, the voltage drops
> and since you are at the end of the road, and most likely at the end of a line,
> you would be effected the most.
> 
> In a power company with modern, decent, voltage regulation, static capacitors
> and step type voltage regulators should be coming on at this time and
> compensating for the voltage sag and you should not even be noticing it!
> 
> If the regulators are slow (or manually raised by an operator) this could
> explain the "Light & electronic equipment cycling very slowly from bright to dim
> and back again..."
> 
> It "could" be indicative of frequency deterioration, but this should "not" be
> happening in a modern power system. As the load demand increases on a power
> system, generator governing devices should maintain the frequency at 60 Hz,
> within a few tenths of a cycle.
> 
> Now, if your power company consists of a diesel generator set down the road,
> with a few lines strung out, it would be understandable.
> 
> Also, if you are in a remote location, you may be served by an unmanned
> substation that is experiencing malfunctioning equipment. The power companies
> "depend upon customer calls" to learn of and locate trouble spots so they can
> make repairs.
> 
> Also, since your phones are going out too, you may have some shorting in your
> own house wiring involving your telephone circuits as well.
> 
> What did the phone company say? Did they give you any reason for the outages?
> 
> >It also can be felt as high frequency and flucuating?  The only other
> >possibility is that our closest neighbor is a ham with a big antenna. This
> >would be a RF problem then I suppose.
> 
> The power company and the phone company can bring detecting equipment out to see
> if there is RF interference coming from the Ham Operator's equipment. If it is,
> by law he is required to install filters and interference eliminators on his
> equipment.
> 
> Eliminate all that and see if you still have a "hum" problem.
> 
> >I lived in Bayfield Wisc... back in the mid-1970s and was very aware of ELF and
> >felt it's effects while living there. Though that was much different then our
> >present problem.
> >                      DJ
> 
> I wonder if you could do a favor and describe as best you can your experiences
> with the ELF there in Wisconsin (sound, feelings, sleep interference, nervous
> reactions, or other kinds of reactions? How many others could hear or experience
> it? Were there any others that could "not" perceive it, etc.?)
> 
> Take care and good luck,
> 
> Oliver W. Jopling <juno@interserv.com>
>

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar  9 10:53:45 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA08514; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 10:43:52 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 10:43:52 -0800 (PST)
From: tomrice@netcom.com (Tom R. Rice)
Message-Id: <199703091843.KAA22218@netcom11.netcom.com>
Subject: Hum intensity report
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com (taos hum)
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 1997 10:43:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"WE3p73.0.q42.bJm8p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/722
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

	For what it's worth, the (subjective) hum level
	was markedly higher this morning (ca. dawn) and
	its timbre different, rather more dull in sound. 

	Since I'd been viewing Hale-Bopp, a disclaimer
	is warranted, I suppose  ;-)    

 
=================================================================
                       Holler Observatory
Tom R. Rice                  WB6BYH           Lat:  37d 25m 10s N     
PO Box 2152                                  Long: 121d 30m 20s W          
Livermore, CA   94551                       Maidenhead Grid: CM97 
=================================================================
	
-- 
"Start off every day with a smile and get it over with."  --W.C.Fields
Tom R. Rice  
tomrice@netcom.com     
CIS: 71160,1122       

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar 12 00:29:41 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA06909; Wed, 12 Mar 1997 00:21:40 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 00:21:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703120821.JAA34164@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 09:08:00 CET
Subject: Radio news item
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"Irl8P3.0.ph1.IUc9p"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/724
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Hum is frequently in the news here, these days. Here is an example:

This morning at 0700 hours it was an item in the morning radio news. 

Somebody were trying to set up rules for the amount of acoustic noise the 
military was allowed to emit from their bases and areas. 

Local government and central government were both involved. A sound 
technician (Hugo Hein) who has taken an interest in the hum problems 
pointed out that the Ministry of Pollution was acting in an illogical way, 
when they recommended that the military should be given a free hand in this 
area and should not have imposed limits on their emission of low frequency 
noise. This was illogical because in other connections the Ministry of 
Pollution has begun to recognize infrasound as a problem.

Regards, Anders

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 14 09:59:13 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA26073; Fri, 14 Mar 1997 09:43:54 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 09:43:54 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 1997 09:34:50 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <199703141734.JAA17476@spider.innercite.com>
X-Sender: judycole@spider.lloyd.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: judycole@spider.lloyd.com (Judy Karleen-Cole)
Subject: Message for Anne
Resent-Message-ID: <"C-s-R2.0.KN6.PvOAp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/725
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi, Anne

I have answered your letter of March 5, but it does not seem to want to
"fly", and I am getting an error message from my server.  Could you please
drop me another little note with your e-mail address, and I will try to get
this letter off to you.

Thanks,

Judy


Judy K
El Dorado, CA   
38.663N-120.872W
judycole@spider.lloyd.com

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar 15 22:20:35 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA03527; Sat, 15 Mar 1997 22:10:44 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sat, 15 Mar 1997 22:10:44 -0800 (PST)
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 1997 10:24:33 -0700 (MST)
From: Carlos Melendez <carlos@slider.unm.edu>
To: Taos Hum List <taoshum-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Address for Vance Faber
Message-Id: <Pine.ULT.3.91.970315102251.22131A-100000@slider.unm.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"QpVw-1.0.2t.ZxuAp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/726
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Vance,
Drop me a note so I can get your e-mail address.

Carlos

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar 17 03:39:16 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA07285; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 03:30:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 03:30:02 -0800
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 21:29:51 +1000
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by topaz.cqu.edu.au
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Message for Anne
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970317211645.3737c9fe@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Resent-Message-ID: <"NqnAW.0.bn1.uiIBp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/727
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 09:34 AM 14/03/97 -0800, you wrote:
>Hi, Anne
>
>I have answered your letter of March 5, but it does not seem to want to
>"fly", and I am getting an error message from my server.  Could you please
>drop me another little note with your e-mail address, and I will try to get
>this letter off to you.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Judy
>
>
>Judy K
>El Dorado, CA   
>38.663N-120.872W
>judycole@spider.lloyd.com

Hi Judy
The local University email server has also crashed. I have not received mail
off this
server for 2 days. I bet there are some irrate students about at the moment.

-GM

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar 17 11:09:37 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA18514; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 10:20:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 10:20:51 -0800
Message-Id: <199703171825.SAA11633@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 18:20:31 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Has someone pulled the Plug?
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"cRzob.0.5X4.1kOBp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/728
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

There seems to be a sudden end to messages on this list - surely the 
hum problem didn't get solved when I looked the other way?

Regards,
Ronald.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar 17 13:54:48 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA10824; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 13:41:05 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 13:41:05 -0800 (PST)
From: juno@interserv.com
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 13:40:46 -0800
Message-Id: <199703172140.AA09751@relay.interserv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Has someone pulled the Plug?
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <199703171825.SAA11633@mail.enterprise.net>
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22
Resent-Message-ID: <"ot13t.0.3f2.mfRBp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/729
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Ron,

On Mon, 17 Mar 1997 18:20:31 +0000
You wrote:

>There seems to be a sudden end to messages on this list - surely the 
>hum problem didn't get solved when I looked the other way?

>Regards,
>Ronald.

Ron, I shut the Hum transmitter down for maintenance and thought it would be 
nice to give everyone a break from all that noise too!

Geez! It sure has been spooky quiet, huh?!

Where has Joni been lately? Did she get abducted by an alien, or something? 
<hee, hee> :)

I have to relate an experience to her that I had in that area sometime.

I think she will appreciate that.

Anders must have gotten his head stuck in a smoke stack. Or maybe they caught 
him spying on submarines, or something. <BG> :)

See you,

Oliver


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar 17 17:29:37 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA07389; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 17:13:52 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 17:13:52 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <332E0046.1A86@gramercy.ios.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 18:39:02 -0800
From: jbwebb <jbwebb@gramercy.ios.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.01 (Win95; I; 16bit)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Has someone pulled the Plug?
References: <199703172140.AA09751@relay.interserv.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"4jjgN3.0.Op1.EnUBp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/730
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

juno@interserv.com wrote:

> Ron, I shut the Hum transmitter down for maintenance and thought it would be
> nice to give everyone a break from all that noise too!
> 
> Geez! It sure has been spooky quiet, huh?!
> 
> Where has Joni been lately? Did she get abducted by an alien, or something?
> <hee, hee> :)

Very funny Oliver!  You obvious don't realize YOU are our resident 
"kook!"  Ooh - how does it feel to be maligned in front of all 67 of 
us!?!
> 
> I have to relate an experience to her that I had in that area sometime.
> 
> I think she will appreciate that.

I certainly would!!  Please share.  Your thetans sound as if they are 
buzzing to spring off.  

Take care.
Joni

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar 17 20:50:55 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA27003; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 20:32:15 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 20:32:15 -0800 (PST)
From: juno@interserv.com
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 20:32:05 -0800
Message-Id: <199703180432.AA23804@relay.interserv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Has someone pulled the Plug?
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22
Resent-Message-ID: <"vnMQf2.0.sb6.EhXBp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/731
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Joni,

I thought that would flush you out!

How have you been?

Mon, 17 Mar 1997 18:39:02 -0800
jbwebb <jbwebb@gramercy.ios.com> wrote:

>Very funny Oliver!  You obvious don't realize YOU are our resident 
>"kook!" 

Ohhh Pleeeaassse, don't call me a "kook". You hurt my feelings!   :~(~~

Gee, which of my postings brought that on? <hee, hee> :-)

>Ooh - how does it feel to be maligned in front of all 67 of 
>us!?!

:-(

Ah, ha, So there are 67 out there. Do you really think they are all leering at 
me right now? 8-0

Oh, I forgot to tell you, 65 of them are from Epsilon Bootis! We came here 
13,000 years ago. If you do not believe me, check out the Eindhoven signals we 
transmitted to you carbon/oxygen beings on the pretty little blue planet, Sol 3, 
in the Orion Spur, of the Saggitarius Arm of the the Spiral Galaxy you call the 
"Milkey Way". >;->

That "is" your "address" I believe. :-)
 
>> I have to relate an experience to her that I had in that area sometime.
>> 
>> I think she will appreciate that.

>I certainly would!!  Please share.

In front of the 67?? Gee, that's nearly as bad as in front of the TV on the 
SHSBC in the "Castle"!  >;->

>Your thetans sound as if they are buzzing to spring off.

Already sprung! Gone, baby, gone.

And, your confession is accepted, dear one.

Love ya, Joni (:-* :-y

Oliver




  






From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar 17 22:31:35 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA05496; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:11:31 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 22:11:31 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <332DEBFA.3B2A@tiac.net>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 01:12:26 +0000
From: Bob Shannon <bshannon@tiac.net>
Reply-To: bshannon@tiac.net
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Has someone pulled the Plug?
References: <199703172140.AA09751@relay.interserv.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"aLgeq.0.mL1.I8ZBp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/732
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

juno@interserv.com wrote:
> 
> Hi Ron,
> 
> On Mon, 17 Mar 1997 18:20:31 +0000
> You wrote:
> 
> >There seems to be a sudden end to messages on this list - surely the
> >hum problem didn't get solved when I looked the other way?
> 
> >Regards,
> >Ronald.
> 
> Ron, I shut the Hum transmitter down for maintenance and thought it would be
> nice to give everyone a break from all that noise too!

Damn, no wonder I'm not getting anywhere with acoustic pickups.  Sure,
there's infrasound, but I'm not seeing anyting that looks like the hum
is supposed to sound like.

Maybe there are no hum hearers in my neck of the woods (central MA).

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 21 12:37:48 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA01658; Fri, 21 Mar 1997 12:24:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 12:24:10 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <3332A743.6790@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 1997 15:20:35 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Test (ignore)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"GKrWM3.0.rP.fvkCp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/733
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

Test, test 1.2.3.testing to the right, testing to the left.

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar 24 22:32:16 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA13392; Mon, 24 Mar 1997 22:23:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 22:23:14 -0800
Date: Mon, 24 Mar 1997 22:22:56 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Lauralee Radio Show
In-Reply-To: <3332A743.6790@ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970324221752.11139A-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"vnqep3.0.7H3.GzsDp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/734
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

I'm scheduled to be a guest on the Lauralee Show this Saturday evening
(PST), discussing the Hum.  I still have to verify that the schedule
hasn't slipped or anything.  Show info is normally at www.lauralee.com,
but their site is down at the moment (NIC name problems.) 

Yes, taoshum-L still works, it's just a large conversational lull.

.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,.............................
William Beaty  voice:206-781-3320   bbs:206-789-0775    cserv:71241,3623
EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer        http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/
Seattle, WA 98117  billb@eskimo.com           SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar 25 02:37:22 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA01164; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 02:25:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 02:25:16 -0800
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 20:11:18 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re:
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: Star Valley <stvalley@simplynet.net>
Cc: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970326011118.36afe110@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"DBgeD.0.7I.CWwDp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/735
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 07:48 PM 24/03/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Hello Grant:
>
>I am fianlly getting around to sending you a letter.  The last letter I sent
>to you seem to go out, at least it is gone.

>It did seem like some of the things that happend to you were similar to what
>was happening here with me.  I did start hearing this after protesting
>something and was starting some research regarding the health of people
>living close to some of the towers I was telling you about in my first
>letter to you.

>What has happend to the the people on the hum list?  Do you suppose the hum
>has subsided in parts of the country?  Are you still hearing it as badly as
>you were?

Yes they always use the high pitch to keep me monitored. Even if the hum is
turned down. This high pitch is attacking the base of my brain where the
spinal cord meets. They are in effect giving me slow neuro-motor disease.
This portion of the brain is the same place where a boxer gets punch drunk,
or elderly get alzymers or muscular distrify.
I have suspicion they are using 450 mhz as  I'm told this frequency
resonates in 
the spinal column, which will cause the fluid in the spinal column to move
back an forward thus moving the spinal cord and in turn the point of the
brain where spinal column means the brain. In affect punch drunk syndrome or
neuro-motor disease. 
This will take a few years, but I gather they have plenty of time. And it
has all the 
symptoms of and normally acquired disease due to the period of time it takes. 
This 450 mhz frequency has a wave length of 666mm which is nearer to the
electrical wave length of the spinal cord itself. This frequency is near the
477 mhz of the FM Uhf CB radio or the 450 mhz uhf band of some amateur
transmissions. 


The hum is down lower at the moment until I post this email I bet ????


>It did seem like some of the things that happend to you were similar to what
>was happening here with me.  I did start hearing this after protesting
>something and was starting some research regarding the health of people
>living close to some of the towers I was telling you about in my first
>letter to you.

Yes every person that I have spoken to about alternative systems has developed
a chronic fatigue for a period. I witnessed these people being physical
drained of 
their normal physical energy: and we hearers know that the hum does exactly
this.

>I was told
>that even when they were not in use that others could use these satellites
some way
>although they are not supposed to.  

Yes I tend to agree to some extent.


>I think we that hear this, should stay in touch somewhat with each other
>just to be sure that no one has some real bad effects from this. I have a
>sore place behind my left ear that comes when the hum is bad, and I think
>you mentioned something regarding a similar thing in one of your letters.

Yes I have a concave indent (about the diameter of a pencil at a guess) in
the top of my skull where the bone has dissolve away. I never knew I had
this indent until it started getting sore. Small sores appear around this
area. I believe I have only skin in this position at the moment. I believe
this is one way they can literally target the brain directly ???? 

>I am interested in the incidence too, about the man that said he only heard
>the hum when he meditated.  I think that was strange. 

I can't meditate any more they make sure of that. They produce a random
periodic thumping on the iron roof of my house or shed. This is directly
designed to break my concentration. It works to some degree, but not all the
time. I'm getting use to it now.
Its also used to try and give you a fright to upset the pancreas to secrete
adrenaline and produce associate shock syndromes or nervous system
disorders: to try and add extra stress into your system. Probably designed
to give you heart attack, diabetes what ever ???

>I was trying to remember some of the things you had in your  letters, that I
>wanted to discuss, but I lost them when my hardrive went out.  I was off
>line for quite some time after that. 

Bill B. has an archive of most discussions that took place on Toas-h list.
See the archives pages on Bills web site. 

If your hard drive is horizontal the beam can corrupt it... Put your hard
drive platnun
vertical. I feel it makes it slightly more difficult to target. Although I
guess they
could corrupt it if they wished too. They only have to move the satellite to
around 50 deg. from the horizon. All the brand new floppy discs I gave out
with vital information on them came back with unreadable media errors. I
mean you can't even format them again. They are logically destroyed. I kept
5 of them here to analyse later. The moral if this story is to store
valuable floppies on their ends; not lying flat, just to make it a little
more difficult. I'm 'uncertain' as to the belief they can read the floppy
disc directly, but I'm getting slowly convinced, because it appears to be
only the vital
discs that are effected. I have discovered another just today that has the
same fault. It was optically marked like a vital disc by mistake and they
have obviously taken the disc out of service.  So it may only be optical
markings they are reading. ie. the physical writing on the cover of the disc. 
I have also heard of people with totally secured systems, developing strange
viruses. These systems operate in secured environments with no physical
access to outside influence. So if there is a case for writing to a hard
drive, then I gather they can
read one ? This warrants further study before I make any judgement ???? If
they can
read audio waves from glass windows with a laser, then I have no problems
with the notion of reading writing magnet fields on discs directly via a beam.


>Let me know if things are better there in Australia.  I looked up South
>Hampton, on the computer and it looks like it sure is beautiful there.

I live in Rockhampton here Anne...: hot in summer with the odd mosquito. :)

>
>Best regards to you and your family.
>
>
>Anne

Regards
G.D.Mutch

P.S. They have just turned up the hum this very minute. I feel they have
just had
a look at their computer monitor and found what I was up too... You can't
get better
than that: an instant hum report... :|



From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar 25 09:42:25 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA09104; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 09:21:52 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 09:21:52 -0800 (PST)
From: tomrice@netcom.com (Tom R. Rice)
Message-Id: <199703251721.JAA05150@netcom10.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Lauralee Radio Show
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 09:21:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970324221752.11139A-100000@eskimo.com> from "William Beaty" at Mar 24, 97 10:22:56 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"RI6Yu.0.5E2.ic0Ep"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/736
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

> I'm scheduled to be a guest on the Lauralee Show this Saturday evening
> (PST), discussing the Hum.  I still have to verify that the schedule
> hasn't slipped or anything.  Show info is normally at www.lauralee.com,

	Is Lauralee on KOMO?  We get that station here
	via satellite (S4-08), it could be a great opportunity. 

	Please let the listers know fer shur.  


=================================================================
                       Holler Observatory
Tom R. Rice                  WB6BYH           Lat:  37d 25m 10s N     
PO Box 2152                                  Long: 121d 30m 20s W          
Livermore, CA   94551                       Maidenhead Grid: CM97 
=================================================================

-- 
"Start off every day with a smile and get it over with."  --W.C.Fields
Tom R. Rice  
tomrice@netcom.com     
CIS: 71160,1122       

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar 25 10:33:34 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA29284; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:17:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:17:12 -0800
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:17:41 -0800 (Pacific Standard Time)
Message-Id: <199703251817.KAA00016@mail.reninet.com>
X-Sender: theroux@borderlands.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com, taoshum-L@eskimo.com
From: Michael Theroux <theroux@borderlands.com>
Subject: Re: Lauralee Radio Show
Resent-Message-ID: <"0kSgY.0.T97.cQ1Ep"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/737
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>Yes, taoshum-L still works, it's just a large conversational lull.

I wonder if there is a decrease in the presence of the HUM in several areas
which would correspond to decrease in the flow of messages here? Since about
mid January, I have only experienced the HUM twice in my area (Bayside, CA),
and it was quite faint. I would be interested if anyone has similar reports
of either low or high HUM incidence during the lulls in this list. 

===================================================
Michael Theroux                                    
Director - Borderland Sciences Research Foundation   
theroux@borderlands.com                             
http://www.borderlands.com                          
Ph: 707.825.7733 Fax: 707.825.7779  
===================================================

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar 25 11:11:50 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA03617; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:52:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:52:14 -0800
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 10:52:06 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Oops! Radio show wrong date
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970324221752.11139A-100000@eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970325104240.19118A-100000@eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"j7QBp1.0.Ou.Ux1Ep"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/738
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Mon, 24 Mar 1997, William Beaty wrote:

> I'm scheduled to be a guest on the Lauralee Show this Saturday evening
> (PST), discussing the Hum.  I still have to verify that the schedule
> hasn't slipped or anything.  Show info is normally at www.lauralee.com,
> but their site is down at the moment (NIC name problems.) 

Rats, I should have given the date.  It's 4/5/97, which I though was next
Saturday, but is actually in two weeks.

The show is locally on KVI, and is carried by lots of stations across the
US.  The info is on www.lauralee.com, which is down, so I can't get to the
stations list.

Unfortunately AM radio is not high fidelity, so I suspect that there's no
point to playing the .wav files.  However, I'm going to bring along a
function generator so we can demonstrate how various higher frequencies
sound, show that low-freq square waves are easily audible, add some FM
sweep to the audio tones to crudely simulate the Hum, etc.

.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,.............................
William Beaty  voice:206-781-3320   bbs:206-789-0775    cserv:71241,3623
EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer        http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/
Seattle, WA 98117  billb@eskimo.com           SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar 25 14:17:49 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA03218; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 13:43:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 13:43:03 -0800
Message-ID: <333846DD.1D5F@olypen.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 13:42:53 -0800
From: Denis Jackson <ticn@olypen.com>
Reply-To: ticn@olypen.com
Organization: The Illustrator Collectors News
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Lauralee Radio Show
References: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970324221752.11139A-100000@eskimo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"j2wWb1.0.Do.cR4Ep"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/739
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Thanks Bill...
   Will be tuning in, it should be a great & informative show.
Just so you know we are getting a HF? Hum out here. Different then the
one of 20 years ago in north Wisconsin, ala the ELF system. However,
this one we are becoming sensitive too and it is interferring with sleep
now. I believe the hum is there all or most of the time. We are just no
aware of it so much when keeping busy. It is at sleep time and quiet
that its full force becomes apparent. Electrician came and eliminated
wiring; a ham/radio guy came and ruled out some frequencies, but, not
all, he suspects the 21,000 range, also it was strong when he was here
and claimed he could slightly perceive it. Who knows, don't know where
to go from here. . . . been living in same area/house (75 miles west of
Seattle, as the crow flys) for 9 years and this has just been popping
up in the past 6 months. . . . but, it is not getting any better.
Do you know someone with the proper electronic in our area whom we could
pay to try and track down our HF hum? Someone who is knowledgeable
and has the right tools?  Any help is much needed.
      Good Luck on the show......   Denis    



William Beaty wrote:
> 
> I'm scheduled to be a guest on the Lauralee Show this Saturday evening
> (PST), discussing the Hum.  I still have to verify that the schedule
> hasn't slipped or anything.  Show info is normally at www.lauralee.com,
> but their site is down at the moment (NIC name problems.)
> 
> Yes, taoshum-L still works, it's just a large conversational lull.
> 
> .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,.............................
> William Beaty  voice:206-781-3320   bbs:206-789-0775    cserv:71241,3623
> EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer        http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/
> Seattle, WA 98117  billb@eskimo.com           SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Tue Mar 25 23:21:14 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA10912; Tue, 25 Mar 1997 23:06:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 23:06:07 -0800
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 16:52:24 -0500
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: New Contact
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
To: Taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Message-id: <2.2.16.19970326215224.298f8cdc@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"E0UmF.0.Rg2.VhCEp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/740
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


New person that has just contact myself... 
Subject header removed with respect for the persons anonymity.
 
>Mutch........
>    Is this email going directly to you? To your EMail address?
>Hope so.... I think we can share some hum info and perhaps
>share some methods of foiling or deflecting its influence.
>    I have spent most of my life being a free, honest and truthful
>man. Reliant on no bosses...... a lone wolf, an intellectual with
>failing sharpness of mind because of the hum.... I have pissed off
>many slave owners, slave owner wanna be's, and slave drivers.
>Freeminded individual thinking men are not appreciated here anymore. .
>.  The good old USofA capitalistic system.... where most people are
>chattel and goods producing fodder.  This is the only country in the
>world where a man can go to school for 12 years and not be able to
>read his own dipolma at graduation time. These poor boobs have not
>figured out that they have already been trained for work...garbage
>hauler, pick & shovel, fruit picking, etc.... the writting is on the
>wall and they can't even read that. They have been through the ultimate
>form of human degradation and humilation in the process, the best that
>they could be was never brought out in them. It wasn't even considered
>seriously by the public education system....rote & memorize, no real
>teaching involved. 
>   I am getting real tired of my personal hum shit.... and I will not
>allow it to slowly destroy my most prized possesion, my mind, I will
>check out before it gets much worse.
>       Hope I have not bored you and perhaps I have made a new friend
>in the same situation. Wishing you the best       

Denis

Hi Denis
         I'm fully aware of how you feel. You must talk about it openly else it
will build up in you and tare you apart. You must vent the steam. It will
get at you.
Don't give up that's what the list is for. I'm shore there is others who care on
taoshum-l. Give them a chance, put your dignity aside for just one minute.
This is how I over come the stress of the hum, I talk openly and honestly
about it.
Confide in someone... you have to. I have sent a copy of this email to
taoshum-l.
I have removed all headers and any email address; your anonymity is safe
with me,
unless you contact the list directly and approach others openly. Every one only
knows you as Denis. If you monitor Taoshum-l@eskimo.com you will see any replies
to this mail. If not; I can send them back to you. Let me know. 

Remember you are anonymous at this point. 

sincerely 
G.D.Mutch

 
=IIII== E-mail: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au ===================================IIII=
  II     _--_|\               *   G.D.&C.M.Mutch |-oo[ New-Age Pioneer ]oo- II
  ||    /    |_\           *    * Rockhampton.   | Alternative : Energy,    ||
  ||    \_.--._/               .  Queensland.    | Health, Wealth ,Personal ||
  II  Great/ s@uthern/ land/  *   Australia.     | & Social Values Today.   II
=IIII====================================================By=Ascii=Arts=====IIII=
Current member of Amnesty International. 
Have the guts to stand UP and say "NO!" to the current use of Bio-telemetry.


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar 26 17:07:03 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA21253; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 16:54:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 16:54:29 -0800
Message-ID: <3339C52E.1380@olypen.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 16:54:06 -0800
From: Denis Jackson <ticn@olypen.com>
Reply-To: ticn@olypen.com
Organization: The Illustrator Collectors News
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-L@eskimo.com
Subject: Hum Rig
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"z0hGm2.0._B5.5LSEp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/741
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Anders....?
   Hoping this goes to everyone else as well.  I have a question
is it possible for radio tech guys to put together a system of a roof
mounted antenna, sonic or ultra sonic device and a amplifier to
concenrate or blanket a area fairly close with sonic rays? (just above
the range of human hearing)... Sort of an assualt? Is this possible in
some instances or of like equipment???
                 Like to know     Thanks Denis

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Wed Mar 26 17:59:04 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA28769; Wed, 26 Mar 1997 17:46:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 17:46:06 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <33398A3E.338F@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 1997 20:42:38 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Oops! Radio show wrong date
References: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970325104240.19118A-100000@eskimo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"0LMcS.0.O17.U5TEp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/742
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

William Beaty wrote:

However, I'm going to bring along a
> function generator so we can demonstrate how various higher frequencies
> sound, show that low-freq square waves are easily audible, add some FM
> sweep to the audio tones to crudely simulate the Hum, etc.

You can always drive over to the nearest truck stop and record the
overnight diesal rigs (well at least here in Florida they run them all
night with the AC and all) - The rigs (especially if you get right
between two of them to create that binueral effect) have that throbbing,
pulsing, blood pressure raising, irritating sound after awhile and might
do the trick for radio broadcast purposes. Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 28 08:44:25 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA10452; Fri, 28 Mar 1997 08:31:02 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 08:31:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Oh My !
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 97 11:35:19 -0500
x-sender: adams@mail.ee.utk.edu
x-mailer: Claris Emailer 1.1
From: Ray Adams <RayAdams@utk.edu>
To: "TaosHum Newslist" <taoshum-l@eskimo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Message-ID: <1352573853-107629581@mail.ee.utk.edu>
Resent-Message-ID: <"nUwqw1.0.EZ2.59_Ep"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/743
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Greetingsi, to all T-H posters and lurkers,

I am mostly  in the "lurking" mode faithfully reading (and filing) all of 
the "digest" postings.  However, from time to time I will post something 
if I feel it might contribute from either the "conventional" 
engineering/physics viewpoint, or from a human communications viewpoint.  

One of the things that has bothered me in past postings is the confusion 
that is contributed by the mis-use of english words.  It really does take 
some effort, and often is impossible, to try to surmise from context, the 
intended meaning of the words used in some postings.  I would recommend 
the use of a good dictionary (and of course there are typos - for which 
proof-reading helps) to make sure posters use the correct word for its 
indended meaning.  I cite the following cases found in previous postings.

word used/possible meaning
effect/affect
data are plural, such as in "the data show" not, "the data shows" !
to/too
out/ought
possible/possibly
use to (used to?)/accustomed
there/their
preceived/perceived

Also, at risk of inflaming Mr. Mutch, which I would not wish to do (as 
his opinion is to be respected), I would like to point out, respectfully, 
that I wish he would *not* presume to speak for me, a hearer, as in the 
message below!

>Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 20:11:18 -0500
>From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
>To: Star Valley <stvalley@simplynet.net>
>Cc: taoshum-l@eskimo.com

>Yes every person that I have spoken to about alternative systems has developed
>a chronic fatigue for a period. I witnessed these people being physical
>drained of 
>their normal physical energy: and *we hearers know* that the hum does exactly
>this.
*we hearers know*, emphasis, mine* - I know, and I believe, *no such 
thing* !
Will Rogers said, "It's not what you don't know that worries me, it's 
what you know for sure, that just isn't so."

Now, as to Bill Beaty's upcoming radio interview, billjaco@ix.netcom.com, 
suggested that taping the sound of idling deisel trucks would be a good 
idea.  I, too think it would be useful to do this, as that is the sound 
that many hearers agree is the closest to what we hear - yet the sound is 
invariably described as "sounds like deisels idling *in the distance*". 

Now, back to my normal "lurker" mode.

Ray Adams

Raymond K. Adams, Twice retired Educator/Engineer
E-mail:  RayAdams@utk.edu   -or-   rkadams@sacam.oren.ortn.edu
WWW:   http://sacam.oren.ortn.edu/~rkadams/homepage.html

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 28 12:36:31 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA05695; Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:26:55 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:26:55 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <333C2980.5181@olypen.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:26:40 -0800
From: Denis Jackson <ticn@olypen.com>
Reply-To: ticn@olypen.com
Organization: The Illustrator Collectors News
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Oh My ! Lions, and Tibers, & bears
References: <1352573853-107629581@mail.ee.utk.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"jEYvh.0.vO1.Ec2Fp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/744
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Ray....
   You should teach English in the public school system (really!);
I am sure they would appreciate your efforts at correction. Tho you
may find it rather frustrating.....Which would you rather be? A best
selling author, with a good editor? Or the best darn English teacher in
the whole dang universe?   Would like to know.... Thank Ya    Denis

PS: Feel free to correct any english problems you may find in this
message or any future ones I send....                         






Ray Adams wrote:
> 
> Greetingsi, to all T-H posters and lurkers,
> 
> I am mostly  in the "lurking" mode faithfully reading (and filing) all of
> the "digest" postings.  However, from time to time I will post something
> if I feel it might contribute from either the "conventional"
> engineering/physics viewpoint, or from a human communications viewpoint.
> 
> One of the things that has bothered me in past postings is the confusion
> that is contributed by the mis-use of english words.  It really does take
> some effort, and often is impossible, to try to surmise from context, the
> intended meaning of the words used in some postings.  I would recommend
> the use of a good dictionary (and of course there are typos - for which
> proof-reading helps) to make sure posters use the correct word for its
> indended meaning.  I cite the following cases found in previous postings.
> 
> word used/possible meaning
> effect/affect
> data are plural, such as in "the data show" not, "the data shows" !
> to/too
> out/ought
> possible/possibly
> use to (used to?)/accustomed
> there/their
> preceived/perceived
> 
> Also, at risk of inflaming Mr. Mutch, which I would not wish to do (as
> his opinion is to be respected), I would like to point out, respectfully,
> that I wish he would *not* presume to speak for me, a hearer, as in the
> message below!
> 
> >Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 20:11:18 -0500
> >From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
> >To: Star Valley <stvalley@simplynet.net>
> >Cc: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
> 
> >Yes every person that I have spoken to about alternative systems has developed
> >a chronic fatigue for a period. I witnessed these people being physical
> >drained of
> >their normal physical energy: and *we hearers know* that the hum does exactly
> >this.
> *we hearers know*, emphasis, mine* - I know, and I believe, *no such
> thing* !
> Will Rogers said, "It's not what you don't know that worries me, it's
> what you know for sure, that just isn't so."
> 
> Now, as to Bill Beaty's upcoming radio interview, billjaco@ix.netcom.com,
> suggested that taping the sound of idling deisel trucks would be a good
> idea.  I, too think it would be useful to do this, as that is the sound
> that many hearers agree is the closest to what we hear - yet the sound is
> invariably described as "sounds like deisels idling *in the distance*".
> 
> Now, back to my normal "lurker" mode.
> 
> Ray Adams
> 
> Raymond K. Adams, Twice retired Educator/Engineer
> E-mail:  RayAdams@utk.edu   -or-   rkadams@sacam.oren.ortn.edu
> WWW:   http://sacam.oren.ortn.edu/~rkadams/homepage.html

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 28 12:38:27 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA05902; Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:29:28 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:29:28 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <333C2A19.79D7@olypen.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:29:13 -0800
From: Denis Jackson <ticn@olypen.com>
Reply-To: ticn@olypen.com
Organization: The Illustrator Collectors News
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "taoshum-l@eskimo.com" <taoshum-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Hum Darkly
References: <3339C52E.1380@olypen.com> <333AD748.B79@olypen.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"2VfB83.0.9S1.ee2Fp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/745
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hum   Darkly
> 
>     Just Mother Earth Crying
>     and old God's dying
>     Under the wormwood tree
>                                Denis

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 28 13:08:33 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA08749; Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:59:02 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:59:02 -0800 (PST)
From: juno@interserv.com
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 12:58:30 -0800
Message-Id: <199703282058.AA03725@relay.interserv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Oh My !
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22
Resent-Message-ID: <"GcEz6.0.e82.L43Fp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/746
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Howdy y'all!

Date: Fri, 28 Mar 97 11:35:19 -0500
Ray Adams <RayAdams@utk.edu> wrote:

>Greetings, to all T-H posters and lurkers,

>I am mostly  in the "lurking" mode faithfully reading (and filing) all of 
>the "digest" postings.  However, from time to time I will post something 
>if I feel it might contribute from either the "conventional" 
>engineering/physics viewpoint, or from a human communications viewpoint.  

Likewise.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 20:11:18 -0500
>>From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
>>To: Star Valley <stvalley@simplynet.net>
>>Cc: taoshum-l@eskimo.com

>>Yes every person that I have spoken to about alternative systems has developed
>>a chronic fatigue for a period. I witnessed these people being physical
>>drained of their normal physical energy: and *we hearers know* that the hum 
>>does exactly this.

>*we hearers know*, emphasis, mine* - I know, and I believe, *no such 
>thing* !

>Will Rogers said, "It's not what you don't know that worries me, it's 
>what you know for sure, that just isn't so."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I must agree with Mr. Adams here, especially since it is evident that different 
people in different places, may be hearing different "hums" from different 
sources. Some seem to be perceiving an acoustic signal, whereas the actual 
"Taos-hum" is most likely NOT and acoustic signal, but of some other nature.

I too do not feel the hum is causing me to be physically drained of my normal
energy unless, of course, it is one of those nights where the hum is really loud
and almost "insistent" upon my hearing it and I lose sleep due to this.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As to Mr. Adams insistence upon Taoshum-L members using perfectly correct 
"King's English" goes, that is NOT a criterion for posting to this list. As 
being an "electronics engineer", is NOT a criterion for posting to this list.

Demands such as these serve no purpose other than to "scare" off lurkers that 
may not have total certainty in either of these subjects, yet may have 
information of vital importance to the actual purpose here. Therefore, such 
demands serve no purpose other than to feed the egos of those who make these 
subjects their life's "claim to fame".

The purpose of this list is to combine our minds, observations, knowledge of 
related subjects, and theories that serve as food for thought, for the purpose 
of coming to a conclusion as to the SOURCE and Character of the hum that we
are perceiving and, in so doing, perhaps coming up with a solution which may
give us a little more peace in our lives.

It is "not" to air our pet "hobby horses".

If this finds great disagreement among the posters and lurkers, let's hear about 
it!

In fact, let's hear anything! What is this apathy?

Joni, use your "flame thrower" on me, or something! [If you don't, a one horned, 
one eyed, flying purple people eater is gonna gitcha! <Heh, heh>

This silence is maddening!

Sincerely,

Oliver W. Jopling


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 28 13:20:36 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA09196; Fri, 28 Mar 1997 13:05:11 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 13:05:11 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <333C327F.65ED@olypen.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 13:05:03 -0800
From: Denis Jackson <ticn@olypen.com>
Reply-To: ticn@olypen.com
Organization: The Illustrator Collectors News
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Feedback
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"6gcYl.0.cF2.6A3Fp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/747
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Denis from Sequim, Washington
   I could use some feedback from any of you who may have an interest.
As I have mentioned before we have a High Frequency (Just at the highest
level of hearing) sound/hum in our area, some times it seems to modulate
and or mix with a lower feeling hum. But, it is mostly HF in nature. It
will vary in strenght and is usually worse from 2:00 to 4:00 in the
morning, though it may change to other times. It is not getting any
weaker. I have eliminated The house, electrical, hams & CBs, industry,
radio and microwave towers, (closest one is 25 miles away) etc...
   I noticed a post about solar activity may be part of the problem;
and in some way this may make sense for our area. 
   The Sequim area has a natural vortex anomomly; the only one of it's
kind I am aware of on the western U.S.A.. Because of it we only get
about 18" of rain a year, while 40 miles away they will get 6 feet of
rain.
   This vortex is general circle about 10 to 20 miles wide, it can be
raining all over western Washington and still have this circle area
clear and sunny, only a fairly heavy storm front will dislodge the
vortex. This voxtex is created by pressures from the mountains and sea
which (a distance of only 3 miles apart). It act on the weather like a
ultra slow motion tornado the never really gains steam to become one. It
is in place about 350 days a year.
   We live right in the center of this vortex. I believe it is pulling
something from above that is creating the hum from the upper atmoshpere
to ground level and that is what we may be experiencing. The HF effects
can be felt for several miles in all directions from us and it slowly
disapates from the general middle (still have not determined where it
ends or is weakest).
  Also, when field hum is the strongest (inside of house can be just as
strongest as outdoor areas) it leaves a very slight taste on the tongue,
like a combination of ozone/metallic with very light electric overlay.
  Any ideas, feedback, expertise or methods to check this out would be
appreciated. My area of expanded possibilities is running out.
                          Denis
  I am getting the hell out of hear and going camping 40 miles away
where I can longer feel it, Be back in two days.
Happy week-end to all...

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 28 14:20:59 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA14276; Fri, 28 Mar 1997 14:12:12 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 14:12:12 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <333BFB39.1A1F@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 17:09:14 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Oh My !
References: <1352573853-107629581@mail.ee.utk.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"sZy3r1.0.zU3.v84Fp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/750
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Ray Adams wrote: (snipped)

> Now, as to Bill Beaty's upcoming radio interview, billjaco@ix.netcom.com,
> suggested that taping the sound of idling deisel trucks would be a good
> idea.  I, too think it would be useful to do this, as that is the sound
> that many hearers agree is the closest to what we hear - yet the sound is
> invariably described as "sounds like deisels idling *in the distance*".

Ray,

You are 100% correct and I am glad one of our list members was awake.
I actually canceled my EMail "send" command three times before finally
letting it fly - for the very reason you pointed out.  I was standing
right between two idling diesels at the Renaissance Festival in one of
the Viscaya Gardens and experienced something very similar in sound
(with an added baffle effect, ... correct use of word I think).  But it
was definitely not "in the distance".  The HUM(s) I have experienced are
always "around the next corner OR are very weak (seemingly just beneath
normal threshold) - at any rate, both types could be described as "in
the distance" or "at a distance".

I understand what you are hoping to achieve with the grammar lesson.
If I remember correctly you were an educator at one time in your
extensive career; so attempting to coach the list is probably almost
instinctive or second nature to you.  Others may not see it that way - I
hope that they will not stop posting - it doesn't take that much effort
to 'mentally' correct the errors or extract the meaning(s).  I do not
use a spell check on EMail because a percentage of the time I open an
application (while my Browser is open) I end up with a 'lock up' and
have to start over.  Sometimes spelling errors are caused by the many
system translations a post must go through.  For example your very first
word on your post came through with a spelling error - and I am sure you
would not have made such an error on a post about proofreading!

Respectfully,

Bill J
billjaco@ix.netcom.com

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 28 15:09:17 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA27919; Fri, 28 Mar 1997 14:57:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 14:57:45 -0800
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <333C05E6.5A1F@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 17:54:46 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Oh My !
References: <199703282058.AA03725@relay.interserv.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"7armw2.0.8q6.cp4Fp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/751
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

juno@interserv.com wrote:
> 
> In fact, let's hear anything! What is this apathy?
> This silence is maddening!
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Oliver W. Jopling


Oliver,

Alright, alright.  I was going to go into lurk mode while finishing up
some studies but there are some things I would like to bounce around.

The concept of (for lack of a better term) "like receivers" is something
that has bothered me on a number of fronts. I have often wondered if a
person whose brain has 'received' a signal, and decoded it, whether a
second, or third...etc. brain can tune in to the first persons brain. 
For example there are many documentated cases of sleeping people talking
in languages not their own.  Could something like this be going on with
HUM hearers?  While reading a post on a different list I noticed a
familiar style of writing and subject matter.  As I read through the
post I was anxious to say hello to the list member whom (word choice?,
oh no, look what you have started Ray) I was absolutely sure came from
the TAOS list. When I saw that the name was different I sat there in
disbelief - in fact I reread the post several times and ended up writing
to the individual just to be sure - even the mis-use of words and
spelling errors were the same!

Could, there be deep lying evolutionary (no attacks from the
Creationists please; I believe there is a happy middle point where both
are true) functional bio-communications systems at work here?
Do not insect hives, schools of fish, flocks of birds (hey, I am making
my way up the evolutionary scale here), packs of animals, all exhibit
some instantaneous 'knowing'?

Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 28 18:02:55 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA03880; Fri, 28 Mar 1997 17:50:59 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 17:50:59 -0800 (PST)
From: juno@interserv.com
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 17:50:34 -0800
Message-Id: <199703290150.AA09173@relay.interserv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Oh My !
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22
Resent-Message-ID: <"d4sKE.0.Ty.1M7Fp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/752
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Bill,

Fri, 28 Mar 1997 17:54:46 +0000
billjaco@ix.netcom.com  wrote:


>>In fact, let's hear anything! What is this apathy?
>>This silence is maddening!

>Oliver,

>Alright, alright.  I was going to go into lurk mode while finishing up
>some studies but there are some things I would like to bounce around.

>The concept of "like receivers" is something that has bothered me on a number 
>of fronts. I have often wondered if a person whose brain has 'received' a 
>signal, and decoded it, whether a second, or third...etc. brain can tune in to 
>the first persons brain. 

>For example there are many documentated cases of sleeping people talking
>in languages not their own.  Could something like this be going on with
>HUM hearers?

>While reading a post on a different list I noticed a familiar style of writing 
>and subject matter.  As I read through the post I was anxious to say hello to 
>the list member whom I was absolutely sure came from the TAOS list. When I saw 
>that the name was different I sat there in disbelief - in fact I reread the 
>post several times and ended up writing to the individual just to be sure - 
>even the mis-use of words and spelling errors were the same!

>Could, there be deep lying evolutionary functional bio-communications systems 
>at work here?

>Do not insect hives, schools of fish, flocks of birds (hey, I am making
>my way up the evolutionary scale here), packs of animals, all exhibit
>some instantaneous 'knowing'?

>Bill J

Ahhhh, huh?

Of course!
   <BG>

There is one word that answers all the above questions, Bill.

That one word is "SPIRIT".

If you feel you "are" a brain (a mass of gelatinous protoplasm locked in a 
sphere of bone) well, that's one thing.

But, if you realize that you "are" a spiritual being (soul) that operates a body 
and possesses a mind, instead of the other way around, then the above questions 
will merely fade away into insignificance.

A spirit is free to go and be wherever he wishes. Of course a lot of us are not 
aware of this and/or are not aware that we may be roaming around in dreams and 
visit other people while they are asleep.

Then, there are those of us who visit each other knowingly and enjoy each 
other's company on a higher level than the mundane world, such as "Soul Mates", 
"Twin Flames" or "Twin Rays".

Also, there are such things as the "Akashic Records" and "Universal Mind" 
concepts.

And even further out there, near the very limits of stretchable imagination, are 
"parallel lives", "interdimensional communications", "Star Rovers", and 
disembodied aliens from "Epsilon Bootis" justa lookin fer a home.

As far as the writing style, same misuse of words and spelling errors go, this 
is either an unwitting "signature" and it actually is the same person using an 
alias, or they came from the same school district, or they both "ain't had no 
good schoolhousin nohow!"

How 'bout dat?

Oliver


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Fri Mar 28 21:57:41 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA17030; Fri, 28 Mar 1997 21:48:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 21:48:38 -0800
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 21:47:31 -0800 (PST)
From: TN <isotope@itsa.ucsf.edu>
To: TaosHum List <taoshum-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Oh My !
In-Reply-To: <333C05E6.5A1F@ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.A41.3.95.970328214612.25098A-100000@itsa.ucsf.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"m2_JN2.0.1A4.sqAFp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/753
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Fri, 28 Mar 1997 billjaco@ix.netcom.com wrote:

> Could, there be deep lying evolutionary (no attacks from the
> Creationists please; I believe there is a happy middle point where both
> are true) functional bio-communications systems at work here?
> Do not insect hives, schools of fish, flocks of birds (hey, I am making
> my way up the evolutionary scale here), packs of animals, all exhibit
> some instantaneous 'knowing'?
> 
> Bill J
> 
> 
Hello Bill,

Are you suggesting something like a "hundredth monkey" effect?

Regards,
Thomas


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar 29 00:28:54 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA03633; Sat, 29 Mar 1997 00:20:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 00:20:38 -0800
Message-Id: <199703290820.JAA33018@sdn5.csc.dk>
From: i3683@csc.dk (I3683)
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 09:12:00 CET
Subject: Ang.: Hum Rig
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com, ticn@olypen.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Resent-Message-ID: <"-zVaN2.0.hu.L3DFp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/754
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Yes, it is possible to blanket an area with sonic rays.
It is commonly done for intruder detection (ultrasonic alarms)

It is more difficult with infrasound. You need a larger transmitter. But=
 it=20
is certainly possible, as some industrial plants have shown.

Regards, ANders




______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________=
________
Subject: Hum Rig
Author:  ticn@olypen.com at INTERNET
Date:    27-03-97 01.59


Anders....?
   Hoping this goes to everyone else as well.  I have a question
is it possible for radio tech guys to put together a system of a roof
mounted antenna, sonic or ultra sonic device and a amplifier to
concenrate or blanket a area fairly close with sonic rays? (just above
the range of human hearing)... Sort of an assualt? Is this possible in
some instances or of like equipment???
                 Like to know     Thanks Denis

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar 29 05:47:18 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA08309; Sat, 29 Mar 1997 05:36:50 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 05:36:50 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <333CD3E4.7ACB@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 08:33:40 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Oh My !
References: <Pine.A41.3.95.970328214612.25098A-100000@itsa.ucsf.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"IyUSJ1.0.m12.nhHFp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/755
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

TN wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 28 Mar 1997 billjaco@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> 
> > Could, there be deep lying evolutionary (no attacks from the
> > Creationists please; I believe there is a happy middle point where both
> > are true) functional bio-communications systems at work here?
> > Do not insect hives, schools of fish, flocks of birds (hey, I am making
> > my way up the evolutionary scale here), packs of animals, all exhibit
> > some instantaneous 'knowing'?
> >
> > Bill J
> >
> >
> Hello Bill,
> 
> Are you suggesting something like a "hundredth monkey" effect?
> 
> Regards,
> Thomas

Thomas,

Exactly.  The skeptics balk at the concept but through careful
observation you can find examples almost anywhere. Of course, each
biological system is (initially) limited in what it can detect about
other biological systems - for example you may go outside and feed a
couple of turtles and the next day fifteen turtles show up to be fed.
You (in this case me) did not see nor hear any communication between the
turtles which would have facilitated an 'understanding' that identified
(that land animal, myself) or the time of day with food. Were the other
thirteen turtles merely watching beneath or from afar? Was there some
communication between the two and the thirteen exonerating me as a
'friendly food source'?

In the case of the hundredth monkey theory - how might we reach critical
mass required to overcome the natural filters? - well, we have the best
tool in our history - the internet itself. Just imagine that instead of
fifty million users worldwide (guestimate) there were 1.5 billion, and
that there were mandatory or highly suggested sites - can you imagine
the mind controlling potential to shift an entire populations thinking
overnight?

There is an example just a few years ago in India's school system (I am
working entirely from memory here) whereby one female student became
sick and vomited, was observed by a second who became immediately sick
and vomited and a third etc.  The situation spontaneously 'jumped' to a
second school and a third etc. until 39 schools were involved in a
single morning! This is a good example because the invisible 'signal'
jumped from town to town.

Bill J
billjaco@ix.netcom.com

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar 29 11:31:53 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA29765; Sat, 29 Mar 1997 11:14:39 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 11:14:39 -0800 (PST)
From: juno@interserv.com
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 11:14:15 -0800
Message-Id: <199703291914.AA22873@relay.interserv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Oh My !
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22
Resent-Message-ID: <"7Cs3O3.0.0H7.UeMFp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/756
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Bill,

Sat, 29 Mar 1997 08:33:40
You wrote re the "Hundredth Monkey Syndrome".

I thought of the "hundredth monkey syndrome" in my note to you yesterday, but I 
gave you a little more benefit of the doubt than to classify Hum Hearers among 
those with a "heard instinct". 

If "being" a brain is your domain, then so be it.

Did I misinterpret your intention?

If so, pardon me, I apologize.

If not, sorry. It won't happen again.

Oliver


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar 29 13:30:12 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA19951; Sat, 29 Mar 1997 12:54:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 12:54:58 -0800
Message-Id: <199703292055.UAA05626@mail.enterprise.net>
Comments: Authenticated sender is <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
From: "Ron Hill" <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 20:54:40 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Subject: Re: Oh My !
Priority: normal
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.42a)
Resent-Message-ID: <"C0lCP.0.gt4.X6OFp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/757
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Hello Ray,
Nice to see you coming out of the shadows again <G>.

I fear that some of us experience spelling glitches as a result of 
the way our languages have developed. For instance we always spell 
English with a capital "E", and what you in the US spell as "deisels" 
we spell "diesels" (after all they do get their name from Mr Diesel I 
believe). We spell misuse without the hyphen too.

"Our two countries divided by a common language"
or to quote Mark Twain:
In Paris they simply stared when I spoke to them in French; I never 
did succeed in making those idiots understand their own language"

Regards,
Ron.  

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar 29 16:59:33 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA19563; Sat, 29 Mar 1997 16:47:05 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 16:47:05 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970330153300.42171f84@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 10:33:00 -0500
To: Taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Oh My ! 
Resent-Message-ID: <"Vn3pR2.0.Zn4.8WRFp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/758
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

At 12:26 PM 28/03/97 -0800, you wrote:
>Ray....
>   You should teach English in the public school system (really!);
>I am sure they would appreciate your efforts at correction. Tho you
>may find it rather frustrating.....Which would you rather be? A best
>selling author, with a good editor? Or the best darn English teacher in
>the whole dang universe?   Would like to know.... Thank Ya    Denis
>
>PS: Feel free to correct any english problems you may find in this
>message or any future ones I send....                         
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Ray Adams wrote:
>> 
>> Greetingsi, to all T-H posters and lurkers,
>> 
>> I am mostly  in the "lurking" mode faithfully reading (and filing) all of
>> the "digest" postings.  However, from time to time I will post something
>> if I feel it might contribute from either the "conventional"
>> engineering/physics viewpoint, or from a human communications viewpoint.
>> 
>> One of the things that has bothered me in past postings is the confusion
>> that is contributed by the mis-use of english words.  It really does take
>> some effort, and often is impossible, to try to surmise from context, the
>> intended meaning of the words used in some postings.  I would recommend
>> the use of a good dictionary (and of course there are typos - for which
>> proof-reading helps) to make sure posters use the correct word for its
>> indended meaning.  I cite the following cases found in previous postings.
>> 
>> word used/possible meaning
>> effect/affect
>> data are plural, such as in "the data show" not, "the data shows" !
>> to/too
>> out/ought
>> possible/possibly
>> use to (used to?)/accustomed
>> there/their
>> preceived/perceived
>> 
>> Also, at risk of inflaming Mr. Mutch, which I would not wish to do (as
>> his opinion is to be respected), I would like to point out, respectfully,
>> that I wish he would *not* presume to speak for me, a hearer, as in the
>> message below!
>> 
>> >Date: Tue, 25 Mar 1997 20:11:18 -0500
>> >From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
>> >To: Star Valley <stvalley@simplynet.net>
>> >Cc: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
>> 
>> >Yes every person that I have spoken to about alternative systems has
developed
>> >a chronic fatigue for a period. I witnessed these people being physical
>> >drained of
>> >their normal physical energy: and *we hearers know* that the hum does
exactly
>> >this.
>> *we hearers know*, emphasis, mine* - I know, and I believe, *no such
>> thing* !
>> Will Rogers said, "It's not what you don't know that worries me, it's
>> what you know for sure, that just isn't so."
>> 
>> Now, as to Bill Beaty's upcoming radio interview, billjaco@ix.netcom.com,
>> suggested that taping the sound of idling deisel trucks would be a good
>> idea.  I, too think it would be useful to do this, as that is the sound
>> that many hearers agree is the closest to what we hear - yet the sound is
>> invariably described as "sounds like deisels idling *in the distance*".
>> 
>> Now, back to my normal "lurker" mode.
>> 
>> Ray Adams
>> 
>> Raymond K. Adams, Twice retired Educator/Engineer
>> E-mail:  RayAdams@utk.edu   -or-   rkadams@sacam.oren.ortn.edu
>> WWW:   http://sacam.oren.ortn.edu/~rkadams/homepage.html



(I'm certain I have just witnessed karma in the above posts all its infinite
wisdom.) 

Ha ha ha :) I'm sorry... Hi Ray and Denis. I appreciate your post Ray...
sincerely taken with all humility.

Apology for assuming yourself as "we hearers" Ray... I've made a mental note
to say/write/quote "we hearers and may be Ray" in any future references...
[no pun] :) 

I sincerely except your corrections no malice perceived (is that right) on
my part, but "we Australians" (I think I'm allowed to quote 'we' here) use
the European Queens English; its dictionaries and it's contextual
interpretation. I'm not perfect; nor do I perceive to be. 

While we are in the mode of being pedantic: --is the use of asterisk legal
english? We ozzy's use the recommended single or double quotations to
'accentuate' a word. I found this use of *asterisk* to accent a word and
closing a letter with ones signature on the left most side, quite odd when
first exposed to internet. 

To be honest: the biggest problem I face is my own laziness in proof-reading
my mail before sending. I usually say "what the heck, they know what I
mean". The energy level used to correct my mail is directly proportional to
the intensity level of the hum for the given day.... So heaps of mistakes,
means heaps of hum.

Denis, should I put a full stop after ellipses when ending a sentence, 
ie.....?  <--- Truthfully is this right ? ;) 


I also agree with one of Oliver's posts in saying, the fact that we are
communicating important information is the issue, and not the correcting of
spelling or grammar used by each countries natural language. Its quite
obvious that we have little to do on the list at this point in time...

                                                                          -Grant

 

 

From mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au  Sat Mar 29 18:28:14 1997
Received: from janus.cqu.edu.au (janus.cqu.EDU.AU [138.77.1.23]) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id SAA31938; Sat, 29 Mar 1997 18:28:09 -0800
Received: from [138.77.45.108] by janus.cqu.edu.au with SMTP id AA02547
  (5.65v3.2/1.1.3.6 for taoshum-l@eskimo.com); Sun, 30 Mar 1997 12:28:04 +1000
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970330171429.42179976@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 12:14:29 -0500
To: William Beaty <billb@eskimo.com>
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Oh My !
Cc: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

>   Famous politician seen on vacation with 'wife.'

I guess this is the difference of spelling an interpretations across
language barriers. 

I read the above sentence as :
                
        Famous politician seen on vacation with WIFE. (emphases places on WIFE)

where as you Bill read the sentence as :

        Famous politician seen on vacation with so called wife.


>Sounds like the guy is having an affair, no?  To do it properly, one would
>underline "wife," which is impossible in ASCII, so the asterisks are used.

In australia we underline to make you take notice of that word.
                                           ------    
As you have stated this is not possible with ascii.

Either way it just goes to show you the ambiguity of the written word, no matter
which language you choose. This problem is well recognized in computer
programming environments. Z-notation is a language that attempts to remove
this problem, but falls into the same ambiguity in re-interpreting that
notation or formal logic.

Give you an idea of how this is accomplished using Z or formal logic.

F(x) where x is a Famous politician.
V(x) x is on vacation.
W(x) is wife of x .

A x( F(x) ^ W(x) ) -> V( (F(x) ^  W(x) ) 

This decodes as :

FOR ALL 'x'. IF 'x' is a Famous politician and x is with his wife THEN 
'x' is on Vacation with his wife. 

You see how ambiguity can creep back into the interpretation. Which is always
the case with the written word.  

We just have to live with it. :) 
        
>.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,.............................
>William Beaty  voice:206-781-3320   bbs:206-789-0775    cserv:71241,3623
>EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer        http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/
>Seattle, WA 98117  billb@eskimo.com           SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page

sincerely
-G.D.Mutch

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar 29 21:40:46 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA13688; Sat, 29 Mar 1997 21:24:11 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 21:24:11 -0800 (PST)
From: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
Message-ID: <333DB183.B3@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 00:19:15 +0000
Reply-To: billjaco@ix.netcom.com
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0-C-NC320 (Macintosh; I; 68K)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Oh My !
References: <199703291914.AA22873@relay.interserv.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"baBCh2.0.oL3.wZVFp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/760
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

juno@interserv.com wrote:
> 
> Bill,
> 
> Sat, 29 Mar 1997 08:33:40
> You wrote re the "Hundredth Monkey Syndrome".
> 
> I thought of the "hundredth monkey syndrome" in my note to you yesterday, but I
> gave you a little more benefit of the doubt than to classify Hum Hearers among
> those with a "heard instinct".
> 
> If "being" a brain is your domain, then so be it.
> 
> Did I misinterpret your intention?
> 
> If so, pardon me, I apologize.
> 
> If not, sorry. It won't happen again.
> 
> Oliver
> 

Hi Oliver,

Your beginning to sound like a poet and probably didn't even know it.
What I was trying to say was - what if - everyone on this planet could
read (know) about what has been discussed on the Taos Hum.  Would (1) a
percentage of those people suddenly become hearers, or (2) become
sensitized to something they have filtered out all along?  I have no
idea - threw it out for discussion.  I never tied the diesel sound I
heard with the HUM episode on "Sightings" until I joined this list.
A co-worker never even thought (more than a moment or two) about the
HUM(s) he heard until I discussed with him. Finally, could (3) a (for
example) child of an adult HUM hearer, hear the HUM that his parent is
experiencing without experiencing the HUM themself? Bill J

From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sat Mar 29 23:49:48 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA29356; Sat, 29 Mar 1997 23:01:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 23:01:51 -0800
From: juno@interserv.com
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 23:01:42 -0800
Message-Id: <199703300701.AA03953@relay.interserv.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Oh My !
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailer: SPRY Mail Version: 04.10.06.22
Resent-Message-ID: <"11m-V3.0.dA7.U_WFp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/761
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Bill,

Good grief, you're in tomorrow! I'm history! Where are you on the east coast?

Sun, 30 Mar 1997 00:19:15 +0000
billjaco@ix.netcom.com wrote: 

>juno@interserv.com wrote:
> 
>> Bill,
> 
>> Sat, 29 Mar 1997 08:33:40
>> You wrote re the "Hundredth Monkey Syndrome".
> 
>>I thought of the "hundredth monkey syndrome" in my note to you yesterday, but 
>>I gave you a little more benefit of the doubt than to classify Hum Hearers 
>>among those with a "heard instinct".

I guess no one, not even Ray Adams, caught the "error" in the above sentence?!
["heard instinct"... instead of "herd instinct", for 100th Monkey Syndrome
<Hee, hee>

>>If "being" a brain is your domain, then so be it.

Hi Oliver,

>Your beginning to sound like a poet and probably didn't even know it.

Yeah, that's a turrible thing!

>What I was trying to say was - what if - everyone on this planet could
>read (know) about what has been discussed on the Taos Hum.  Would (1) a
>percentage of those people suddenly become hearers, or...

To be honest with you Bill, I was not aware I was a "hum" hearer per se' until I 
did look at this list. I knew I was being bothered by something, but I assumed 
it had to be just something I couldn't find a source for. Like, someone had that 
damn truck well hidden. <G>

>(2) become sensitized to something they have filtered out all along?  I have no
>idea - threw it out for discussion.  I never tied the diesel sound I
>heard with the HUM episode on "Sightings" until I joined this list.

I guess I missed that "Sighting" thing.

>A co-worker never even thought (more than a moment or two) about the
>HUM(s) he heard until I discussed with him. Finally, could (3) a (for
>example) child of an adult HUM hearer, hear the HUM that his parent is
>experiencing without experiencing the HUM themself? Bill J

That's a deep question there.

There is a lot more to this hundredth monkey syndrome than meets the eye though, 
like you referred to it as a "critical mass" required to overcome the natural 
filters...

That is what it seems like. I mentioned "Akashic Records" and "Universal Mind". 
I know these are rather arcane subjects, but the idea of a "Collective 
Unconsciousness" as well as a "Collective Consciousness" has been kicked around 
for years.

Just for kicks, let's say this "Collective Consciousness" does exist, and under 
normal conditions, we do not have access to it, which I understand is the idea. 
People, like Edgar Casey, et. al. supposedly could go into a trance state and 
access it. 

Also, perhaps when a sort of "Critical Mass", like you suggested is reached, and 
the natural filtering, [normal barriers] break down, the knowledge gained by the 
few, now becomes common knowledge to the many, or the species. Like some old 
survival instinct. Like, saber tusk kitties are bad news, and everybody should 
be aware of this! Of course, one look should be enough.

Human beings, supposedly evolved above "herds" and "packs", have individuated 
from the use of this "common" or "super" mind. We thrill to our own invention 
and individuality. But perhaps in times of need, times, when "Life" in general 
has a need to know, it can tap into this collective knowingness. 

"Life" built the Internet, even if DARPA or Dept. of Defense, claims that fame. 
It sure has hooked us all up. Maybe it is replacing the "Cosmic Consciousness" 
because we "did" divorce it for "individuality", and Life needs another path to 
our knowledge to make it common?!

Interesting food for thought you opened up here Bill.

What has the hum been sounding like where you live? It has been undergoing some 
rather bizarre changes in amplitude as well as tonal qualities here on the west 
coast lately.

Take care,

Oliver


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Sun Mar 30 15:36:48 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx1.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA07767; Sun, 30 Mar 1997 15:01:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 30 Mar 1997 15:01:32 -0800
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970331134745.28af73de@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
X-Sender: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 08:47:45 -0500
To: Taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: "G.D.Mutch" <mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au>
Subject: Hum generators
Resent-Message-ID: <"tMcGk2.0.Fv1.B3lFp"@mx1>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/762
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi All.
        A little tit bit of info that came my way about six months back.
My father had some inside information from a gentlemen who works for the 
Brisbane airport. This gentlemen said that they where forced to install these
huge pulsating generators; they were told it would suppress the noise
pollution problem around the airport. After these generators where installed
there
was strict instructions for no one to go near or do maintenance on these
generators unless they ware the specified protection equipment.  On going
near these generators the maintenance crew would experience a terrific
humming sensation and some felt nauseous. Some people could not stand in
close proximity
to the generators for any length of time. 

My piece of conspiracy for the day:
What a great place to hide the carrier wave equipment for their EVIL link.
Place it at all airports,that way they could use the excuse that it is for
sound suppression ???? And if anyone around the airport complains, then they
would be
told it just sub acoustics aircraft noise... What a great way to hide there
real intentions ?

interesting... Comments anyone ?
G.D.Mutch

 
 
=IIII== E-mail: mutchg@topaz.cqu.edu.au ===================================IIII=
  II     _--_|\               *   G.D.&C.M.Mutch |-oo[ New-Age Pioneer ]oo- II
  ||    /    |_\           *    * Rockhampton.   | Alternative : Energy,    ||
  ||    \_.--._/               .  Queensland.    | Health, Wealth ,Personal ||
  II  Great/ s@uthern/ land/  *   Australia.     | & Social Values Today.   II
=IIII====================================================By=Ascii=Arts=====IIII=
Current member of Amnesty International. 
Have the guts to stand UP and say "NO!" to the current use of Bio-telemetry.


From taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com  Mon Mar 31 10:47:31 1997
Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mx2.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA02324; Mon, 31 Mar 1997 10:32:08 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 10:32:08 -0800 (PST)
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 19:32:30 +0100 (BST)
Message-Id: <199703311832.TAA08802@mail.enterprise.net>
X-Sender: ronhill@mail.enterprise.net (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
From: Ron Hill <ronhill@mail.enterprise.net>
Subject: Surge in electromagnetic field.
Resent-Message-ID: <"uITB5.0.Fa.cC0Gp"@mx2>
Resent-From: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Reply-To: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <taoshum-l@eskimo.com> archive/latest/763
X-Loop: taoshum-l@eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: taoshum-l-request@eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Has anyone noticed anything different about the hum in the previous 2 days?

I monitor the frequency changes in the ambient electromagnetic field
regularly and the field usually only varies around 50 - 55 hz (power hum and
interference from electrical equipment kocally) with occasional spikes as an
inductive load is switched on  
However from around 01.00 hrs GMT on Sunday night until 15.50 hrs today
(Monday) I recorded huge changes in the e/m field with the frequency change
of the ambient field swinging from 50 Hz up to as much as 2kHz at times.
Then as suddenly as it began the field changes reverted to normal.

Bearing in mind the time difference between here in England and other
countries does this tie in with any observations of the hum by anyone else?

Regards,
Ron.
