Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Acient sounds recorded on pottery?

90 views
Skip to first unread message

Martin Reboul

unread,
Oct 17, 2002, 10:03:13 PM10/17/02
to

Martin Lechner wrote...

> A long time ago I heard of the idea, that sound recording could have
occured
> during the decoration process of pottery. The theory was, that the
> decoration tools worked like the needle on old grammophones, and this
sounds
> could be recreated by laser scanning.
>
> Does anyone know anything about that?
> Was it tried out actually?

I'm not sure about that one.
Many years ago it was postulated that as a brush was being stroked across a
canvas, the bristles might have been modulated by sound waves in the studio.

The possibilities are rather fascinating, but what might have been recorded
I wonder....?

Michelangelo arguing with the Pope about interior design, with the crump of
medieval cannon in the background - fascinating!
Hieronymous Bosch explaining what the symbolism in Heaven and Hell was all
about as he painted? The Borgias discussing their ambitions during one of
their family sittings maybe? Henry VII breaking down and confessing to the
man painting his portrait that it was in fact he who killed the Little
Princes in the Tower and said where they were buried.....

That would be great, but I think it more likely you might hear Leonardo
DaVinci shouting "stay still you silly cow!" to a model (in Italian of
course), or the clinking of a bottle and the glug of Absinthe in later
impressionist works done in Victorian Paris? Maybe Vincent Van Gough
belching after a surfeit of wine? Or worse....


Seriously, I heard that "a word" had been extracted from a masterpiece (this
was on 'the Burke Special' back in the 70's) but never heard any more about
it since.

What would everyone else like to hear I wonder? Fruity conversations with
all those pasty faced models used by the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood for
me....

"Lizzie - that's the *third* bottle of laudenham you've had since
breakfast - give it a rest girl!"
"Oh shtopp moaning you shod! You never let me have any fun!" (sniff sniff)
"Well, I'm not going out to the bloody apothecary again, and that's final!"
"Barshtard!" (sound of smashing class, paroxysm of coughing then hysterical
laughter)....

It's all down there somewhere I'm sure!
Cheers
Martin


tkavanagh

unread,
Oct 17, 2002, 10:46:23 PM10/17/02
to Martin Reboul

There was a Twilight Zone episode from the 1950s whih suggestd that the sounds
of the destruction of some ancient city (I can't remember if the specified
Pompei) were preserved in the rocks.

tk

Matthew Montchalin

unread,
Oct 17, 2002, 11:29:39 PM10/17/02
to
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, Martin Reboul wrote:
|Many years ago it was postulated that as a brush was being stroked
|across a canvas, the bristles might have been modulated by sound waves
|in the studio.
|
|The possibilities are rather fascinating, but what might have been
|recorded I wonder....?
|
|Michelangelo arguing with the Pope about interior design, with the crump
|of medieval cannon in the background - fascinating!

Just imagine how he would have complained if somebody'd had a boom box
nearby, and it was cranking out some "rap!"

Martin Reboul

unread,
Oct 17, 2002, 11:38:52 PM10/17/02
to

tkavanagh wrote ..

>
> There was a Twilight Zone episode from the 1950s whih suggestd that the
sounds
> of the destruction of some ancient city (I can't remember if the specified
> Pompei) were preserved in the rocks.

Many years ago, there was a BBC drama called 'The Stone Tape" about an
electronics company who'd moved into an old (haunted) house... needless to
say it all ended in 'Dr Who' style (i.e. incredibly cheap and pisspoor)
disaster when they tried to exploit the 'haunting' as a new kind of
recording medium.

Got my imagination going even so...
With new scientific methods and techniques, who knows what may become
possible? An extremely interesting subject really - any ideas?
Cheers
Martin


Martin Reboul

unread,
Oct 17, 2002, 11:41:53 PM10/17/02
to

Matthew Montchalin wrote...

I'd love to hear his voice even if he was just screaming "turn that *****ing
racket off!"....?

Renia

unread,
Oct 18, 2002, 6:05:42 AM10/18/02
to


I remember this. Black and white, starring Jane Asher. It caught my
imagination.

Renia


Michael Farthing

unread,
Oct 18, 2002, 5:14:46 AM10/18/02
to
In message <aonvjk$t14$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk>, Martin Reboul <martin@reb
oul1471.freeserve.co.uk> writes

>
>tkavanagh wrote ..
>>
>> There was a Twilight Zone episode from the 1950s whih suggestd that the
>sounds
>> of the destruction of some ancient city (I can't remember if the specified
>> Pompei) were preserved in the rocks.
>
>Many years ago, there was a BBC drama called 'The Stone Tape" about an
>electronics company who'd moved into an old (haunted) house... needless to
>say it all ended in 'Dr Who' style (i.e. incredibly cheap and pisspoor)
>disaster when they tried to exploit the 'haunting' as a new kind of
>recording medium.

Illusions shattered! Yes, I suppose it was an incredibly cheap and
pisspoor ending, but I was nowt but a lad at the time, and had
nightmares about that programme for weeks (well days) afterwards. It
still sends a slight shudder through me. If it should ever be repeated
I think I'll not watch it - it'd be a shame not to find it frightening
second time round!

--
Michael Farthing
cyclades
Software House

Renia

unread,
Oct 18, 2002, 12:46:10 PM10/18/02
to
Well, take a look at this! It's now out on DVD. And it was colour. Must
have had a b/w TV in those days.

Renia

Renia

unread,
Oct 18, 2002, 12:49:05 PM10/18/02
to
Well, take a look at this! The Stone Tape is now out on DVD. And it was
colour. Must have had a b/w TV in those days.

http://www.bfi.org.uk/bookvid/videos/special/archivetv/bf099-rev.html
http://freespace.virgin.net/g.hurry/stone_tape.htm

Renia

Martin Reboul

unread,
Oct 18, 2002, 1:29:40 PM10/18/02
to

Renia wrote...

> Well, take a look at this! The Stone Tape is now out on DVD. And it was
> colour. Must have had a b/w TV in those days.
>
> http://www.bfi.org.uk/bookvid/videos/special/archivetv/bf099-rev.html
> http://freespace.virgin.net/g.hurry/stone_tape.htm

I'm not paying 13 ***** quid to see it again? That really is remarkable!

Even so, although I was a mere babe in arms when it came out, the
combination of technology and spooks fascinated me and helped set me on the
path to er, well, wherever I end up (shudder!) ... worth a look.
Cheers
Martin


Göran Bäärnhielm

unread,
Oct 18, 2002, 3:02:50 PM10/18/02
to
I remember too, many years ago, one prominent Swedish archaeologist looked
seriously into this possibility, and I remember listening to some rythmic sounds
on the radio, but I don't think any publication ever came out of it.
Göran Bäärnhielm

Martin Reboul skrev:

--
Göran Bäärnhielm
Stockholm, Sweden
goran.ba...@linux.nu


zolota

unread,
Oct 19, 2002, 1:00:52 AM10/19/02
to

"Göran Bäärnhielm" <goran.ba...@linux.nu> wrote in message
news:3DB05AB3...@linux.nu...

> I remember too, many years ago, one prominent Swedish archaeologist looked
> seriously into this possibility, and I remember listening to some rythmic
sounds
> on the radio, but I don't think any publication ever came out of it.
> Göran Bäärnhielm
>

My father was an early amateur radio operator cira 1920. When radio was in
it's infancy a lot of ideas that started became obsolete as understandings
advanced. He told me several times that early theorists predicted that as
amplifiers improved they could pick up sounds from farther awar which is
also farther back in time. From this came the idea that eventually
electronics would be used to listen in on the conversations of the ancients
thousands of years ago. The idea had it's fling in the science fiction of
the time.

Zolota


E. C. Lee

unread,
Oct 19, 2002, 11:29:50 PM10/19/02
to
"Martin Reboul" <mar...@reboul1471.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message news:<aonq04$8ts$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk>...

>
> What would everyone else like to hear I wonder? Fruity conversations with
> all those pasty faced models used by the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood for
> me....
>
> "Lizzie - that's the *third* bottle of laudenham you've had since
> breakfast - give it a rest girl!"
> "Oh shtopp moaning you shod! You never let me have any fun!" (sniff sniff)
> "Well, I'm not going out to the bloody apothecary again, and that's final!"
> "Barshtard!" (sound of smashing class, paroxysm of coughing then hysterical
> laughter)....
>
> It's all down there somewhere I'm sure!

Not bad. Don't suppose you have the one where Millais and Effie are
giggling about John Ruskin?

Eve

Ken Down

unread,
Oct 19, 2002, 1:18:47 AM10/19/02
to
In article <8G5s9.537563$v53.22...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca>, "zolota"
<zol...@shaw.ca> wrote:

> My father was an early amateur radio operator cira 1920. When radio was in
> it's infancy a lot of ideas that started became obsolete as understandings
> advanced. He told me several times that early theorists predicted that as
> amplifiers improved they could pick up sounds from farther awar which is
> also farther back in time. From this came the idea that eventually
> electronics would be used to listen in on the conversations of the
> ancients thousands of years ago. The idea had it's fling in the science
> fiction of the time.

Ah! Doesn't that bring back memories. I don't date back to the 1920s, I
hasten to point out, but many of the books in my father's library did. I had
forgotten all about that idea, but yes, I remember reading one or more
stories based on it.

Ken Down

--
__ __ __ __ __
| \ | / __ / __ | |\ | / __ |__ All the latest archaeological news
|__/ | \__/ \__/ | | \| \__/ __| from the Middle East with David Down
================================= and "Digging Up The Past"
Web site: www.argonet.co.uk/education/diggings
e-mail: digg...@argonet.co.uk


Renia

unread,
Oct 20, 2002, 7:21:09 AM10/20/02
to
Martin Reboul wrote:

>
> What would everyone else like to hear I wonder? Fruity conversations with
> all those pasty faced models used by the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood for
> me....

My great-grandmother was one of those, thank you very much. She wasn't
pasty-faced. Rosy-cheeked and pouting lips.

Renia

Biff Anderson

unread,
Oct 21, 2002, 1:20:50 PM10/21/02
to
<Henry VII breaking down and confessing to the
man painting his portrait that it was in fact he who killed the Little
Princes in the Tower and said where they were buried.....

That one was really stupid. You just rendered yourself into an idiot.

"Martin Reboul" <mar...@reboul1471.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:aonq04$8ts$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
>

Martin Reboul

unread,
Oct 21, 2002, 1:56:23 PM10/21/02
to

Biff Anderson wrote... (of Martin Reboul)

> That one was really stupid. You just rendered yourself into an idiot.

You think so?
As it happens Biff, some might well say that shows you are hardly the
sharpest tool in the box yourself on two counts, firstly by demonstrating
your inability to write English and secondly through your lamentable failure
to appreciate a very obvious joke (unless you have no understanding of
sarcasm?).

I would never be so impolite however, especially to a complete stranger.

Cheers
Martin

Martin Reboul

unread,
Oct 21, 2002, 2:23:51 PM10/21/02
to

zolota wrote...

Göran Bäärnhielm wrote...


> > I remember too, many years ago, one prominent Swedish archaeologist
> > looked seriously into this possibility, and I remember listening to some
> > rythmic sounds
> > on the radio, but I don't think any publication ever came out of it.
> > Göran Bäärnhielm

The pottery turning at a fairly uniform rate would provide a far better
'medium' than an artists brush, true, but as for modulation of the tool used
on it by soundwaves, I have serious doubts?
Microscopic at best, 'noisy' in the extreme... it sounds great in theory but
I wouldn't hold out too much hope.

>
> My father was an early amateur radio operator cira 1920. When radio was in
> it's infancy a lot of ideas that started became obsolete as understandings
> advanced. He told me several times that early theorists predicted that as
> amplifiers improved they could pick up sounds from farther awar which is
> also farther back in time. From this came the idea that eventually
> electronics would be used to listen in on the conversations of the
ancients
> thousands of years ago. The idea had it's fling in the science fiction of
> the time.

An interesting idea, but I foresee a few snags?

If you want to look back in time look at the sun - it *really* looked like
that about eight minutes ago, may have blown up since then, who knows? Look
at a star like Deneb and you're looking back 60,000 years...

But I assume he meant sound waves - those are electromagnetic 'speed of
light stuff' whatever. The trouble is, people only usually say things once
that couldn't be heard more than a few hundred yards away even when they
were said....

I suppose in theory that sound waves go on for ever and ever in the
atmosphere, getting ever fainter? But even if the atmosphere were deadly
still
and undisturbed, I think sub-molecular vibration levels would soon be
reached?

It's a lovely thought, but all 'lost in the noise' within milliseconds,
never to be heard again I'm afraid.
Cheers
Martin

PS. What would everyone *really* like to hear from the past if it were
possible?

ouagadougou

unread,
Oct 21, 2002, 8:04:45 PM10/21/02
to
> PS. What would everyone *really* like to hear from the past if it were
> possible?

Just the Voices of the time.
My imagining of history is filtered and distorted by modern media... movies,
books, documentaries.

In these people speak English, usually with an American, or an upper class
Shakespeare Thespian British accent, or perhaps an American putting on a bad
European accent.
It give you an image of a modern 21st Century man, but living in less
technological advanced times.

To actually hear the native tongue, the turn of phrase, the cough of some
nasty medieval disease....

ouagadougou


David Williams

unread,
Oct 22, 2002, 9:34:41 AM10/22/02
to
-> > PS. What would everyone *really* like to hear from the past if it were
-> > possible?

It *is* possible to hear voices from back in the 19th Century. Old
recordings, on phonograph cylinders or disks, still exist from the
earliest days of recording. For example, there's a recording of the
voice of British Prime Minister William Gladstone, who was born in
1809, so his modes of speech reflected the first quarter of the 19th
Century. His accent was very different from anything that exists today,
making what he said quite difficult to understand.

dow

Martin Reboul

unread,
Oct 23, 2002, 5:55:18 PM10/23/02
to

David Williams wrote ...

I remember that a very early Edison Phonograph, that had been on display in
a museum for the best part of a century (c/w cylinder) was examined, and it
was found that the cylinder actually had a recording of a woman's voice on
it - thought to be Queen Victoria. I heard it (on the news, only a few
words) and it was exactly as I would have suspected - that traditional "we
are not amused" voice we all know and er, well, love...?
Anyone else remenber this?
I'd love to hear Gladstone - have to track this one down!
Cheers
Martin

David Williams

unread,
Oct 23, 2002, 11:56:10 PM10/23/02
to
-> I'd love to hear Gladstone - have to track this one down!

I am sure that the BBC has a copy of the recording.

dow

Martin Reboul

unread,
Oct 24, 2002, 10:26:15 AM10/24/02
to

David Williams wrote...

> -> I'd love to hear Gladstone - have to track this one down!
>
> I am sure that the BBC has a copy of the recording.

No need actually - Mr Gladstone is on the Net....

http://www.btinternet.com/~st.deiniols/History.htm

Cheers
Martin


Mike Cleven

unread,
Oct 28, 2002, 11:16:03 PM10/28/02
to

the screams of slaves and the convicted as they were tortured and/or
killed, "the lamentations of the women", the sound of sword-armies
clashing. ...aaAh, for the good old days...

MC

Mike Cleven

unread,
Oct 28, 2002, 11:48:52 PM10/28/02
to

Think about it; to effectively travel to such a distant place you'd have
to be able to go "around space" because you need to do it in real time,
both there and back. Relativistic time-fudging not allowed for
practical space travel, nope, not unless we get really long lifespans
and a hell of a lot of patience to travel the galaxy effectively at even
sublight speeds. 60,000 light years, at 10% lightspeed with a Bussard
ramjet or similar, makes it 600,000 years of travel just to get there;
in the meantime Earth's had a few hundred million years go by, and might
not even be there at the end of a return trip. If you _had_ to evacuate
a whole planet on an emergency basis and didn't have anything more
advanced, if such a thing is theoretically even possible, then it would
do - but you'd need to build ships and organizations capable of managing
onboard society for generations upon generations. For
diplomatic/commercial/educational/tourist purposes, "space" travel or
real-time communication as on so many TV science fiction shows would
have to be able to make distance as measured by light irrelevant; if an
understanding spacetime comes along to solve this issue it would make
"space exploration" really possible. Our "signal space" is still only
160 years old or so (starting with the telegraph's spread) and our
"broadcast space" is still less than 200 lightyears across; the distance
and EM signals from us have travelled or could be detected (by EM means
anyway). If we sent a signal to Alpha Centauri, it would take nearly
four years to get there (or is it Barnard's Star that's closest?), and
another four for any reply. Not very handy for pizza delivery or
take-out gaakh.


>
> But I assume he meant sound waves - those are electromagnetic 'speed of
> light stuff' whatever. The trouble is, people only usually say things once
> that couldn't be heard more than a few hundred yards away even when they
> were said....

Depending on what kind of technology you might be using, that is,
especially lately. I had to jump in here over the sounds waves being
"speed of light stuff". Nope; sound is a mechanical wave in matter;
it's not matter-energy like light is, not in the same way anyway. Speed
is very slow in comparison to light, and requires a medium; light
requires only space/time. I can't remember the speed of sound - 6, 700
miles an hour tops? - but it's completely different. Long-distance
communication by sound vs. electrical signal (wiredEM isn't as fast as
light, but is a hell of a lot faster than sound) would be, if
technologically practical over distance, still slower than electrical.
The closest I can think of to fairly long-range sound-transmission was
the old speaking-tube system, which was sometimes fairly elaborate.
Still, sound carries only so far; light goes on forever, more or less.
Untechnological things like drum-calls and "hollers" can provide
networks for sound-carried information, but it's not the same thing as
direct transmission, which electrical and light-born (laser) media can
provide.


>
> I suppose in theory that sound waves go on for ever and ever in the
> atmosphere, getting ever fainter? But even if the atmosphere were deadly
> still
> and undisturbed, I think sub-molecular vibration levels would soon be
>

More like white noise, or actually pink noise; random signal - pink is
white noise in low frequencies, i.e. the "red" end of the sound
spectrum. Entropy affects sound a lot more than it does light; signals
fade over time because they run out through absorption, mutual
cancellation from echoing, and so on; but their frequency and pattern
doesn't change, only their amplitude (volume) does. It may even be that
some resonant effect on molecules, crystals, sub-molecular systems etc.
might carry "imprints", but eventually a "signal" will just become
another indiscernible pattern lost within the mass of daily sound
generated over millenia in our noisy atmosphere. There may one day be a
technological way of sorting out sounds from the "background white
noise", but it's not anywhere near even proposed yet, not by serious
engineers anyway. An atmosphere that would be "deadly still and
undisturbed" would be entropy, or against the laws of thermodynamics;
and if the matter in the atmosphere weren't moving, then there's no
possibility at all that there would be sound in such an environment, for
sound needs it to move through (when not moving through objects, water
etc.). Sound can't be present in interplanetary space, as you probably
know; which is why all those explosions on the TV shows should really be
in dead silence, except for radio noise from the usually very
matter-ripping explosions, which should generate a lot of EM (and you'd
want to be wearing goggles near-constantly in battle).


>
> It's a lovely thought, but all 'lost in the noise' within milliseconds,
> never to be heard again I'm afraid.

Trees within an incredibly large forest, dropping twigs....

> PS. What would everyone *really* like to hear from the past if it were
> possible?

Alexander's speech to the troops in India.
Buddha and other religious figures teaching.
Roman pop tunes, Egyptian and Babylonian temple music, the Greek plays
with their original productions
the sound the Straits of Gibraltar when it was a waterfall....

MC

Martin Reboul

unread,
Oct 29, 2002, 4:47:20 PM10/29/02
to

Mike Cleven wrote...

Well, according to the theory of relativity, you'd never be able to 'catch
up' with seeing yourself take off anyway, so that's out for a start. EM is
no way to communicate celestially speaking, unless we find out how to extend
our lifetimes many thousand times and learn the true meaning of patience?
An interesting point is that our electromagnetic waves may be detectebale
(way under the noise) quite a few light years away by now, but all they'd
probably be able to see were 50/60 Hz sync pulses and maybe TV testcards?
All those episodes of Fawlty Towers, the News and records of man's finest
achievements would be impossible to see, according to what I know of signal
theory. What would they lead another civilisation to think of us I wonder?
Even then, they'd only find them if they were really looking hard for them
and knew what to look for...

> > But I assume he meant sound waves - those are electromagnetic 'speed of
> > light stuff' whatever. The trouble is, people only usually say things
once
> > that couldn't be heard more than a few hundred yards away even when they
> > were said....
>
> Depending on what kind of technology you might be using, that is,
> especially lately. I had to jump in here over the sounds waves being
> "speed of light stuff". Nope; sound is a mechanical wave in matter;
> it's not matter-energy like light is, not in the same way anyway. Speed
> is very slow in comparison to light, and requires a medium; light
> requires only space/time.

Poor phraseology on my part - I was aware of this.

> I can't remember the speed of sound - 6, 700
> miles an hour tops? - but it's completely different.

Call it about 300 m/s?

> Long-distance
> communication by sound vs. electrical signal (wiredEM isn't as fast as
> light, but is a hell of a lot faster than sound) would be, if
> technologically practical over distance, still slower than electrical.
> The closest I can think of to fairly long-range sound-transmission was
> the old speaking-tube system, which was sometimes fairly elaborate.
> Still, sound carries only so far; light goes on forever, more or less.
> Untechnological things like drum-calls and "hollers" can provide
> networks for sound-carried information, but it's not the same thing as
> direct transmission, which electrical and light-born (laser) media can
> provide.

Theoretically, Richard III's cry of "treason" as he died at bosworth, would,
by now, have travelled perhaps 5x10^12 metres.. and were the atmospere to
extend forever, thoughout the universe, it might just have been heard by a
very sensitive Saturnian the other day.... but it doesn't of course!


> > I suppose in theory that sound waves go on for ever and ever in the
> > atmosphere, getting ever fainter? But even if the atmosphere were deadly
> > still
> > and undisturbed, I think sub-molecular vibration levels would soon be
> >
>
> More like white noise, or actually pink noise; random signal - pink is
> white noise in low frequencies, i.e. the "red" end of the sound
> spectrum. Entropy affects sound a lot more than it does light; signals
> fade over time because they run out through absorption, mutual
> cancellation from echoing, and so on; but their frequency and pattern
> doesn't change, only their amplitude (volume) does. It may even be that
> some resonant effect on molecules, crystals, sub-molecular systems etc.
> might carry "imprints", but eventually a "signal" will just become
> another indiscernible pattern lost within the mass of daily sound
> generated over millenia in our noisy atmosphere.

To 'record' something with any hope of recovery, it has to influence a
process undergoing crystallization, freezing, setting or morphosing somehow
I suppose? Or modulate some medium that will preserve a 'recording' in some
form via the same process - something transient, changeable and soon
permanent. The brush bristles are an obvious example. Perhaps freezing ice
(tricky!) or at best, solidifying metal, paint or pitch may somehow record
sound waves?

But whatever it is that dowsing, ghosts and other phenomena work on, through
or by, has nothing to do with sound or electromagnetism I fear. It isn't a
'new' force or field, its always been around. The problem is, it can't be
'properly' detected scientifically by any sort of transducer as far as I
know. So far... the same was once true of electricity and magnetism, only a
century or so ago...?

> There may one day be a
> technological way of sorting out sounds from the "background white
> noise", but it's not anywhere near even proposed yet, not by serious
> engineers anyway. An atmosphere that would be "deadly still and
> undisturbed" would be entropy, or against the laws of thermodynamics;
> and if the matter in the atmosphere weren't moving, then there's no
> possibility at all that there would be sound in such an environment, for
> sound needs it to move through (when not moving through objects, water
> etc.). Sound can't be present in interplanetary space, as you probably
> know; which is why all those explosions on the TV shows should really be
> in dead silence, except for radio noise from the usually very
> matter-ripping explosions, which should generate a lot of EM (and you'd
> want to be wearing goggles near-constantly in battle).

In space no-one can hear you scream.....

> > It's a lovely thought, but all 'lost in the noise' within milliseconds,
> > never to be heard again I'm afraid.
>
> Trees within an incredibly large forest, dropping twigs....

Drops in oceans, grains of sand on a beach.... worse. Once lost in the noise
they are lost for good Needles in haystacks are a piece of cake compared,
using a metal detector! The detector is the key...

>
> > PS. What would everyone *really* like to hear from the past if it were
> > possible?
>
> Alexander's speech to the troops in India.
> Buddha and other religious figures teaching.
> Roman pop tunes, Egyptian and Babylonian temple music, the Greek plays
> with their original productions
> the sound the Straits of Gibraltar when it was a waterfall....

Back to white noise!

Personally, I'd like to hear Charles I on trial, Henry VIII arguing with
Thomas More, all the music you mention and more, Helen of Troy's voice,
Edward Iv adressing his men at Barnet, many of Richard III's private
conversations, Warwick apologising to Margaret of Anjou, and what Jesus
really said during the crucifixion.... too many to mention!
Cheers
Martin


Mark Edwards

unread,
Oct 30, 2002, 6:18:56 AM10/30/02
to
In article <apn0an$eed$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk>, Martin Reboul
<mar...@reboul1471.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

> > I can't remember the speed of sound - 6, 700
> > miles an hour tops? - but it's completely different.
>
> Call it about 300 m/s?


or roughly 700mph varying at sea level and altitude. In addition as
previously stated cannot travel in a vacuum.

0 new messages