Discussion:
OT: Bionic Woman again
(too old to reply)
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-04 11:29:03 UTC
Permalink
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.

Last night's show was pretty good.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
John Black
2007-10-04 14:44:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
Can you explain to me who she is working for and who they are fighting?

John Black
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Snakes on a plane
2007-10-04 16:21:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Black
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
Can you explain to me who she is working for and who they are fighting?
She is working for NBC/Universal and fighting ABC CBS Fox.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-04 17:27:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Black
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
Can you explain to me who she is working for and who they are fighting?
John Black
Not yet.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
gamefixer
2007-10-04 16:11:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Really? Wouldnt you be able to tell which direction a distant sound
above 1000hz was coming from with only one ear?

Thats odd.

Matt
KK
2007-10-04 17:15:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Really? Wouldnt you be able to tell which direction a distant sound above
1000hz was coming from with only one ear?
Only if you turned around, like the radar dish at an airport.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-04 17:29:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by KK
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Really? Wouldnt you be able to tell which direction a distant sound above
1000hz was coming from with only one ear?
Only if you turned around, like the radar dish at an airport.
Wouldn't work. Sound bounces off of objects. You need both ears to
identify a direction and hear in stereo.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Manfred Mann
2007-10-04 18:20:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by KK
Really? Wouldnt you be able to tell which direction a distant sound above
1000hz was coming from with only one ear?
Only if you turned around, like the radar dish at an airport.
Wouldn't work. Sound bounces off of objects. You need both ears to
identify a direction and hear in stereo.
Who is to say you can't have more than one way to pick up sound in
that one ear? And then use those sources in the ear to detemine the
direction it's coming from? In theory you could have as many sources
for picking up sound in that ear as you can fit on an intergrated
circuit board.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-04 18:26:57 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 14:20:30 -0400, Manfred Mann
Post by Manfred Mann
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by KK
Really? Wouldnt you be able to tell which direction a distant sound above
1000hz was coming from with only one ear?
Only if you turned around, like the radar dish at an airport.
Wouldn't work. Sound bounces off of objects. You need both ears to
identify a direction and hear in stereo.
Who is to say you can't have more than one way to pick up sound in
that one ear? And then use those sources in the ear to detemine the
direction it's coming from? In theory you could have as many sources
for picking up sound in that ear as you can fit on an intergrated
circuit board.
How would you perceive direction with one ear?

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Mr. Bill
2007-10-04 19:28:52 UTC
Permalink
One ear with a high density of "sound detectors", if you will. Like the
sensor in a digital camera that has millions of "light detectors", or
pixels. It would require a computer to tell the difference between when the
sound hits the different areas of the sound sensor because they are so close
together, but it would work in theory.

But, whatever.. I hate when people make up this fan-wank theory crap, and
now you made me do it. Thanks!

Bill
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 14:20:30 -0400, Manfred Mann
Post by Manfred Mann
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by KK
Really? Wouldnt you be able to tell which direction a distant sound above
1000hz was coming from with only one ear?
Only if you turned around, like the radar dish at an airport.
Wouldn't work. Sound bounces off of objects. You need both ears to
identify a direction and hear in stereo.
Who is to say you can't have more than one way to pick up sound in
that one ear? And then use those sources in the ear to detemine the
direction it's coming from? In theory you could have as many sources
for picking up sound in that ear as you can fit on an intergrated
circuit board.
How would you perceive direction with one ear?
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-04 19:27:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mr. Bill
One ear with a high density of "sound detectors", if you will. Like the
sensor in a digital camera that has millions of "light detectors", or
pixels. It would require a computer to tell the difference between when the
sound hits the different areas of the sound sensor because they are so close
together, but it would work in theory.
That would work possibly for distance. The sound is going into a
single orifice, not two, so you really couldn't discern which
direction it is coming from. It's like trying to watch a 3D movie
with one eye.
Post by Mr. Bill
But, whatever.. I hate when people make up this fan-wank theory crap, and
now you made me do it. Thanks!
Oh, and YOU'RE WELCOME! ;)

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Thanatos
2007-10-04 22:34:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 14:20:30 -0400, Manfred Mann
Post by Manfred Mann
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by KK
Really? Wouldnt you be able to tell which direction a distant sound above
1000hz was coming from with only one ear?
Only if you turned around, like the radar dish at an airport.
Wouldn't work. Sound bounces off of objects. You need both ears to
identify a direction and hear in stereo.
Who is to say you can't have more than one way to pick up sound in
that one ear? And then use those sources in the ear to detemine the
direction it's coming from? In theory you could have as many sources
for picking up sound in that ear as you can fit on an intergrated
circuit board.
How would you perceive direction with one ear?
The ear itself could have multiple sensors and software that transmits
the resulting directional data to her brain.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-05 13:24:01 UTC
Permalink
Just as two eyes are needed to perceive depth ( 3d ), two ears are
needed to determine precise distance from the listener and
direction...left to right, as well as front & back. Even with two ears
sound can be difficult to determine the source if one ear is slightly
deaf or has lost higher frequencies.
The most common confusion occurs in areas with hard surfaces that bounce
sound around corners, buildings, or alleys.
We've all ( or most of us ) experienced hearing sound appear to come
from across the way when it is coming from reflected surfaces around a
corner.
It can be difficult with two ears..one ear impossible.
Was that an original composition? You are exactly right. I have
first hand knowledge...

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Manfred Mann
2007-10-05 18:00:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Manfred Mann
Who is to say you can't have more than one way to pick up sound in
that one ear? And then use those sources in the ear to detemine the
direction it's coming from? In theory you could have as many sources
for picking up sound in that ear as you can fit on an intergrated
circuit board.
How would you perceive direction with one ear?
With the miniaturization they have today you can have
several receivers in the ear, they can then triangulate
on the signal. It would be the equivalant of having sevearal
cell phones that can be used to triangulate on the signal.

You do realize they've used cell phones in this way
to triangulate on a person they had to find?
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 11:51:06 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 14:00:17 -0400, Manfred Mann
Post by Manfred Mann
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Manfred Mann
Who is to say you can't have more than one way to pick up sound in
that one ear? And then use those sources in the ear to detemine the
direction it's coming from? In theory you could have as many sources
for picking up sound in that ear as you can fit on an intergrated
circuit board.
How would you perceive direction with one ear?
With the miniaturization they have today you can have
several receivers in the ear, they can then triangulate
on the signal. It would be the equivalant of having sevearal
cell phones that can be used to triangulate on the signal.
If you have one reception point in your head, the sound travels down
your ear canal. You cannot triangulate a signal using one point.
Post by Manfred Mann
You do realize they've used cell phones in this way
to triangulate on a person they had to find?
They use multiple cel phone towers to do that.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
KK
2007-10-04 21:30:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by KK
Post by gamefixer
Really? Wouldnt you be able to tell which direction a distant sound
above 1000hz was coming from with only one ear?
Only if you turned around, like the radar dish at an airport.
Wouldn't work. Sound bounces off of objects. You need both ears to
identify a direction and hear in stereo.
I didn't say it would work *as well* as two ears, and hearing in stereo
wasn't part of the requirement.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-05 10:49:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by KK
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by KK
Post by gamefixer
Really? Wouldnt you be able to tell which direction a distant sound
above 1000hz was coming from with only one ear?
Only if you turned around, like the radar dish at an airport.
Wouldn't work. Sound bounces off of objects. You need both ears to
identify a direction and hear in stereo.
I didn't say it would work *as well* as two ears, and hearing in stereo
wasn't part of the requirement.
It would be pretty much useless. And hearing in stereo is basically
how people find the direction of sound.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
gamefixer
2007-10-04 21:40:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by KK
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Really? Wouldnt you be able to tell which direction a distant sound above
1000hz was coming from with only one ear?
Only if you turned around, like the radar dish at an airport.
Wouldn't work. Sound bounces off of objects. You need both ears to
identify a direction and hear in stereo.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Hmm.. Well short of poking one of my ears out I'll take your word for
it.

Thanks for the science lesson.

Matt
unknown
2007-10-04 18:16:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
It would depend on the design of the ear. Say you have the ear is in
communication with nearby cell towers and uses towers through the
cell phones to tranglulate on the signal. Or maybe it can pick up
the sound and detemine the direction it is coming from.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-04 18:27:33 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 14:16:24 -0400, Sookie St. James <Don't
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
It would depend on the design of the ear. Say you have the ear is in
communication with nearby cell towers and uses towers through the
cell phones to tranglulate on the signal. Or maybe it can pick up
the sound and detemine the direction it is coming from.
I don't think that's part of the story.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Manfred Mann
2007-10-05 18:25:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by unknown
It would depend on the design of the ear. Say you have the ear is in
communication with nearby cell towers and uses towers through the
cell phones to tranglulate on the signal. Or maybe it can pick up
the sound and detemine the direction it is coming from.
I don't think that's part of the story.
Bear in mind techonology has moved forward by light years since
the original Bionic woman. Anything is possible, the bionic
woman of 2007 is 30+ years more advanced than the original.

Also a bionic woman would come very close to an android. In 2007
the lines would be very much blurred.

After all if you're going to build a bionic woman why not go
one step further and buld an android?
Forge
2007-10-05 23:10:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Manfred Mann
After all if you're going to build a bionic woman why not go
one step further and buld an android?
Because a brain is a very, very, very, very, very difficult thing to
replicate with a piece of machinery.
Manfred Mann
2007-10-06 02:46:45 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:10:44 -0400, Forge
Post by Forge
Post by Manfred Mann
After all if you're going to build a bionic woman why not go
one step further and buld an android?
Because a brain is a very, very, very, very, very difficult thing to
replicate with a piece of machinery.
Here is a hint: it's a fantasy show....so if they can create an
android on Star Trek why not on the Bionic Woman?

The only limit is the imagination of the writers.
Forge
2007-10-07 02:29:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Manfred Mann
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:10:44 -0400, Forge
Post by Forge
Post by Manfred Mann
After all if you're going to build a bionic woman why not go
one step further and buld an android?
Because a brain is a very, very, very, very, very difficult thing to
replicate with a piece of machinery.
Here is a hint: it's a fantasy show....so if they can create an
android on Star Trek why not on the Bionic Woman?
The only limit is the imagination of the writers.
The only limit is the level of suspension of disbelief you're able to
sell to the viewer. You can get an audience to believe there is a
clandestine government organization capable of cybernetically enhancing
people to the point they're superhuman, but you're not going to get them
to buy that the same organization can manufacture an artificial person.
These are the very most basic rules of telling a story. Mister Data was
believable because (a) it was the 26th century A.D. and (2) he still had
limitations that made him not-human.
Manfred Mann
2007-10-07 03:19:20 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 22:29:58 -0400, Forge
Post by Forge
The only limit is the level of suspension of disbelief you're able to
sell to the viewer. You can get an audience to believe there is a
clandestine government organization capable of cybernetically enhancing
people to the point they're superhuman, but you're not going to get them
to buy that the same organization can manufacture an artificial person.
These are the very most basic rules of telling a story. Mister Data was
believable because (a) it was the 26th century A.D. and (2) he still had
limitations that made him not-human.
Heck it's not any more far fetched than the idea that someone
could have super powers after being bitten by a radioctive spiider.

It's a fantasy people. Fiction.
Forge
2007-10-07 13:48:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Manfred Mann
On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 22:29:58 -0400, Forge
Post by Forge
The only limit is the level of suspension of disbelief you're able to
sell to the viewer. You can get an audience to believe there is a
clandestine government organization capable of cybernetically enhancing
people to the point they're superhuman, but you're not going to get them
to buy that the same organization can manufacture an artificial person.
These are the very most basic rules of telling a story. Mister Data was
believable because (a) it was the 26th century A.D. and (2) he still had
limitations that made him not-human.
Heck it's not any more far fetched than the idea that someone
could have super powers after being bitten by a radioctive spiider.
It's a fantasy people. Fiction.
It's all about context. Telling a comic-book superhero story, no matter
how vigorously you try to couch it in terms of what's really real or
not, is still way different than doing a story about something that's
supposed to be happening now, in our world, but it's just a big ol'
secret 'cuz if we made it public, we'd lose our advantage over the bad
guys. And Stan Lee will tell you exactly that if you were to ask him.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 11:52:37 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 22:29:58 -0400, Forge
Post by Forge
Post by Manfred Mann
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:10:44 -0400, Forge
Post by Forge
Post by Manfred Mann
After all if you're going to build a bionic woman why not go
one step further and buld an android?
Because a brain is a very, very, very, very, very difficult thing to
replicate with a piece of machinery.
Here is a hint: it's a fantasy show....so if they can create an
android on Star Trek why not on the Bionic Woman?
The only limit is the imagination of the writers.
The only limit is the level of suspension of disbelief you're able to
sell to the viewer. You can get an audience to believe there is a
clandestine government organization capable of cybernetically enhancing
people to the point they're superhuman, but you're not going to get them
to buy that the same organization can manufacture an artificial person.
These are the very most basic rules of telling a story. Mister Data was
believable because (a) it was the 26th century A.D. and (2) he still had
limitations that made him not-human.
And the limits of known physics can be a painful thing. Like finding
distant sounds with one ear...

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Thanatos
2007-10-04 22:32:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Unless the ear itself is programmed with multiple receptors...
Manfred Mann
2007-10-05 18:26:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Unless the ear itself is programmed with multiple receptors...
Why can't it? In this age of miniaturization why can't it?
Dave Oldridge
2007-10-05 08:11:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-05 10:49:54 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Manfred Mann
2007-10-05 18:30:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
In this day and age if you can miniaturize hundreds of integrated
circuits on a tiny circuit board why can't you put multiple
receptors in the ear?

Maybe you should read up on intergrated circuits/miniaturization
that can be done today.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 11:54:11 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 14:30:27 -0400, Manfred Mann
Post by Manfred Mann
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
In this day and age if you can miniaturize hundreds of integrated
circuits on a tiny circuit board why can't you put multiple
receptors in the ear?
Maybe you should read up on intergrated circuits/miniaturization
that can be done today.
Does it matter if multiple receptors are in the same location? The
reason your ears are on both sides of your head is so you can tell the
direction of a given sound. If the sounds are coming into the same
source, you don't have the stereo separation to give you direction.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Thanatos
2007-10-08 13:46:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 14:30:27 -0400, Manfred Mann
Post by Manfred Mann
In this day and age if you can miniaturize hundreds of integrated
circuits on a tiny circuit board why can't you put multiple
receptors in the ear?
Maybe you should read up on intergrated circuits/miniaturization
that can be done today.
Does it matter if multiple receptors are in the same location?
But they wouldn't be in the same location. They'd be spaced sslightly
apart, just like the receptors in the compound eye of a fly.
Post by lab~rat >:-)
The reason your ears are on both sides of your head is so
you can tell the direction of a given sound.
Yes, the limitations of our biology require spacing of several inches to
produce the effect. But the bionic technology is not bound by those
limitations. It can make distance/direction distinctions with receptors
spaced only microns apart.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 13:48:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 14:30:27 -0400, Manfred Mann
Post by Manfred Mann
In this day and age if you can miniaturize hundreds of integrated
circuits on a tiny circuit board why can't you put multiple
receptors in the ear?
Maybe you should read up on intergrated circuits/miniaturization
that can be done today.
Does it matter if multiple receptors are in the same location?
But they wouldn't be in the same location. They'd be spaced sslightly
apart, just like the receptors in the compound eye of a fly.
Post by lab~rat >:-)
The reason your ears are on both sides of your head is so
you can tell the direction of a given sound.
Yes, the limitations of our biology require spacing of several inches to
produce the effect. But the bionic technology is not bound by those
limitations. It can make distance/direction distinctions with receptors
spaced only microns apart.
Ok, we can pretend that for the moment. I'm assuming they wouldn't be
in the ear canal, where sound is channeled down a tube.

And BTW, I'm not aware of any bionic technology that can do what you
say.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Thanatos
2007-10-08 15:30:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 14:30:27 -0400, Manfred Mann
Post by Manfred Mann
In this day and age if you can miniaturize hundreds of
integrated circuits on a tiny circuit board why can't
you put multiple receptors in the ear?
Maybe you should read up on intergrated circuits/
miniaturization that can be done today.
Does it matter if multiple receptors are in the same
location?
But they wouldn't be in the same location. They'd be spaced
slightly apart, just like the receptors in the compound eye
of a fly.
Post by lab~rat >:-)
The reason your ears are on both sides of your head is so
you can tell the direction of a given sound.
Yes, the limitations of our biology require spacing of
several inches to produce the effect. But the bionic
technology is not bound by those limitations. It can
make distance/direction distinctions with receptors
spaced only microns apart.
Ok, we can pretend that for the moment. I'm assuming they
wouldn't be in the ear canal, where sound is channeled down
a tube.
Perhaps not. Perhaps the receptors for the bionic ear are located in the
dermis in and around the ear.
And BTW, I'm not aware of any bionic technology that can do what you
say.
Well, that can be said for the entire concept of the show and the extent
of the technology they're showcasing on it.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 15:37:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Ok, we can pretend that for the moment. I'm assuming they
wouldn't be in the ear canal, where sound is channeled down
a tube.
Perhaps not. Perhaps the receptors for the bionic ear are located in the
dermis in and around the ear.
And BTW, I'm not aware of any bionic technology that can do what you
say.
Well, that can be said for the entire concept of the show and the extent
of the technology they're showcasing on it.
Ok, then I can say that, per my original premise, she wouldn't be able
to hear direction with one ear. You can build a story around that
fact, but it is still a fact.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
unknown
2007-10-08 16:20:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Thanatos
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 14:30:27 -0400, Manfred Mann
Post by Manfred Mann
In this day and age if you can miniaturize hundreds of
integrated circuits on a tiny circuit board why can't
you put multiple receptors in the ear?
Maybe you should read up on intergrated circuits/
miniaturization that can be done today.
Does it matter if multiple receptors are in the same
location?
But they wouldn't be in the same location. They'd be spaced
slightly apart, just like the receptors in the compound eye
of a fly.
Post by lab~rat >:-)
The reason your ears are on both sides of your head is so
you can tell the direction of a given sound.
Yes, the limitations of our biology require spacing of
several inches to produce the effect. But the bionic
technology is not bound by those limitations. It can
make distance/direction distinctions with receptors
spaced only microns apart.
Ok, we can pretend that for the moment. I'm assuming they
wouldn't be in the ear canal, where sound is channeled down
a tube.
Perhaps not. Perhaps the receptors for the bionic ear are located in the
dermis in and around the ear.
And BTW, I'm not aware of any bionic technology that can do what you
say.
Well, that can be said for the entire concept of the show and the extent
of the technology they're showcasing on it.
Me thinks you people are missing the point.....it's a fictional show.
In a fictional show set in a fanatasy world you can pretty much
do what you want and set it up how ever you want.

But remember here it is only a Tv show, it's a fantasy,
a fictional show.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 18:06:30 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:20:50 -0400, Maia Rutledge <Don't bother sent
Post by unknown
Post by Thanatos
Post by lab~rat >:-)
And BTW, I'm not aware of any bionic technology that can do what you
say.
Well, that can be said for the entire concept of the show and the extent
of the technology they're showcasing on it.
Me thinks you people are missing the point.....it's a fictional show.
In a fictional show set in a fanatasy world you can pretty much
do what you want and set it up how ever you want.
But remember here it is only a Tv show, it's a fantasy,
a fictional show.
Ok, so let's talk, about reality. How does one find the direction of
a sound source with only one ear?

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
unknown
2007-10-08 19:09:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Ok, so let's talk, about reality. How does one find the direction of
a sound source with only one ear?
Being a fictional show they can dream up some way of doing it.
Star Trek TOS dreamed up lots of stuff that was in the realm
of science fiction back then, now it much of it is on the verge
of becoming reality.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 19:04:56 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:09:46 -0400, Maia Rutledge <Don't bother sent
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Ok, so let's talk, about reality. How does one find the direction of
a sound source with only one ear?
Being a fictional show they can dream up some way of doing it.
Star Trek TOS dreamed up lots of stuff that was in the realm
of science fiction back then, now it much of it is on the verge
of becoming reality.
Ion propulsion being one of the more impressive ones in my book. I'm
thinking that they should get working on the replicator, transporter
and holo-deck, but the hand held phaser would be a lot of fun, too...

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Drumrboy
2007-10-08 19:21:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:09:46 -0400, Maia Rutledge <Don't bother sent
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Ok, so let's talk, about reality. How does one find the direction of
a sound source with only one ear?
Being a fictional show they can dream up some way of doing it.
Star Trek TOS dreamed up lots of stuff that was in the realm
of science fiction back then, now it much of it is on the verge
of becoming reality.
Ion propulsion being one of the more impressive ones in my book. I'm
thinking that they should get working on the replicator, transporter
and holo-deck, but the hand held phaser would be a lot of fun, too...
Bah, keep your phaser, I want a taser.

Jeremy>
unknown
2007-10-08 21:04:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by unknown
Being a fictional show they can dream up some way of doing it.
Star Trek TOS dreamed up lots of stuff that was in the realm
of science fiction back then, now it much of it is on the verge
of becoming reality.
Ion propulsion being one of the more impressive ones in my book. I'm
thinking that they should get working on the replicator, transporter
and holo-deck, but the hand held phaser would be a lot of fun, too...
There was a show on the History Channel listing all the stuff that was
dreamed on Star Trek TOS that has since come to actually exist in real
life.
unknown
2007-10-08 21:06:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Ion propulsion being one of the more impressive ones in my book. I'm
thinking that they should get working on the replicator, transporter
and holo-deck, but the hand held phaser would be a lot of fun, too...
You do realize scientists in Europe have been able to create a
trasnporter on a very small scale?
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-09 11:33:44 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 17:06:28 -0400, Sookie St. James <Don't
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Ion propulsion being one of the more impressive ones in my book. I'm
thinking that they should get working on the replicator, transporter
and holo-deck, but the hand held phaser would be a lot of fun, too...
You do realize scientists in Europe have been able to create a
trasnporter on a very small scale?
Was that the subatomic thing? Not impressed. Until we can do away
with cargo ships by transporting goods across the Earth and
materialize in a craft in space from the Earth's surface, we're
talking piker stuff...

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Thanatos
2007-10-08 23:47:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:09:46 -0400, Maia Rutledge <Don't bother sent
Post by unknown
Star Trek TOS dreamed up lots of stuff that was in the realm
of science fiction back then, now it much of it is on the verge
of becoming reality.
Ion propulsion being one of the more impressive ones in my book. I'm
thinking that they should get working on the replicator, transporter
and holo-deck, but the hand held phaser would be a lot of fun, too...
I once read a comment by some physicist that said that even given the
general level of advanced technology on Star Trek, the transporter is so
much beyond what even *they* could technologically achieve that it would
be like Columbus having a microwave oven on the Santa Maria.
unknown
2007-10-09 06:29:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
I once read a comment by some physicist that said that even given the
general level of advanced technology on Star Trek, the transporter is so
much beyond what even *they* could technologically achieve that it would
be like Columbus having a microwave oven on the Santa Maria.
Except that some scientists in Europe have been able to create
a transporter on a small scale.
Thanatos
2007-10-09 14:04:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
Post by Thanatos
I once read a comment by some physicist that said that even given the
general level of advanced technology on Star Trek, the transporter is so
much beyond what even *they* could technologically achieve that it would
be like Columbus having a microwave oven on the Santa Maria.
Except that some scientists in Europe have been able to create
a transporter on a small scale.
Except that the scale of the one on the show is one of the reasons it
would be so fantastically impossible.
KK
2007-10-09 15:46:36 UTC
Permalink
me thinks you people are missing the point.....it's a fictional show. In
a fictional show set in a fanatasy world you can pretty much do what you
want and set it up how ever you want.
But remember here it is only a Tv show, it's a fantasy, a fictional
show.
And me thinks (jesus, that's douchy) you miss the point of science
fiction. If you don't need to explain any of it - then why explain any of
it? Because the fictional devices and their believability are part of the
story.
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
2007-10-08 16:42:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Ok, we can pretend that for the moment. I'm assuming they
wouldn't be in the ear canal, where sound is channeled down
a tube.
Perhaps not. Perhaps the receptors for the bionic ear are located in the
dermis in and around the ear.
cochlear implants
Post by Thanatos
And BTW, I'm not aware of any bionic technology that can do what you
say.
Well, that can be said for the entire concept of the show and the extent
of the technology they're showcasing on it.
bionic ears already exist and have been in use for sometime
and can cure many cases of deafness

and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little community
rather than be able to function in a larger society


people are also working on artificial retinas
wired to the visual cortex
or stimulating a matrix of touch receptors on the skin or tongue

aint science grand

arf meow arf - everything thing i know i learned
from the collective unconsciousness of odd bodkins
sacramento - political pigsty of the western world
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 17:51:31 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 09:42:00 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Post by Thanatos
Well, that can be said for the entire concept of the show and the extent
of the technology they're showcasing on it.
bionic ears already exist and have been in use for sometime
and can cure many cases of deafness
You're talking about cochlear implants, that corrects very FEW types
of deafness.
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little community
rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.

Unless there are people in wheelchairs that REALLY just want to be
hobbling around in a chair instead of walking, too...

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
unknown
2007-10-08 19:15:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little community
rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.
Unless there are people in wheelchairs that REALLY just want to be
hobbling around in a chair instead of walking, too...
Go ask people in the deaf community. I've never understood
it but there are those who would choose to remain deaf than
have an operation like cokliar implants that would allow them
to hear. I think alot of it has to do with loosing their
connection to friends who are deaf.

But yeah there are deaf people who would choose to remain deaf.

It's been a long running arguement in the deaf community.
Drumrboy
2007-10-08 19:15:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little
community rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.
Unless there are people in wheelchairs that REALLY just want to be
hobbling around in a chair instead of walking, too...
Go ask people in the deaf community. I've never understood
it but there are those who would choose to remain deaf than
have an operation like cokliar implants that would allow them
to hear. I think alot of it has to do with loosing their
connection to friends who are deaf.
But yeah there are deaf people who would choose to remain deaf.
It's been a long running arguement in the deaf community.
What?

Jeremy>
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 19:11:12 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:15:08 -0400, Sookie St. James <Don't
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little community
rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.
Unless there are people in wheelchairs that REALLY just want to be
hobbling around in a chair instead of walking, too...
Go ask people in the deaf community. I've never understood
it but there are those who would choose to remain deaf than
have an operation like cokliar implants that would allow them
to hear. I think alot of it has to do with loosing their
connection to friends who are deaf.
But yeah there are deaf people who would choose to remain deaf.
It's been a long running arguement in the deaf community.
In the fucking idiot deaf community? I have NEVER heard (LOL)
anything about this. What community is it?

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Justin
2007-10-08 19:30:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:15:08 -0400, Sookie St. James <Don't
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little community
rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.
Unless there are people in wheelchairs that REALLY just want to be
hobbling around in a chair instead of walking, too...
Go ask people in the deaf community. I've never understood
it but there are those who would choose to remain deaf than
have an operation like cokliar implants that would allow them
to hear. I think alot of it has to do with loosing their
connection to friends who are deaf.
But yeah there are deaf people who would choose to remain deaf.
It's been a long running arguement in the deaf community.
In the fucking idiot deaf community? I have NEVER heard (LOL)
anything about this. What community is it?
Deaf Against Technology? - National Association of the Deaf
"There is one piece of technology that has caused controversy within the
deaf and hard of hearing community - cochlear implants. There are many
deaf and hard of hearing people who are against the use of implants in
children; and there are many who support its use in children. There are
people who are opposed to use of implants in anyone at any age; and
there are people who don't care if a deaf or hard of hearing adult makes
a personal decision to be implanted."
http://www.nad.org/site/pp.asp?c=foINKQMBF&b=180439
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 19:28:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Justin
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:15:08 -0400, Sookie St. James <Don't
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little community
rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.
Unless there are people in wheelchairs that REALLY just want to be
hobbling around in a chair instead of walking, too...
Go ask people in the deaf community. I've never understood
it but there are those who would choose to remain deaf than
have an operation like cokliar implants that would allow them
to hear. I think alot of it has to do with loosing their
connection to friends who are deaf.
But yeah there are deaf people who would choose to remain deaf.
It's been a long running arguement in the deaf community.
In the fucking idiot deaf community? I have NEVER heard (LOL)
anything about this. What community is it?
Deaf Against Technology? - National Association of the Deaf
"There is one piece of technology that has caused controversy within the
deaf and hard of hearing community - cochlear implants. There are many
deaf and hard of hearing people who are against the use of implants in
children; and there are many who support its use in children. There are
people who are opposed to use of implants in anyone at any age; and
there are people who don't care if a deaf or hard of hearing adult makes
a personal decision to be implanted."
http://www.nad.org/site/pp.asp?c=foINKQMBF&b=180439
Yeah, I just posted this: WTF?

http://www.beyonddiscovery.org/content/view.page.asp?I=261


PS, you posted nad.org. Hehehhhhh...

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Drumrboy
2007-10-08 19:31:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:15:08 -0400, Sookie St. James <Don't
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little
community rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.
Unless there are people in wheelchairs that REALLY just want to be
hobbling around in a chair instead of walking, too...
Go ask people in the deaf community. I've never understood
it but there are those who would choose to remain deaf than
have an operation like cokliar implants that would allow them
to hear. I think alot of it has to do with loosing their
connection to friends who are deaf.
But yeah there are deaf people who would choose to remain deaf.
It's been a long running arguement in the deaf community.
In the fucking idiot deaf community? I have NEVER heard (LOL)
anything about this. What community is it?
What?

Jeremy>
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 19:25:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:15:08 -0400, Sookie St. James <Don't
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little community
rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.
Unless there are people in wheelchairs that REALLY just want to be
hobbling around in a chair instead of walking, too...
Go ask people in the deaf community. I've never understood
it but there are those who would choose to remain deaf than
have an operation like cokliar implants that would allow them
to hear. I think alot of it has to do with loosing their
connection to friends who are deaf.
But yeah there are deaf people who would choose to remain deaf.
It's been a long running arguement in the deaf community.
In the fucking idiot deaf community? I have NEVER heard (LOL)
anything about this. What community is it?
Here's a link:

http://www.beyonddiscovery.org/content/view.page.asp?I=261

Now this is some dumbass shit. I'm thinking that once someone that is
deaf can hear, they realize how funny their deaf friends talk and
start making fun of them. Why else would they be ostracized?

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
unknown
2007-10-08 21:10:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
In the fucking idiot deaf community? I have NEVER heard (LOL)
anything about this. What community is it?
In the real world. Try reading a newspaper,
opening a book, etc.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-09 11:34:41 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 17:10:00 -0400, Sookie St. James <Don't
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
In the fucking idiot deaf community? I have NEVER heard (LOL)
anything about this. What community is it?
In the real world. Try reading a newspaper,
opening a book, etc.
Sorry, the fucking idiot deaf community doesn't get much press. I did
find what you were talking about on the web though...

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 19:16:14 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:15:08 -0400, Sookie St. James <Don't
Post by unknown
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little community
rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.
Unless there are people in wheelchairs that REALLY just want to be
hobbling around in a chair instead of walking, too...
Go ask people in the deaf community. I've never understood
it but there are those who would choose to remain deaf than
have an operation like cokliar implants that would allow them
to hear. I think alot of it has to do with loosing their
connection to friends who are deaf.
But yeah there are deaf people who would choose to remain deaf.
It's been a long running arguement in the deaf community.
BTW, if deaf friends aren't your friends when you are no longer deaf,
then they weren't really your friends to begin with, were they.

Now I'm starting to think about last night's episode of Family Guy...

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Thanatos
2007-10-08 23:42:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 09:42:00 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Post by Thanatos
Well, that can be said for the entire concept of the show and the extent
of the technology they're showcasing on it.
bionic ears already exist and have been in use for sometime
and can cure many cases of deafness
You're talking about cochlear implants, that corrects very FEW types
of deafness.
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little community
rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.
Much as I hate to defend Marzipan, she's correct in this case. Some of
the more extreme members of the deaf community oppose these implants,
saying it's no less offensive than if a procedure were developed to turn
black people white.

Some deaf parents have refused to allow their deaf children to become
hearing-capable because they feel the kid would become an outsider in
the deaf community.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-09 11:35:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 09:42:00 -0700, mariposas rand mair fheal
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Post by Thanatos
Well, that can be said for the entire concept of the show and the extent
of the technology they're showcasing on it.
bionic ears already exist and have been in use for sometime
and can cure many cases of deafness
You're talking about cochlear implants, that corrects very FEW types
of deafness.
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
and very controversial among some people
who would rather be deaf so they can have their special little community
rather than be able to function in a larger society
Post proof that's the case. IOW, it's total fabricated bullshit.
Much as I hate to defend Marzipan, she's correct in this case. Some of
the more extreme members of the deaf community oppose these implants,
saying it's no less offensive than if a procedure were developed to turn
black people white.
Some deaf parents have refused to allow their deaf children to become
hearing-capable because they feel the kid would become an outsider in
the deaf community.
Didn't they make an X-Men movie like that?

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Thanatos
2007-10-08 23:39:22 UTC
Permalink
In article
<mair_fheal-***@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Post by mariposas rand mair fheal greykitten tomys des anges
Post by Thanatos
Ok, we can pretend that for the moment. I'm assuming they
wouldn't be in the ear canal, where sound is channeled down
a tube.
Perhaps not. Perhaps the receptors for the bionic ear are
located in the dermis in and around the ear.
cochlear implants
Post by Thanatos
And BTW, I'm not aware of any bionic technology that
can do what you say.
Well, that can be said for the entire concept of the show
and the extent of the technology they're showcasing on it.
bionic ears already exist and have been in use for sometime
and can cure many cases of deafness
Not like the one on this show. That one is still in the realm of science
fiction.
KK
2007-10-09 15:44:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Yes, the limitations of our biology require spacing of several inches to
produce the effect. But the bionic technology is not bound by those
limitations. It can make distance/direction distinctions with receptors
spaced only microns apart.
Not really. Those limitations aren't biomechanical limits, they're
laws-of-physics limits.

And the compound receptors in fly eyes aren't for judging distance -
that's what the two eyes are for. Adjacent receptors would be far too
close for that.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-09 15:44:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by KK
Post by Thanatos
Yes, the limitations of our biology require spacing of several inches to
produce the effect. But the bionic technology is not bound by those
limitations. It can make distance/direction distinctions with receptors
spaced only microns apart.
Not really. Those limitations aren't biomechanical limits, they're
laws-of-physics limits.
And the compound receptors in fly eyes aren't for judging distance -
that's what the two eyes are for. Adjacent receptors would be far too
close for that.
Exactly. If you were to do the physics triangulating a line from each
receptor that is microns apart and a sound source however distant
away, you would see that the two receptors would be unable to
determine the location because they are so close. Sound waves bounce
and are absorbed into materials, and for all intents & purposes two
receptors that close together would work as a single receptor.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
KK
2007-10-09 16:31:00 UTC
Permalink
Sound waves bounce and are absorbed
into materials,
That's not why distance between sensors is important.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-09 16:22:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by KK
Sound waves bounce and are absorbed
into materials,
That's not why distance between sensors is important.
If you are facing in a given direction and rely on the volume of a
particular sound from a single receptor to indicate where it is coming
from, it is important. As one would turn his head to find the point
where the source is the loudest, it would perceive a bounce and
perhaps subsequent sound absorption in the formula and throw him off.


--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Thanatos
2007-10-09 16:37:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by KK
Post by Thanatos
Yes, the limitations of our biology require spacing of several inches to
produce the effect. But the bionic technology is not bound by those
limitations. It can make distance/direction distinctions with receptors
spaced only microns apart.
Not really. Those limitations aren't biomechanical limits, they're
laws-of-physics limits.
And the compound receptors in fly eyes aren't for judging distance -
that's what the two eyes are for. Adjacent receptors would be far too
close for that.
So the bionic receptors are outside her ear, spaced in the dermis of her
scalp. The point is, the idea is workable within the context of the show.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-09 16:43:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by KK
Post by Thanatos
Yes, the limitations of our biology require spacing of several inches to
produce the effect. But the bionic technology is not bound by those
limitations. It can make distance/direction distinctions with receptors
spaced only microns apart.
Not really. Those limitations aren't biomechanical limits, they're
laws-of-physics limits.
And the compound receptors in fly eyes aren't for judging distance -
that's what the two eyes are for. Adjacent receptors would be far too
close for that.
So the bionic receptors are outside her ear, spaced in the dermis of her
scalp. The point is, the idea is workable within the context of the show.
Are you familiar with the term "fan wank"?

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
David E. Milligan
2007-10-05 23:04:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
If it sounds louder on your left side than on your right, then wouldn't you assume the left
is where the sound is coming from?
Dave Oldridge
2007-10-06 04:16:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by David E. Milligan
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to
read the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio
by moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it
against the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
If it sounds louder on your left side than on your right, then
wouldn't you assume the left
is where the sound is coming from?
To begin with, yes. But the brain is very good at learning new stuff.
So, assuming the thing worked right, it would eventually be able to, with
a few slight head movements, report direction accurately. Maybe more so
than a real ear, because it's very simple to include a phase demodulation
array in circuitry.
--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 11:55:02 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:04:23 -0400, "David E. Milligan"
Post by David E. Milligan
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
If it sounds louder on your left side than on your right, then wouldn't you assume the left
is where the sound is coming from?
Assuming that your left and right ear are working on the same level.
If her bionic ear was hearing something low far away, her normal ear
wouldn't hear it.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Forge
2007-10-05 23:08:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
A radar dish, with only one "ear," doesn't seem to ever have much
trouble finding direction and range on things.
Dave Oldridge
2007-10-06 04:18:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Forge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to
read the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio
by moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it
against the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
A radar dish, with only one "ear," doesn't seem to ever have much
trouble finding direction and range on things.
That's because it's listening to its own echo. That really simplifies
the problem. But there's no rigid requirement for listening to your own
echo. You can listen to the echoes from some other guy's radar and do
just fine if you've got the processing power.
--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 11:58:10 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:08:54 -0400, Forge
Post by Forge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
A radar dish, with only one "ear," doesn't seem to ever have much
trouble finding direction and range on things.
A radar 'dish' generally relies on a constantly cycling directional
antenna that emits a sound to compare relative distances. A lot
different than a non-stationary person walking through the city with
one ear.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Forge
2007-10-09 01:06:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:08:54 -0400, Forge
Post by Forge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
A radar dish, with only one "ear," doesn't seem to ever have much
trouble finding direction and range on things.
A radar 'dish' generally relies on a constantly cycling directional
antenna that emits a sound to compare relative distances. A lot
different than a non-stationary person walking through the city with
one ear.
Stand still, turn your head from side to side. You can hear the phase
shift of a sound. Walk toward it, it gets louder. Walk away from it, it
gets softer. Our bionic person is basically playing a game of hot or
cold.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-09 11:36:22 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 21:06:55 -0400, Forge
Post by Forge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 19:08:54 -0400, Forge
Post by Forge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
A radar dish, with only one "ear," doesn't seem to ever have much
trouble finding direction and range on things.
A radar 'dish' generally relies on a constantly cycling directional
antenna that emits a sound to compare relative distances. A lot
different than a non-stationary person walking through the city with
one ear.
Stand still, turn your head from side to side. You can hear the phase
shift of a sound. Walk toward it, it gets louder. Walk away from it, it
gets softer. Our bionic person is basically playing a game of hot or
cold.
If sound bounces down a corridor, you basically hear the sound from
the last bounce it takes, leading you to the conclusion the sound is
coming from behind that wall.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Thanatos
2007-10-05 23:38:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read the
phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by moving a
virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase modulation that the
motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against the signal driving the
motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
You're assuming the bionic ear is just one ear. It could actually be
dozens of tiny ears all analyzing and triangulating the position of the
sound.
Dave Oldridge
2007-10-06 04:18:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to
read the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio
by moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it
against the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
You're assuming the bionic ear is just one ear. It could actually be
dozens of tiny ears all analyzing and triangulating the position of
the sound.
More to the point, it could be doing fast fourier on everything that
comes in and analyzing frequency and phase of every part of the signal
BEFORE reporting to the brain.
--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667
Dave Oldridge
2007-10-06 04:14:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as you
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667
Justin
2007-10-07 04:12:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as you
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
You mean moving around like she did, complete circles even
Dave Oldridge
2007-10-07 23:11:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Justin
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as you
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
You mean moving around like she did, complete circles even
Yes. And one reason I know this is that my left ear plugged up on me
with an infection a few months back. If I held my head still I got
totally wrong direction information, but if I turned it or moved around a
bit, it was OK, especially after a couple of days' experience.
--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667
Justin
2007-10-08 00:42:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by Justin
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to
read
Post by Justin
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it
against
Post by Justin
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as
you
Post by Justin
Post by Dave Oldridge
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
You mean moving around like she did, complete circles even
Yes. And one reason I know this is that my left ear plugged up on me
with an infection a few months back. If I held my head still I got
totally wrong direction information, but if I turned it or moved around a
bit, it was OK, especially after a couple of days' experience.
There's also nothing to say that the other ear isn't helping with this
as well, picking up faint sounds that it would ignore otherwise.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-08 11:58:57 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:14:55 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as you
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
It takes forever.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Dave Oldridge
2007-10-09 00:06:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:14:55 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to read
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it against
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as you
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
It takes forever.
Not in my case. But it still required movement to place a sound. If I
was just sitting perfectly still in my chair and something happened
outside, it could seem to be inside until I moved my head. Of course the
longer and more sustained the sound, the easier it is to locate.

The principle is used in modern radio direction finders for VHF and UHF
signals. The virtual antenna is moved in a circle of known parameters
and the phase of the incoming signal is compared with the position of the
antenna in its circle. The result is an accurate direction fix within
25ms. The human brain is a good deal more complex than the antenna-moving
apparatus and doesn't need an exact or regular circle. The key
requirement is that the hardware moving the ear know where it moved it.
It then becomes possible to locate the source, even with one ear (but
slower than with two, obviously). Now a bionic ear could be constructed
to report a lot more things about the incoming sound, including tiny
phase shifts, which could be wired to give the brain (once it learned to
interpret the signals).
--
Dave Oldridge+
ICQ 1800667
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-09 11:38:41 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:06:47 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:14:55 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to
read
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it
against
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as you
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
It takes forever.
Not in my case. But it still required movement to place a sound. If I
was just sitting perfectly still in my chair and something happened
outside, it could seem to be inside until I moved my head. Of course the
longer and more sustained the sound, the easier it is to locate.
The principle is used in modern radio direction finders for VHF and UHF
signals. The virtual antenna is moved in a circle of known parameters
and the phase of the incoming signal is compared with the position of the
antenna in its circle. The result is an accurate direction fix within
25ms. The human brain is a good deal more complex than the antenna-moving
apparatus and doesn't need an exact or regular circle. The key
requirement is that the hardware moving the ear know where it moved it.
It then becomes possible to locate the source, even with one ear (but
slower than with two, obviously). Now a bionic ear could be constructed
to report a lot more things about the incoming sound, including tiny
phase shifts, which could be wired to give the brain (once it learned to
interpret the signals).
Are you deaf in one ear?

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Justin
2007-10-09 12:45:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:06:47 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:14:55 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to
read
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it
against
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as you
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
It takes forever.
Not in my case. But it still required movement to place a sound. If I
was just sitting perfectly still in my chair and something happened
outside, it could seem to be inside until I moved my head. Of course the
longer and more sustained the sound, the easier it is to locate.
The principle is used in modern radio direction finders for VHF and UHF
signals. The virtual antenna is moved in a circle of known parameters
and the phase of the incoming signal is compared with the position of the
antenna in its circle. The result is an accurate direction fix within
25ms. The human brain is a good deal more complex than the antenna-moving
apparatus and doesn't need an exact or regular circle. The key
requirement is that the hardware moving the ear know where it moved it.
It then becomes possible to locate the source, even with one ear (but
slower than with two, obviously). Now a bionic ear could be constructed
to report a lot more things about the incoming sound, including tiny
phase shifts, which could be wired to give the brain (once it learned to
interpret the signals).
Are you deaf in one ear?
Hmmm, is the Bionic Woman?
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-09 12:56:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Justin
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:06:47 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:14:55 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to
read
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it
against
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as you
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
It takes forever.
Not in my case. But it still required movement to place a sound. If I
was just sitting perfectly still in my chair and something happened
outside, it could seem to be inside until I moved my head. Of course the
longer and more sustained the sound, the easier it is to locate.
The principle is used in modern radio direction finders for VHF and UHF
signals. The virtual antenna is moved in a circle of known parameters
and the phase of the incoming signal is compared with the position of the
antenna in its circle. The result is an accurate direction fix within
25ms. The human brain is a good deal more complex than the antenna-moving
apparatus and doesn't need an exact or regular circle. The key
requirement is that the hardware moving the ear know where it moved it.
It then becomes possible to locate the source, even with one ear (but
slower than with two, obviously). Now a bionic ear could be constructed
to report a lot more things about the incoming sound, including tiny
phase shifts, which could be wired to give the brain (once it learned to
interpret the signals).
Are you deaf in one ear?
Hmmm, is the Bionic Woman?
I was asking Dave specifically because he stated "not in my case", but
I was assuming that Jamie Summers' other ear was normal, and that's
why I qualified it by saying she couldn't locate sound sources AT A
DISTANCE.

This would assume that her 'normal' ear wouldn't be able to hear the
distant sounds and locate their source.

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...
Justin
2007-10-09 16:49:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Justin
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:06:47 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:14:55 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to
read
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it
against
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as you
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
It takes forever.
Not in my case. But it still required movement to place a sound. If I
was just sitting perfectly still in my chair and something happened
outside, it could seem to be inside until I moved my head. Of course the
longer and more sustained the sound, the easier it is to locate.
The principle is used in modern radio direction finders for VHF and UHF
signals. The virtual antenna is moved in a circle of known parameters
and the phase of the incoming signal is compared with the position of the
antenna in its circle. The result is an accurate direction fix within
25ms. The human brain is a good deal more complex than the antenna-moving
apparatus and doesn't need an exact or regular circle. The key
requirement is that the hardware moving the ear know where it moved it.
It then becomes possible to locate the source, even with one ear (but
slower than with two, obviously). Now a bionic ear could be constructed
to report a lot more things about the incoming sound, including tiny
phase shifts, which could be wired to give the brain (once it learned to
interpret the signals).
Are you deaf in one ear?
Hmmm, is the Bionic Woman?
I was asking Dave specifically because he stated "not in my case", but
I was assuming that Jamie Summers' other ear was normal, and that's
why I qualified it by saying she couldn't locate sound sources AT A
DISTANCE.
This would assume that her 'normal' ear wouldn't be able to hear the
distant sounds and locate their source.
That's a big assumption.
lab~rat >:-)
2007-10-09 16:56:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Justin
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Justin
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:06:47 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 04:14:55 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
On Fri, 05 Oct 2007 08:11:04 GMT, Dave Oldridge
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
NOT fact. If the ear is moved and the software (brain) learns to
read
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the phase changes, it can work. We do it all the time in radio by
moving a virtual antenna in a circle and demodulating the phase
modulation that the motion imposes on the signal, comparing it
against
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
Post by lab~rat >:-)
Post by Dave Oldridge
the signal driving the motion.
It is a fact. If you're standing in a large area and only have one
ear to use, you can't tell the direction that it's coming from.
Unless you move your head around a bit while listening. As long as you
stand still you won't have a clue. Takes a while to compensate, if
you've just lost hearing in one ear, though.
It takes forever.
Not in my case. But it still required movement to place a sound. If I
was just sitting perfectly still in my chair and something happened
outside, it could seem to be inside until I moved my head. Of course the
longer and more sustained the sound, the easier it is to locate.
The principle is used in modern radio direction finders for VHF and UHF
signals. The virtual antenna is moved in a circle of known parameters
and the phase of the incoming signal is compared with the position of the
antenna in its circle. The result is an accurate direction fix within
25ms. The human brain is a good deal more complex than the antenna-moving
apparatus and doesn't need an exact or regular circle. The key
requirement is that the hardware moving the ear know where it moved it.
It then becomes possible to locate the source, even with one ear (but
slower than with two, obviously). Now a bionic ear could be constructed
to report a lot more things about the incoming sound, including tiny
phase shifts, which could be wired to give the brain (once it learned to
interpret the signals).
Are you deaf in one ear?
Hmmm, is the Bionic Woman?
I was asking Dave specifically because he stated "not in my case", but
I was assuming that Jamie Summers' other ear was normal, and that's
why I qualified it by saying she couldn't locate sound sources AT A
DISTANCE.
This would assume that her 'normal' ear wouldn't be able to hear the
distant sounds and locate their source.
That's a big assumption.
Oh jesus christ WTF? Can you hear a normal voice 200 yards away? No.
That's what we're discussing here. You make me want to gouge Jaime
Summers' normal ear out with an ice pick just to prove my frigging
point...

--
lab~rat >:-)
Stupid humans...

Manfred Mann
2007-10-05 18:14:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
Ok you can take this a step further.....she hears a sound,
the computer in her bionic ear taps into the city system
they use to track gun shots, the next thing they know she
has pin pointed the exact location of the sound.

Or she hears a sound. Her bionic implants taps into
the closed circuit tv system in the city and pin points
a camera trained on the exact source of the sound.
Very probable when you consider that in an average
city you're on Tv 300 times in a given day.
Thanatos
2007-10-05 23:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Manfred Mann
Post by lab~rat >:-)
If she only had one bionic ear, she wouldn't be able to tell what
direction distant sounds were coming from. FACT.
Last night's show was pretty good.
Ok you can take this a step further.....she hears a sound,
the computer in her bionic ear taps into the city system
they use to track gun shots, the next thing they know she
has pin pointed the exact location of the sound.
Or she hears a sound. Her bionic implants taps into
the closed circuit tv system in the city and pin points
a camera trained on the exact source of the sound.
Very probable when you consider that in an average
city you're on Tv 300 times in a given day.
That tiny little town in Idaho would not have a system to track gunshots
or a closed circuit camera system.
Manfred Mann
2007-10-06 02:52:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Manfred Mann
Or she hears a sound. Her bionic implants taps into
the closed circuit tv system in the city and pin points
a camera trained on the exact source of the sound.
Very probable when you consider that in an average
city you're on Tv 300 times in a given day.
That tiny little town in Idaho would not have a system to track gunshots
or a closed circuit camera system.
Wrong answer. Many Dunkin Donuts/Banks/Stores/etc. have tv cameras.
When you're at the register paying for your purchases notice all the
signs telling you they have video cameras in use.
Thanatos
2007-10-06 10:49:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Post by Manfred Mann
Or she hears a sound. Her bionic implants taps into
the closed circuit tv system in the city and pin points
a camera trained on the exact source of the sound.
Very probable when you consider that in an average
city you're on Tv 300 times in a given day.
That tiny little town in Idaho would not have a system to
track gunshots or a closed circuit camera system.
Wrong answer. Many Dunkin Donuts/Banks/Stores/etc.
have tv cameras. When you're at the register paying
for your purchases notice all the signs telling you
they have video cameras in use.
Yes, but contrary to what Hollywood tells you, they're not part of a
networked grid that can be hacked into. They're just 20-year-old low-res
cameras hardwired to VCRs. And they don't even work half the time. The
businesses just keep them visible for deterrent purposes.

Besides, you said "taps into the closed circuit tv system in the city"
which refers to a city-run and city-wide network of cameras like the one
in London.
Manfred Mann
2007-10-06 16:59:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Yes, but contrary to what Hollywood tells you, they're not part of a
networked grid that can be hacked into. They're just 20-year-old low-res
cameras hardwired to VCRs. And they don't even work half the time. The
businesses just keep them visible for deterrent purposes.
And the police can go around looking at the tapes to see crimes in
progress (both inside the store and outside.)
Post by Thanatos
Besides, you said "taps into the closed circuit tv system in the city"
which refers to a city-run and city-wide network of cameras like the one
in London.
I would point out in this post 9/11 era some cities have put in
large tv survelience systems.

Take a close look at what they used to capture the subway terrorists
in London.

Besides if you go to your local store you can buy a webcam to hook
up to your computer for $25.00. Oh and that laptop you just bought?
It may well have a web cam built in. The one I just bought does.

So that camera in 7/11 that years ago may not havae been hooked up
to anyone else outside the store may now be connected to the USB port
on a laptop or on a website the manager can access away from the
store.


Take a close look at the technology and how much privacy you
don't have any more.
Thanatos
2007-10-07 19:39:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Manfred Mann
Post by Thanatos
Yes, but contrary to what Hollywood tells you, they're not part of a
networked grid that can be hacked into. They're just 20-year-old low-res
cameras hardwired to VCRs. And they don't even work half the time. The
businesses just keep them visible for deterrent purposes.
And the police can go around looking at the tapes to see crimes in
progress (both inside the store and outside.)
Okay, first you say Sommers's bionic ear could tap into the CCTV network
in the city and now you've completely changed it to "cops can go from
business to business looking at grainy videotapes" (assuming the cameras
work in the first place).

That's vastly different from what you originally proposed.
Post by Manfred Mann
Post by Thanatos
Besides, you said "taps into the closed circuit tv system in the city"
which refers to a city-run and city-wide network of cameras like the one
in London.
I would point out in this post 9/11 era some cities have put in
large tv survelience systems.
Take a close look at what they used to capture the subway terrorists
in London.
That's London, which is way out on the fringe even for a major
metropolitan city when it comes to surveillance saturation. Some tiny
little town in Idaho would have neither the desire nor the funding to
install such a system.
Manfred Mann
2007-10-07 21:08:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
Okay, first you say Sommers's bionic ear could tap into the CCTV network
in the city and now you've completely changed it to "cops can go from
business to business looking at grainy videotapes" (assuming the cameras
work in the first place).
You do realize the show is fantasy don't you?

That the writers are only limited by their imagination?
Post by Thanatos
That's London, which is way out on the fringe even for a major
metropolitan city when it comes to surveillance saturation. Some tiny
little town in Idaho would have neither the desire nor the funding to
install such a system.
You haven't been into a 711/Dunkin Dounuts/Grocery store/bank/
etc. lately have you?

You may not be aware of it but many of them have servaliance cameras.
Even in your little town in Idaho. If they collect money and
are susceptable to robberies there is a good chance they have
TV cameras watching.

That is how prevalant theft is.
Thanatos
2007-10-08 00:09:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Manfred Mann
Post by Thanatos
Okay, first you say Sommers's bionic ear could tap into the
CCTV network in the city and now you've completely changed
it to "cops can go from business to business looking at
grainy videotapes" (assuming the cameras work in the first
place).
You do realize the show is fantasy don't you?
So that's what you're going to fall back on when it's pointed out to you
that what you're suggesting is silly?
Post by Manfred Mann
Post by Thanatos
That's London, which is way out on the fringe even for a major
metropolitan city when it comes to surveillance saturation. Some tiny
little town in Idaho would have neither the desire nor the funding to
install such a system.
You haven't been into a 711/Dunkin Dounuts/Grocery store/bank/
etc. lately have you?
I've worked dozens of criminal investigations where such surveillance
footage is gathered as evidence and at least half the time, the systems
don't work and merely kept as visual deterrants. And when you do get the
tapes, they're so grainy and lo-res, you can't even make out the
subject's face.
Manfred Mann
2007-10-08 02:05:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Thanatos
So that's what you're going to fall back on when it's pointed out to you
that what you're suggesting is silly?
Me thinks someone is taking this whole thing much too serously.

Yo do realize it is fantasy? Fiction?
Post by Thanatos
Post by Manfred Mann
You haven't been into a 711/Dunkin Dounuts/Grocery store/bank/
etc. lately have you?
I've worked dozens of criminal investigations where such surveillance
footage is gathered as evidence and at least half the time, the systems
don't work and merely kept as visual deterrants. And when you do get the
tapes, they're so grainy and lo-res, you can't even make out the
subject's face.
And around here there are surveillance images that are crystal clear.
But utltimately it is a fantasy and in a fantasy world
you can write your fiction to say that all these systems
have crystal clear pictures and their tied together.


Remember the keywords here: fantasy, fiction.
Loading...