On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Don Mannino <DMannino at kawaius.com> wrote: > I'm not clear which person wrote that sound is not a vibration, but that is incorrect. Always love a conversation where people realize the words they've been using for ages have meant different things to the participants the whole time :-) Don points out the term "vibration" means oscillation about a point of equilibrium, and that meets with my intuitive understanding of sound. But isn't the vibration of a string very different than the compression and rarefaction cycles of air molecules? Then are we back to the "transducer" discussion? Also (based on echoes of engineering classes long forgotten) the vibration of a string *is* a form of wave -- a "standing" wave caused by the reflections off the impedance mismatch of the terminated string. Had you waited long enough after casting the rock into said pond, or if the pond was relatively small, you would see the wave reflecting off its edges and combining with more recent ones to produce the vibration analagous to that of a piano string. Jim -- Jim Moy Moy Piano Service, LLC http://www.moypiano.com 970-292-6808
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC