Talk:Sound

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
Other languages WikiProject Echo has identified Sound as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the French language Wikipedia.
Sound was a good article, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Delisted version: December 26, 2006
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Version 0.5
 This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.

Contents

[edit] GA Re-Review and In-line citations

Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 00:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

== Sound: A sound is a long, narrow strip of water joining two larger bodies of water, or between mainland and an island. It can also be be an irregular type of inlet, or an 'arm' of a sea. (ex: Puget Sound, Long Island Sound)

Why is that on the start of this page, when we are dealing with sound as a wave of energy? It wasn't there before!

[edit] Examples of Sound Pressure Levels

I think we need some references for the examples of Sound Pressure Levels. There must be some good sources with measured SPL's that we could use. For example, someone has just changed the threshold of pain to 120 dB. What is the source of this data? The same question applies to all numbers in the list. pheon 23:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Tidy Up

I removed some very old comments from this page that no longer seemed relevant. pheon 02:26, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page Structure

It has been suggested that this article be split into articles entitled Sound, Sound pressure and Sound pressure level, accessible from a disambiguation page. I disagree. My preference would be for just one larger article called Sound with sections on sound pressure and sound pressure level. Pages already exist on those topics but there is much overlap with the sound page. We should maintain the links but redirect them to the relevant section in sound. A single, well constructed Sound article would pull together all these concepts on one coherent place.pheon 17:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] This article's Good article status under review for possible delisting, see Good article review

This article's Good article status under review for possible delisting, see Good article review. --Ling.Nut 00:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article review

The Good Article review concerning this article has been archived, and in a 6 to 0 vote, this article has been delisted, primarily for compleate lack of internal citations, and weak referencing overall, along with concerns about the length of the introducton and compleatness. Plus, the article had been warned much earlier about this problem, yet it seems nothing was done. Review archived here: Wikipedia:Good articles/Disputes/Archive 11. Homestarmy 02:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] scribd

I removed the scribd link by User:Hallenrm. It is an interesting article, with much content that would be useful here; but it does contain some mis-conceptions so I felt it would be better not to mislead. pheon 00:11, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Graffiti

Some one or ones is repeatedly defacing this article. See this history comparison. Correcting those.

[edit] Factual error

I didn't want to edit w/o first discussing, but I'm pretty sure the latter half of the sentence below is incorrect (emphasis added):

  • "Sound propagates as waves of alternating pressure, causing local regions of compression and rarefaction.

In the atmosphere air is unconfined, i.e. is in effect incompressible. Pressure gradients do not result in compression. Of course air is compressible, but that is not why it propagates sound waves. Nearly the same sentence appears on the Underwater acoustics page:

  • "A sound wave propagating underwater consists of alternating compressions and rarefactions of the water."

In this context the error is more clear. A small tap of metal on metal propagates quite well underwater, where the speed of sound is about 4x that of air. But that tap in no way produces enough energy to compress water -- something like 2 billion Joules per unit volume. Todd Johnston 04:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC) sound,you hear it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.200.115.135 (talk) 00:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree: (1) "In the atmosphere air is unconfined i.e. is in effect incompressible". This is incorrect. Atmosphere (in equilibrium) can be described by a pressure that is a function of altitude (pressure tends to 0 at very high altitudes). However, sound is a non-equilibrium phenomenon, so a pattern of compressions and rarefactions, that is, regions of higher- and lower-than-atmospheric pressures (at a given altitude), can exist in air, provided that such pattern moves with a well-defined speed. This moving pattern of pressure deviations from equilibrium is sound[1]. (2) But that tap in no way produces enough energy to compress water -- something like 2 billion Joules per unit volume. - This logic is quite misleading. Of course, sound carries energy, and of course, that energy originates from the "tap". Moreover, compression and rarefaction only accounts for 1/2 of the energy carried by the sound wave in water, the other 1/2 comes from the kinetic energy of the water layers moving back and forth as the pattern propagates. How can a weak "tap" compress so much water with so much energy? The answer: the compressions and rarefactions are usually very small, a tiny fraction of the atmospheric pressure. The energy of additional compression (compared to equilibrium) or rarefaction is proportional to the pressure deviation squared, so a part-per-thousand atmosphere additional compression will be associated with part-per-million additional energy. Also, a simple tap does not fill the entire ocean with sound. Rather, sound wave intensity will decay with distance traveled, exactly becasue energy needs to be conserved. Xenonice (talk) 05:52, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Physics of Sound Web Site

I have created a web site devoted to all aspects of sound, including the physics of sound. I would like feedback on whether or not to: (1) reference the sites here, (2) copy some of the material here, or (3) forget the whole idea. There is a relatively simple equation-free section which can be found here [1], and a more advanced section with lots of equations which can be found here[2]. --Aludwig12 (talk) 23:03, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Aludwig12, There is some good stuff on your pages. I think the best thing to do is to copy some over and see how it goes down. The level of technical complexity may be too high to start with and the 'alternative' derivation of the wave equation is interesting, but maybe the standard method would be less confusing/controversial. You could then put in a link to your 'alternative' derivation which would be appropriate I think. pheon (talk) 18:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, no, it's not appropriate to link one's own work; see WP:EL. But another editor, such as pheon, can link it if he sees fit. As for copying the content, make sure that you include a source (not your own work); see WP:V and WP:RS. Dicklyon (talk) 02:49, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback.--Aludwig12 (talk) 16:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article Date

This article was tagged as a good article on January 16, 2006 at 03:18 by User:ScienceApologist. Here is a link to the current version at that time http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sound&oldid=35044351. (I dont' know how to make this link correctly, sorry/please help!). Neurogeek (talk) 01:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Translation of French article

An amateurish translation of the French article is available in my user space: User:Neurogeek/Son_Sound_Translation. The translation is rough, but the article in the original French is very good. I intend to modify the English version so that it is comparable (or better!). Neurogeek (talk) 02:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Note: I found that the first sentence of the French article is a simple translation of the first sentence of Encyclopedia Britannica Online's article on Sound. E.B.O. requires registration, and I am not willing to put a lot of effort towards investigating plagarism. However, that is enough for me not to use a direct translation of the French article for the English one. Also, the French article has the same problem with references as does the English, and perhaps suffers from mistakes. Neurogeek (talk) 05:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 14 year old

I think you should make it so a 14 year old can understand it!!! Hannah Montana94

Perhaps a balance can be reached where different readers will be able to find something that engages them no matter what their prior knowledge. Binksternet (talk) 05:27, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to agree with your Hannah Montana94, but unfortunately (or fortunately) the physics of sound is complex and research goes on all the time. The nature of the material is complex, so a bit of 'basic' physics knowledge is required to understand what is going on. I do however think the introduction and the mention of other animals is fairly simple to understand Gautam Discuss 05:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-Protection

Have requested semi-protection for this article as there seems to be a lot of pointless and random vandalism occurring. Paulrach (talk) 21:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Use Meters per Second

In what seems to be the final section, let's stick to SI units and convert those values to m/s. That's more useful. The british values can be put in parenthesis or something. Gautam Discuss 05:26, 17 May 2008 (UTC)