←back to thread

207 points zdw | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
albert_e ◴[] No.43715256[source]
Tangentially related

I once picked up my memory foam mattress and stood it up against one of the walls ... for cleaning the bed or whatever.

As I walked past the mattress I instantly noticed that the mattress is such a good absorber of audio waves that I could immediately notice a dip in ambient sound in the ear facing the mattress.

The room was already "silent" and this newly discovered lower limit of silence was pretty surprising to me physiologically.

replies(1): >>43715878 #
meindnoch ◴[] No.43715878[source]
Everyone should try a real anechoic chamber once. The silence there is deafening.
replies(3): >>43716212 #>>43716246 #>>43719238 #
cf100clunk ◴[] No.43719238[source]
If you are handy to an R&D lab that has a combo Faraday Cage/anechoic chamber you can have a nice experience free of RF and audio noise and stimulus. Even better if it is dimly lit in near-infrared. Even better-better if it has a tank of warm water with lots of epsom salts, although I've never been in a lab that had such a thing as a requirement.
replies(1): >>43719573 #
meindnoch ◴[] No.43719573[source]
I'm skeptical of shielding yourself from RF noise having any detectable effect.

Unless you have amalgam tooth fillings, that anecdotally can act as a crude diode, and demodulate strong enough AM signals.

replies(2): >>43719631 #>>43732163 #
cf100clunk ◴[] No.43719631[source]
The goal is not to prove or disprove any affects on one's physiology, but simply to have the experience of being free of RF and audio for the sake of it.
replies(1): >>43720339 #
stouset ◴[] No.43720339[source]
I think the point is that even saying the "experience" of being free of RF implies a perception which does not exist.

Plus it's well-known that you don't really get the full experience of this unless you manage to shield yourself from neutrinos by surrounding yourself with sufficiently-dense proto-neutron stars.

replies(1): >>43720921 #
cf100clunk ◴[] No.43720921[source]
Neutrinos, cosmic rays, and extraterrestrial subatomic particle streams are not considered RF, right?
replies(1): >>43722972 #
1. stouset ◴[] No.43722972{5}[source]
If we're going out of our way to eliminate things that cause zero perceptual experience I don't see why you would exclude them.
replies(1): >>43723660 #
2. cf100clunk ◴[] No.43723660[source]
Those requirements were not specified, so were not designed or built. If you can increase the budget, we can write-up a proposal to wrangle some sufficiently-dense proto-neutron stars.