Artificial Atmosphere In Vacuum

"Just a standard home use hammer, lets say with an aluminum handle."

I've never seen a common hammer with an aluminum handle. Wood, fiberglass... materials that dampen the shock of impact. You can get aluminum alloy heads: non-sparking.

Sound is vibration that we can hear.

1. It takes molecules of something to transmit sound, as it is commonly defined. Air nitrogen, water.

The vibrations would be transmitted to your ears by the tissue and bones of your body, so yes, you would "hear" the sound, but it would not "sound like sound" transmitted by air.

2. Same as 1 above, but the glove will attenuate the vibrations, maybe to some near "quiet" level. (I guess)

Finally, yes. It is called a spectrum analyzer or a dB meter.

So, the speed of sound is dependent on the density of the medium transmitting it.

Vacuum 0. air at sea level 760 MPH. speed in water much faster. Steel really fast. Diamond extra, extra extra fast.

Old high school Physics lab experiment. Put a electric door bell and battery to power it, bell not buzzer, in a bell jar and pull a vacuum on the jar. As the pressure within the bell jar decreases (vacuum increases) the bell gets quieter to you. Finally in a full vacuum no sound at all.

Good Luck, Old Salt

so that is why wives always know what is going on before the air head doing it knows?

you're making me laugh. ZERO sound waves in space

Ever been in an anechoic chamber?

Anechoic chamber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have been in lots of them. It is really strange. No echos, at all, so the only thing you hear is what comes directly to your ear from the speaker's mouth.

Zero sound waves in a vacuum

In space no one can hear you scream. Alien 1.

Well, muting the head of the hammer will also reduce the vibration in the handle. If you can't hear the head strike the spike, then the vibration in the handle will probably be inaudible, too.

As for conducted sound through a space suit, I would take the astronaut's word. The suit will probably dampen all but the largest vibrations. Placing a vibrating tuning fork to the helmet or its visor would conduct a sound, but I doubt that a soft glove would.

When working in zero G any action by the astronaut will cause a reverse action, too. So swinging a hammer and striking something will cause an equal recoil to the astronaut. Astronauts use special tools to either lock the tool to the object they are working on or have a recoil-less mechanism to prevent back force from impacting the astronaut.

Try turning a wrench in zero G and you will spin yourself around unless you are anchored to the object with the bolt. Tricky stuff.

Lastly, there are instruments to measure the vibration on panels (typically accelerometers are used), but you need a "calibrated" system to do this. You can probably rent the equipment, but it would be good to employ or hire a technician consultant to get the job done right. Equipment like that is often used in the speaker building industry.

In space, no one can hear you ping.....

Yes but, your suit will be wet and your face shield will fog up.

So, they'll know you've been ping.

Well as it turns out hammering which creates vibration can be transferred by the space suit to the helmet(which has an artificial atmosphere) and heard.....we have evidence from the Apollo 12 moon landing when Alan Bean was collecting rock samples....

Moon hammer....

http://blog.moonzoo.org/2011/07/

that pic was taken on a Hollywood sound-stage, we never really landed on the moon

The guys got a GoPro prototype rev01 attached.

Thank you, very helpful. Much appreciation to all.

My Uncle designed that hammer!

I'll bet he did it on a drafting board with a T-square, angles, dividers, protractors and French curves, too.

Using a slide rule and a mechanical pencil.

I worked with draftsmen back then. (I wasn't one) A giant room with maybe 30-40 direct labor and "job-shoppers". Their motto was, "Never draw more before lunch that you can erase in the afternoon".

My Parents were drafts-people for Bectel in San Fransisco. I grew up with a drafting table and machine, French Curves and Triangles and a Khoinoor Lettering set in my bedroom. I grew up using those tools in Grade shchool and Middle school! It taught me to think in pictures. It got me through Algebra and saw me into Geometry and Trig and eventually Electronics.

I still have everything but the machine. Now I miss the machine.

I just recently aquired a newer version of an old drawing tool, the adjustible French Curve. It is a beautiful collection of thin flexible interlocking rails that are atteched to each other at only one end. You can bend them around three pionts and get a really smooth transition line between the points. I used a large one to draw the lines connecting segments in a Hot-air model of a Zeppelin in High school drafting class. Beautifuly easy to produce the right curves in a pressure vessel!

Thank You Lyn for triggering some fine memories of ways past. I have been a Computer guy for 30+ years but I still can't get used to CAD in the same way I am used to these old tools.

I know what your talking about, I had one as a duplicator for my wood lathe. There's another type of adjustable French curve was also known as a snake. It was just that, a flexible snake with flat side to run your pencil.

French curves?

You mean like this? ;-)

That triggers some fine memories, too.

The communication satellites do. Heck, all Sputnik did (aside from make the US look bad) *WAS* ping back to Earth.

In space, no one can hear you pii-ing. But they can hear you scream after you F.A.R.T.

Sound is mechanical vibration so its directly proportional to the compactness or arrangement of molecules. More audible in solids. Space is vacuum.

Why not innovate something like this but different medium.

Yes, of course, sound, defined as through air to the ear, cannot be perceived in space but vibrations through objects can and they can resemble the perception of sound. This is especially true of lower frequencies.

That might be through the spike and the ground in case 1 or via the space suit in case 2.

To gain an insight into this perception, you might check out this TED talk with a deaf musician. https://www.ted.com/speakers/evelyn_glennie

The head of the hammer is too heavy and has high inertia when compared with a tuning fork which has a thin vibrating arm. Further the end of the handle, which can perhaps vibrate is held in a shock absorbing hand grip.

This is the reason for there being no vibrations from the handle.

I agree Biorami, and the experience of Nasa astronauts Piers Sellers, Mike Massimino, and Garrett Reisman testifies to no sound.. but you can hear Alan Bean hammering away like he is in Earth atmosphere and this issue is the focus of my film. The Apollo broadcasts have MANY sounds in sync to what the astronauts are.doing and the sounds only make sense if they are not in vacuum. The apollo lunar surface journals are pushing the idea that the sound is comjng from the glove into the suit atmosphere and are traveling to mic in helmet and triggering that.... doesnt seem rational at all. The sound can only be coming from hammer handle and you would need to put your ear on handle or amplify sound...not to mention much if not all vibration is subject to reflection back toward handle, then absorption at each new material layer, then what is left could possiby enter atmosphere but would be hard pressed to.migrate from tightness of gloves through suit up to helmet where it woul have to be loud enough to overcome fans in suit and astronaut breathing and be at level loud enough to trigger threshold of VOX mic. This anomaly is my film. I need to interview as many scientists and mechanical engineers as possible. Thanks again for all responses. I will give private link to our preliminary trailer here soon if you guys dont think it will be taken as spam.

You could always rent a spacesuit and visit a large vacuum chamber like the one in Ohio and try it for yourself if you want to be scientific about it.

Those old lunar suits were very balky and stiff, so transmission of sound through components of the suit is possible. Stiffer material will transmit vibrations much more readily than soft materials. Probably much more so than modern suits, which have been designed with newer materials that are much more flexible.

Also, while the sound may be conducted into the suit by vibration, once parts of the suit starts vibrating it will essentially act just like the paper cone of a speaker and transmit a sound pressure wave, which may be the mechanism at play in the Apollo broadcasts you hear.

Some of those noises could also be the suit itself.

As a filmmaker, if you haven't, check out Col. Chris Hadfield's recordings of sounds in space (some areas of space have atmospheres):

https://soundcloud.com/colchrishadfield

(The site's currently firewalled from me, so I don't KNOW that it's the right link.)

Yes, it works.

Interesting recordings, but there's an atmosphere there.

We released the final cut of the initial movie trailer for our forthcoming feature documentary today.

NASA NOT SOUND

https://vimeo.com/114090787

If you believe that, your name should be flimco, not filmco.

I worked at Motorola's Aerospace Div. during that time, 67-88.

We had a semi-literate janitor who cleaned our lab. He thought that way too.

Well that is not a scientific reply. It doesnt matter what anyone believes, what matters is science. Either the evidence obeys laws of science or it does not. Belief is a matter of.faith. the film is about the science of sound waves, nothing more.

The point he wanted to make was that he worked at Motorola's Aerospace Div. that's all.

And the part about the half literate janitor? I thought this was a science forum, amd perhaps emotions might be avoided.

Don't get discouraged. You'll get a long later on. Call it some sort of initiation on this forum. Hazing sort of. Adversity is the mother of all inventions and innovations, I heard it from some one.

hmmm... perhaps.. he is a she after all, I have really a strong feeling about that...do you? Probably typical nasty pretty girl you can't get enough of.

How would you know anything about science?

In your opening post you say, "Im not an engineer. I am a filmmaker".

You are a maker of fiction, not truth.

Distortions and half truths are easy to manipulate.

The statements of the astronauts about sound in a vacuum is taken completely out of the context of how vibrations travel in ALL media.

You are an uninformed hoax, spreading half truths and outright lies in the name of SCIENCE.

I'll be waiting for your next work. 9/11 conspiracy theories

WALOBS!!

There is nothing out of context at all. There is no explanation within the laws of science for the sounds in the clips. Hammer handles dont act like tuning forks or speakers. But this is just the trailer. Furthermore, the smoking gun is the first clip. The rest are supplementary. And i dont mean to disappoint you, but again, this is a film about science. I dont think you have to be a scientist to ask questions. And none of the scientists we have spoken to have been emotional at all. They have been intrigued. And you can wait for the film to find out the rest of the story. It will be coming to a film festival near you soon enough. Peace and happy holidays. The trailer and film speak for themselves... unemotionally. I hope you can do the same.

"Furthermore, the smoking gun is the first clip."

You mean the scene where the astronaut tosses something up and it hits the SOLID BODY of the Lander, where an internal microphone left on would have picked up the sound as it travels through the Lander's hull?

You bring up the 'bell in a bell jar' example, but remember, the bell is SUSPENDED from a thin wire so it is not in PHYSICAL CONTACT with the table or bell jar. If the bell were allowed to come into contact with another surface (much like the tossed object came in contact with the Lander when it hit) then you WOULD hear sound transmitted solid surface to solid surface.

We also have clear proof that we have landed on the Moon. One or more of the Apollo missions includes setting up retroreflective targets on the Moon, so we could accurately measure the distance using 'time of flight' laser pulses. Those mirrors are there, they were not there before the Apollo missions. How would you explain their existance if we never went to the Moon?

You think the object was picked up by a live mic in thr depressurized cabin? Wrong. On all aspects. And we cover tha thoroughly with NASA specs in the film.

Poor fool. Microphones DO NOT require air to produce a signal.

<Unsubscribes in disgust>

That is choice. Im flattered, really. Tell your friends. You were there. I will unsubscribe as well. The game is over, kids. Our film is a gamechanger. -Out

Hey film guy: Solids transmit sounds. Get that into your brain, dude!

Riddle me this: If you made a solid suspended rod en vacuo (in a friggin' vacuum tube), that is at one end strongly coupled to a rifle stock, and a bullet is fired in your direction in air. The bullet is initially supersonic, traveling at just over 800 mph (low muzzle velocity round) Which arrives first? Range is 4 miles.

(a)the bullet

(b)the report from the rifle, traveling through air

(c) the report from the rifle, traveling through the metal rod

(c) the coroner's report (that is a joke, son)

Would you have time to move out of the way, if in fact it was aimed right at you by mistake?

Ooh Ooh! Pick me teach! Pick me!

I want to say the arrival sequence is C, then A, then B.

Although it could be A, C, B. I'm not sure what the speed of sound is in a rod of an unspecified metal.

Yeah, probably you have no chance in here. Look through the number of post and GA, you can tell who's the owner of this forum. He ain't got enough time for nonesense, i guess you'll learn from humiliation. A humble beginning is best other than jumping on the bridge without a life jacket.

Yes plenty of time for CR4. It's unbelievable.

He works here, so better off with nonsensical question or else ...ahmm..it will be funny as hell.hehehe

He'd better work at CR4, otherwise the 'guru' wastes a lot of time for his employer.

Remember what Mark Twain said, "Never argue with a fool. Bystanders may not be able to tell the difference".

Next will be "How the CIA planted explosives in the World Trade Center buildings without anyone knowing, and how the holograms of the planes flying into them were created".

I'm outa here.

Thank you for the advice.

I don't know why I jumped in there, guess I wasn't thinking clearly. Did the clerk at the donut shop slip me decaf instead of regular this morning?

More BS. Film does not speak for itself, because you "scientifically" stated that sound can only travel in air. How about sound traveling in media other than air, such as oil, water, metal, plastic, etc. The speed of sound in known in all of these, as are the thermal conductance, modulus, etc.

Sound is vibration, understood as compression waves, and this does travel in solid materials, but the coupling constants between various media may result in deadening of the sound intensity, some frequency distortion, etc.

I would like to see just once, a filmaker go out there and ask one simple question, show evidence related to the question, and then draw a realistic conclusion based on something besides conjecture. Usually, they ask the question over and over between commercial breaks, and then insinuate something or the other about "the answer", then finally leave it hanging with even more questions. It is a journey with no destination, no arrival, no climax.

This was all explained to flimflam in the beginning.

This loser reminds me of the lunatics who claimed that the CIA took down the WTC.

They never offered any explanations of how the bundles of explosive got there, who convinced the pilots of those planes to fly into the building at just the right time, etc. etc.

Propaganda is easy to edit into innocent statements of unsuspecting people, as this guy did with the statements about sound in a vacuum.

I'll be busy watching the paint dry when the "movie" comes to a theater near me.

"I would like to see just once, a filmaker go out there and ask one simple question, show evidence related to the question, and then draw a realistic conclusion based on something besides conjecture."

Do the MythBusters, Bill Nye, Beakman, or Mr. Wizard count as filmmakers? They've all worked on film (or video) and follow the proper scientific methods of finding answers (geared to the age of the audience and with varying amounts of 'Big Boom' for entertainment value).

I'd be happy if the news media would do that.

You are basing your answers upon untested assumptions, and that is totally unscientific. Sorry, but after further review the play is reversed. The player did hear the hammer strikes through his microphone by vibrational coupling through the hammer handle, his glove (which is unlike any glove you have ever donned), his space suit, parts of his body (being mostly water), and finally to the air in the space suit, and his microphone. Apparently, you have contradictory statements, perhaps from folks who experienced what they experienced, but were either distracted or not particularly good witnesses. You are aware of "eye-witness" theory are you not?

Who gets to be the arbiter of "science" or "truth" here? If it does not obey the science that you understand, then apparently, it is not true? What if someone who is a scientist by education, experience, and career knows science (truth) beyond what you know, and declares that to be the truth, and you unknowingly disallow it? Which one has the closed mind?

We did go to the moon. Fact. Another fact, that particular generation had no pride in "faking" things like the current generation apparently does.

My skin is pretty thick. I know we are touching raw nerves with folks who believe. But this film really isn't about whether we landed on the moon, motivations for a possible hoax, how such a thing might be pulled off, etc. The film, like the quote that starts the trailer, is about one thing only, the science of sound. And the sounds in the trailer have issues. This is a feature doc that explores those issues. We will not be discussing anything in our film outside of sound. It is not a general moon hoax allegation. But it is a film that asks questions I think most people would be proud of their children for asking if this came up in a high school class. If there is no sound in a vacuum, how do you explain these clips? Is it not a fair question? Our film is asking this question, and only this question.

Fair enough, and your skin better be pretty thick if you're asserting what it sounds like you are. I haven't looked at the video beyond this firewall, and it's now pretty low on my list of follow-ups.

The problem with conspiracy theories is that most people engaged in the conversation aren't sophisticated enough to refute or accept the theory, even for themselves. It then lives long enough to gain acceptance. You've presented the right theory to this forum to have found experts who can set you straight in every aspect.

Now, if you'd tried to assert that humans are playing no significant role in climate change, you might've gotten a more welcoming reception. Some here drink the Kool-Aid... <Sound of double-barreled sawed-off shotgun closing. <That means you, kramarat.> >

"My skin is pretty thick."

But sadly your understanding of science is pretty thin.

"how do you explain these clips?"

We did, but your mind seems to exist in the vacuum of ignorance because you didn't like the answers that did not substantiate your claims - therefore, you did not hear them.

Oh, and your claim that you are not trying to disprove the Moon landing is false and disingenuous, but the movie trailer clearly shows otherwise. Very disappointing, but you should have just come clean with your agenda from the first post. You didn't because you knew that the backlash and counter evidence would have been overwhelming.

Sounds link fiction guised as a documentary. Someone such introduce him to Buzz Aldrin.

It's a true believer with the power of persuasion and a large audience of fools.

No. Introduce him to:

.

Never argue with a fool.

I am not really here. The symbols you see are not either.

Fingers touching plastic thingies cannot possibly cause you to see my words.

kastrupsky would be proud.

I really did leave, trust me.

That is Buzz Lightyear.

By the way, the title of this blog is an oxymoron: "Artificial Atmosphere in a Vacuum" Are you kidding me? There is NO friggin' atmosphere in a vacuum. period.

Hey, i know that guy! Lol

You're a little late on your cue.

I already made the 'tell that to Buzz Aldrin' comment up in Post #20 of this thread.

But great minds think alike, and all that, I'm sure we'll get a few more wanting to get him and Buzz in the same room.

Sorry, I missed the bus on that one.

They may have been "in a vacuum", but they were "standing on the moon". There is a big difference between being surrounded by nothing and attempting to hear a sound coming from an isolated source, and being "on" something and hearing a sound transmitted through solid/liquid materials before being coupled into the air (inside a spacesuit).

Case in point: Helen Keller, could not hear, but could sense vibrations.

You would hear it, but muted, and only the lower frequencies - a sort of 'thud' rather than a sharper 'crack' of the hammer against a hard surface as heard through air.

As the human body consists mostly of water the sound will be transmitted through the body as well as anything in contact with the hammer. But, as the body also acts to dampen the sound in a frequency-selective way, absorbing higher frequencies more efficiently than lower ones, what is heard (sans any other source of sound) will be a thud.

Now keep in mind also that to be accurate, there will be other sounds in the space-farer's helmet. A quiet hiss of air from his/her breathing apparatus and possibly the muted sounds of small precision motors and pumps in their life-support pack.

Stanley Kubrick studied this problem for his epic 2001: A Space Odyssey, where you can hear similar sounds from the astronaut's standpoint - the hiss of air, the astronaut's breathing, and so forth but, as none of the astronauts in that film used any 'percussion' tools, there would be no muted sound of hammering. There would be that sound, as well, has such occurred. Not loud, but muffled, somewhat like the stomping of boots on the ground outside, but more defined.

How to record? Don't put a mic in contact with the hammer handle as you'll damage it. Seriously, what would I would try is this (stranger things have been done by filmmakers, so no worries): buy a large beef summer sausage, tape a mic to one end, dip the other end (only the end; a few inches) in a swimming pool and then have someone hammer on a piece of metal whilst completely submerged. This pretty much emulates the sound conduction of the human body whilst also muting the hammer sounds in air. If that's the sound you want, this will do it for you. Then have your sound engineer experiment with the sound mix, cutting the higher frequencies from the recording. What you will get is pretty much what an astronaut in the vacuum of space would hear from inside their helmet as they worked.

The OP's underlying implication is that the moon landings were a hoax, all done on a sound stage here on Earth.

His questions were intended to add credence to his false conspiracy theory. He paid no attention to the many explanations of how vibrations travel through different media.

This stuff is funnier than watching my wife trying to balance her check book!

Good Luck, Old Salt

Filmmakers have gone to great lengths to get the sounds and other effects they want.

For some of the spacey sounds heard in the original Star Wars movie, George Lucas pushed a mic against a rural telephone pole to record the wires 'singing' in the breeze. The little gizmos Doctor McCoy waved over the patient's body in the Star Trek TV series were futuristic-looking salt and pepper shakers bought at a shop across the street from the studio.

Even rock bands aren't immune from experimenting. Creedence Clearwater Revival got that 'fast, echo-y, reverbery trademark sound' by recording their sessions in a large, ceramic-tiled bathroom.

Whatever it takes to get the right sound.

"For some of the spacey sounds heard in the original Star Wars movie, George Lucas pushed a mic against a rural telephone pole to record the wires 'singing' in the breeze."

And the sounds of the blasters firing are a sample of the sound made when hitting a telephone pole guide wire/support cable (depending on what you want to call it) with a hammer.

Sound Foley is fun. Want to jingle a bag of coins? Real coins sound 'flat' and 'dull' when jingled, shake a bag of nails, THOSE give that delightful 'ringing' of money. And we all know about coconuts and horse hooves. Nowadays they HAVE to use coconuts, because that's what moviegoers EXPECT horses to sound like on almost any terrain. (head over to tvtropes.com and look up 'the coconut effect' for details)

Echo...Echo...Echo...Echo...

This horse is dead. So is the rider.

Seem like you're still beating the dead carcass of the guy and frustrated to found the horse and the guy dead still wanting for more action.

Would that be Schrodinger's horse?

I hope it is. Lyn got really an apettite for fools. Lol

Don't know. I can't hear it.