Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Jan -> Here

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1999 15:58:48 -0500
Fwd Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:02:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Fox TV Special


>Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 14:04:30 -0600
>To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <updates@globalserve.net>
>From: Michael Christol <mchristo@mindspring.com>
>Subject: Re: UFO UpDate: Re: Fox TV Special

>Well Greg, I will grant you that the machine which I have seen
>in action was a physical contraption.  It was invented in the
>early part of this century, by Spencer Harvey Louis, and I think
>it now resides in a museum, possibly in Chicago...I cannot be
>sure, without looking through my information.

>This machine consisted of an organ and a device which converted
>the mucical notes into light patterns of various colors, so that
>when one played the organ, the audience was entertained with a
>vast spectrum of color and music.

>Grant you a device was constructed to demonstrate this
>connection between color and sound, in the visible spectrum of
>our reality. Yet, there are individuals who profess to see these
>colors in the auric emaninations from material things...In other
>words it is an "energy."

Well, auras aren't sounds. The machine you saw is a perfect
example of what I wrote about in my post. Spencer Harvey Louis
invented a system for translating sound into color. In order to
do that, he had to make decisions -- he had to decide, for
instance, that a particular musical note would be represented by
a particular color. From a scientific point of view, these
decisions are arbitrary. There is absolutely no connection
between the sound frequency that  produces the note E flat,
let's say, and the electromagnetic frequency that produces the
color green. The decisions may not be arbitrary from some
artistic point of view, but they have no basis at all in
objective reality.

In classical music, color associations with music often come up.
Beethoven's very mighty third symphony is in the key of E flat
major. You'll sometimes hear someone say that this is a perfect
key for something so majestic, because the key of E flat sounds
golden. Then someone else will jump in and say, no, the key of E
flat sounds red. Someone else will think it's blue. Nobody
agrees! This is something joked about, affectionately, over and
over within the field. Nobody can agree on which musical sounds
should be associated with which colors, though many people have
strong ideas on the subject.

>Sound as you are aware, ranges from far below the auditory range
>of the human ear to far above it...It is like a slide kazoo....
>you can slide the bar in and get one sound and slowly withdraw
>it to go all the way to the other extreem, of course again
>within the range of the auditory senses. But those vibrations
>which we call sound, do not stop, simply because we do not hear
>them...animals have a far keener sense of hearing than humans...

Sure. But sound vibrations and light vibrations are entirely
different. Sound is created by a physical vibration of molecules
of air or some other substance. Light is electromagnetic
radiation. You can extend the spectrum of sound past the range
of human hearing, but no matter how far you extend it, you'll
never end up with light. Light is on a completely different
spectrum.

One difference between the two is the phenomenon of octaves,
which exists for sound but not for light. If you picture a piano
keyboard, you know that notes repeat. You can play a scale
upwards from middle C, and the notes will be C,D,E,F,G,A,B, and
finally another C. The first C and the second are audibly the
same note, even though the second C is higher.

Physically, the phenomenon is linked to a note's frequency. If
you double a note's frequency or cut it in half, you get the
same note, only higher or lower. The sound spectrum, then,
consists of repeating series of the same notes. (And now the
fine print for those who want a fuller story. The notes of the
piano keyboard are selected from a continuous spectrum. That is,
it's perfectly possible with your voice or with many other
instruments to produce an infinte number of notes, most of which
fall between the cracks of the piano notes. The specific pitches
of the piano keyboard -- the familiar 12-note chromatic scale of
western music -- have been selected for technical musical
reasons which evolved over many years, and would be too
complicated to describe here.)

Taking a deep breath after that parenthesis...sound has this
audible phenomenon of octaves. Light has nothing equivalent. The
spectrum runs in a continuous sweep, without colors repeating
each time a frequency doubles.

>Vibrations, deal with energy...this enegy issues across the
>entire spectrum of material existence.  Music as a product of
>material expression can be made more enjoyable by adjusting the
>frequency of those vibrations...To harsh and it causes us to
>cringe...to soft and it puts to sleep.

Well, planning the quality of music is a lot more complicated
than adjusting a frequency or two. Anyone who doubts that should
attend an orchestra rehearsal, or sit with me while I prepare a
recording mix of some synthesizer piece I've written!

More important, though..."this energy issues across the entire
spectrum of material existence." From a spiritual or mystical
point of view, it's fine to talk about energy as if it were a
single thing, in all of its forms. In material reality, that's
just not true. Sound and light are different forms of energy,
with no physical connection between them.

>Again, I stick by this, based on the machines I have seen
>produce these colors and sounds....

My point, again, was not that machines can't produce color in
response to sound. These connections are arbitrary; that's what
I was trying to say.

>You are correct...play a note and no color appears in the air..
>yet, as previously said by both of us, you can construct devices
>to project this color in to the visible spectrum... Is it not
>true that the notes on the Universal musical scale cover a range
>of 80 octaves???

Nope, not true at all. Can't imagine what the "universal musical
scale" might be. I've never heard of such a thing. Besides, 80
octaves is a lot of  octaves. The piano, with the largest range
of any acoustic instrument (well, maybe the organ might exceed
it), has only 8 octaves. 80 octaves would take you far beyond
the range of not only human, but animal hearing.

>
>You are correct, I was talking in Spiritual terms...but
>ultimately this Spirit reaches acorss the gulf into physical
>reality...
>

In spirit (no pun intended), I agree with you, MIchael. I think,
though, that the spirit is able to work with physical reality as
science knows it.

In any case, spirit can use the vast power of music, realizing
itself only in sound. There's no need to make any new connection
between sound and light to give music any more conviction than
it already has.

Greg Sandow

(Thanks for your kind words, Michael.)