ATTN: PHYSICS SPAGS

[Cait M. R.]

I'm curious as to whether or not there is a name for electromagnetic frequencies below the ELF radio range, if such things are even physically possible. (Note, this is for a friend who specifically stated that it should be assumed that the hypothetical beings using these frequencies have the means to turn entire solar systems into antennas.)

I'm thinking sub-Hertz (if that's even a technically correct term?) frequencies, like decihertz and below.

If there isn't, could someone offer a plausible name for such?

Thanks!

[Cain]

Quantum.

[Triple Zero]

well there's the GNOME range and of course the FAIRY range.

if you go even lower you wind up in the PIXIE range. if you try to go any lower, you will reach a limit, which is the most diminuitive of all frequency ranges, also known as the PAYNE threshold.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

well there's the GNOME range and of course the FAIRY range.

if you go even lower you wind up in the PIXIE range. if you try to go any lower, you will FALL OFF OF ENGLAND.

Fixed.

[LMNO, PhD (life continues)]

I'm curious as to whether or not there is a name for electromagnetic frequencies below the ELF radio range, if such things are even physically possible. (Note, this is for a friend who specifically stated that it should be assumed that the hypothetical beings using these frequencies have the means to turn entire solar systems into antennas.)

I'm thinking sub-Hertz (if that's even a technically correct term?) frequencies, like decihertz and below.

If there isn't, could someone offer a plausible name for such?

Thanks!

Considering that the ELF is generally between 3 and 30 Hz, are you asking what the range between 1 and 2 HZ is called?

Or are you asking if there are frequencies with a negative Hz range?

If it's the former, the technical term is "too unweildy to produce or use."

If it's the latter, the technical term is "you fail acoustics forever."

[Template]

LMNO: What about the frequencies between zero and one, equivalent to everything between 1e8 m and infinity (aka DC) in wavelength?  It is you, sir, who has failed at real numbers.  Also, I suspect OP was interested in EM waves--is acoustics the study of those too?

[LMNO, PhD (life continues)]

First off, the same answer applies.  If the period of the wavelength is equal to the velocity, and the velocity is just under the speed of light, then the wavelength is as good as unusable in any practial sense.

Second, in both acoustics and EM, the term Hertz is used, which means "cycles per second".  In both instances, to say that a wave length has "negative" cycles is retarded.  Point two also stands.


Go back to your corner and shut up, kid.

[Igor]

Unwieldy to produce/detect indeed. When the US Navy were using ELF to communicate wuth subs, they basically had to use the entire Earth as an antenna. To do anything with lower frequencies (millihertz?) you'd need something much, much bigger.

And since the wave would be of such low energy, you'd have difficulty knowing whether it came from some far off source or a nearby quantum (sorry) fluctuation.

Edit: Those two reasons are probably the same thing.

[Triple Zero]

except that waves are also particles, and therefore Quantum. which means that anything can happen. Except in Tucson.

which, incidentally is why we have seasons occuring in a circular rhythm, because the breakbeat was invented by Eric Clapton.

[Template]

LMNO: you have escalated in hostility needlessly.  Also, you sounded sleepy or drunk in your last post.  In any case, I only said "you fail" because you did, while making a considerable error.  +++++  @OP: you can raise 480 1-Hz waves in the distance from Earth to Sun.

[rong]

to say that a wave length has "negative" cycles is retarded.

i always figured negative cycles to describe a wave moving backward in time.

[LMNO, PhD (life continues)]

Not mentioning values between 0 and 1 after clearly demonstrating that values between 1 and 2 were functionally useless is a "considerable error"?


Clearly, any frequency below 1Hz would have even less pragmatic value.  A wave of 0.5Hz would be twice as long as a wave of 1Hz.  Since we've already shown that a 1Hz wave is longer than the earth's diameter, anything less would be completely useless.  WHICH WAS MY INITIAL POINT, DUMBASS.

[Cait M. R.]

Not negative. From 0 to 3. Yes, it's useless, but that's okay, because this is for something where the more useless it is the more value it has. (Do not ask me to explain, because I don't know the details and he is not providing them. I asked.) I'm just looking for a reasonable name to give it, unless it already has one. Could you help there?

[Jasper]

How the hell can you have a 0Hz wave?  You can't.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

except that waves are also particles, and therefore Quantum. which means that anything can happen. Except in Tucson.

Damn straight.

This thread gave me anal leakage.