4pAAa1 – Auditory Illusions of Supernatural Spirits: Archaeological Evidence and Experimental Results

Steven J. Waller — wallersj@yahoo.com
Rock Art Acoustics
5415 Lake Murray Boulevard #8
La Mesa, CA 91942

Popular version of paper 4pAAa1
Presentation Thursday afternoon, October 30, 2014
Session: “Acoustic Trick-or-Treat: Eerie Noises, Spooky Speech, and Creative Masking”
168th Acoustical Society of America Meeting, Indianapolis, IN

Introduction: Auditory illusions
The ear can be tricked by ambiguous sounds, just as the eye can be fooled by optical illusions. Sound reflection, whisper galleries, reverberation, ricochets, and interference patterns were perceived in the past as eerie sounds attributed to invisible echo spirits, thunder gods, ghosts, and sound-absorbing bodies. These beliefs in the supernatural were recorded in ancient myths, and expressed in tangible archaeological evidence as canyon petroglyphs, cave paintings, and megalithic stone circles including Stonehenge. Controlled experiments demonstrate that certain ambiguous sounds cause blindfolded listeners to believe in the presence of phantom objects.
WallerFig1_HolyGhostScan spirits
Figure 1. This prehistoric pictograph of a ghostly figure in Utah’s Horseshoe Canyon will answer you back.

1. Echoes = Answers from Echo Spirits (relevant to canyon petroglyphs)
Voices coming out of solid rock gave our ancestors the impression of echo spirits calling out from the rocks. Just as light reflection in a mirror gives an illusion of yourself duplicated as a virtual image, sound waves reflecting off a surface are mathematically identical to sound waves emanating from a virtual sound source behind a reflecting plane such as a large cliff face. This can result in an auditory illusion of somebody answering you from deep within the rock. It struck me that canyon petroglyphs might have been made in response to hearing echoes and believing that the echo spirits dwelt in rocky places. Ancient myths contain descriptions of echo spirits that match prehistoric petroglyphs, including witches that hide in sheep bellies and snakeskins. My acoustic measurements have shown that the artists chose to place their art precisely where they could hear the strongest echoes. Listen to an echo at a rock art site in the Grand Canyon (click here).

Watch a video of an echoing rock art site in Utah

WallerFig2_DSCN0662_CedarSpringsTX2010
Figure 2. This figure on the Pecos River in Texas is painted in a shallow shelter with interesting acoustics.

2. Whisper Galleries = Disembodied Voices (relevant to parabolic shelters)
Just as light reflected in a concave mirror can focus to give a “real image” floating in front of the surface, a shallow rock shelter can focus sound waves like a parabolic dish. Sounds from unseen sources miles away can be focused to result in an auditory illusion of disembodied voices coming from thin air right next to you. Such rock shelters were often considered places of power, and were decorated with mysterious paintings. These shelters can also act like loud-speakers to broadcast sounds outward, such that listeners at great distances would wonder why they could not see who was making the sounds.
WallerFig3_HoofedCavePaintingsIndia
Figure 3. This stampede of hoofed animals is painted in a cave with thunderous reverberation in central India.

3. Reverberation = Thunder from Hoofed Animals (relevant to cave paintings)
Echoes of percussion noises can sound like hoof beats. Multiple echoes of a simple clap in a cavern blur together into thunderous reverberation, which mimics the sound of the thundering herds of stampeding hoofed animals painted in prehistoric caves. Ancient myths describe thunder as the hoof beats of supernatural gods. I realized that the reverberation in caves must have given the auditory illusion of being thunder, and thus inspired the cave paintings depicting that the same mythical hoofed thunder gods causing thunder in the sky also cause thunder in the underworld.
Listen to thunderous reverberation of a percussion sound in a prehistoric cave in France (click here).

4. Ricochets = “Boo-o-o!” (relevant to ghostly hauntings)
Can you hear the ricochet reminiscent of a ghostly “Boo” in this recording  of a clap in a highly reverberant room?

WallerFig4_DSCN2779a_DNM_flute
Figure 4. A petroglyph of a flute player in an echoing location within Dinosaur National Monument.

5. Resonance = spritely music (relevant to cave and canyon paintings)
Listen to the difference between a flute being played in a non-echoing environment, then how haunting it sounds if played in a cave;

It is as if spirit musicians are in accompaniment. (Thanks to Simon Wyatt for the flute music, to which half-way through I added cave acoustics via the magic of a convolution reverberation program.)
WallerFig5_rippletank12 nodes 3D w stonehenge perspective
Figure 5. An interference pattern from two sound sources such as bagpipes can cause the auditory illusion that the silent zones are acoustic shadows from a megalithic stone circle, and vice versa.

6. Interference Patterns = Acoustic Shadows of a Ring of Pillars (relevant to Stonehenge and Pipers’ Stones)
Mysterious silent zones in an empty field can give the impression of a ring of large phantom objects casting acoustic shadows. Two sound sources, such as bagpipes playing the same tone, can produce an interference pattern. Zones of silence radiating outward occur where the high pressure of sound waves from one source cancel out the low pressure of sound waves from the other source. Blindfolded participants hearing an interference pattern in controlled experiments attributed the dead zones to the presence of acoustic obstructions in an arrangement reminiscent of Stonehenge.
These experimental results demonstrate that regions of low sound intensity due to destructive interference of sound waves from musical instruments can be misperceived as an auditory illusion of acoustic shadows cast by a ring of large rocks:
WallerFig6_CFuller_InterferenceRocks
Figure 6. Drawing by participant C. Fuller after hearing interference pattern blindfolded, as envisioned from above (shown on left), and in perspective from ground level (shown on right).

I then visited the U.K. and made measurements of the actual acoustic shadows radiating out from Stonehenge and other megalithic stone circles, and demonstrated that the pattern of alternating loud and quiet zones recreates a dual source sound wave interference pattern. My theory that musical interference patterns served as blueprints for megalithic stone circles – many of which are named “Pipers’ Stones” — is supported by ancient legends that two magic pipers enticed maidens to dance in a circle and they all turned to stone.
Listen for yourself to the similarity between sound wave interference as I walk around two flutes in an empty field (click here), and acoustic shadows as I walk around a megalithic Pipers’ Stone circle (click here); both have similar modulations between loud and quiet. How would you have explained this if you couldn’t see what was “blocking” the sound?

Conclusions:
Complex behaviors of sound such as reflection and interference (which scientists today explain by sound wave theory and dismiss as acoustical artifacts) can experimentally give rise to psychoacoustic misperceptions in which such unseen sonic phenomena are attributed to the invisible/supernatural. The significance of this research is that it can help explain the motivation for some of mankind’s most mysterious behaviors and greatest artistic achievements. There are several implications and applications of my research. It shows that acoustical phenomena were culturally significant to ancient peoples, leading to the immediate conclusion that the natural soundscapes of archaeological sites should be preserved in their natural state for further study and greater appreciation. It demonstrates that even today sensory input can be used to manipulate perception, and can give spooky illusions inconsistent with scientific reality, which could have interesting practical applications for virtual reality and special effects in entertainment media. A key point to learn from my research is that objectivity is questionable, since a given set of data can be used to support multiple conclusions. For example, an echo can be used as “proof” for either an echo spirit or sound wave reflection. Also, just based on their interpretation of sounds heard in an empty field, people can be made to believe there is a ring a huge rocks taller than themselves. The history of humanity is full of misinterpretations, such as the visual illusion that the sun propels itself across the sky above the flat earth. Sound, being invisible with complex properties, can lead to auditory illusions of the supernatural. This leads to the more general question, what other perceptional illusions are we currently living under due to other phenomena that we are currently misinterpreting?

See https://sites.google.com/site/rockartacoustics/ for further detail.

1pAA1 – Audible Simulation in the Canadian Parliament

The impact of auralization on design decisions for the House of Commons

Ronald Eligator – religator@ad-ny.com
Acoustic Distinctions, Inc.
145 Huguenot Street
New Rochelle, NY 10801

Popular version of paper 1pAA1
Presented Monday morning, October 27, 2014
168th ASA Meeting, Indianapolis

If the MP’s speeches don’t put you to sleep, at least you should be able to understand what they are saying.

Using state-of-the-art audible simulations, a design team of acousticians, architects and sound system designers is working to ensure that speech within the House of Commons chamber of the Parliament of Canada now in design will be intelligible in either French or English.

The new chamber for the House of Commons is being built in a glass-topped atrium in the courtyard of the West Block building on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. The chamber will be the temporary home of the House of Commons, while their traditional location in the Center Block building is being renovated and restored.

The skylit atrium in the West Block will be about six times the volume of the existing room, resulting in significant challenges for ensuring speech will be intelligibility.

Figure 1 - House_of_Commons Canadian Parliament

Figure 1: Existing Chamber of the House of Commons, Parliament of Canada

The existing House chamber is 21 meters (70 feet) long, 16 meters (53 feet) wide, and has seats for the current 308 Members of Parliament (to increase to 338 in 2015) and 580 people in the upper gallery that runs around the second level of the room. Most surfaces are wood, although the floor is carpeted, and there is an adjustable curtain at the rear of the MP seating area on both sides of the room. The ceiling is a painted stretched linen canvas over the ceiling 14.7 meters (48.5 feet) above the commons floor, resulting in a room volume of approximately 5000 cubic meters.

The new House chamber is being infilled into an existing courtyard that is 44 meters (145 feet) long, 39 meters (129 feet) wide, and 18 meters (59 feet) high. The meeting space itself will retain the same basic footprint as the existing room, including the upper gallery seating, but will be open to the sound reflective glass roof and stone and glass side walls of the courtyard. In the absence of any acoustic treatments, the high level of reverberant sound would make it very difficult to understand speech in the room.

RCOP / FGM ARCHITECTS

Figure 2 - 2010 PERSPECTIVE-1

Figure 2: Early Design Rendering of Chamber in West Block

In order to help the Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC) and the House of Commons understand the acoustic differences between the existing house chamber and the one under design, and to assure them that excellent speech intelligibility will be achieved in the new chamber, Acoustic Distinctions, the New York-based acoustic consultant, created a computer model of both the new and existing house chambers, and performed acoustic tests in the existing chamber. AD also made comparisons of the two room using sophisticated data analysis and tables of data an produced graphs maps of speech intelligibility in each space.

An early design iteration, for example, included significant areas of sound absorptive materials at the sides of the ceiling areas, as well as sound absorptive materials integrated into the branches of the tree-like structure which supports the roof:

ACOUSTIC DISTINCTIONS

Figure 3

Figure 3: Computer Model of Room Finishes

The dark areas of the image show the location of sound absorptive materials, including triangularly-shaped wedges integrated into the structure which supports the roof.

Using a standardized measure of intelligibility, AD estimated a speech quality of 65% using the Speech Transmission Index (STI), a standardized measure of speech intelligibility, where a minimum of 75% was needed to ensure excellent intelligibility.

The computer analysis done by Acoustic Distinctions also produced colorful images relating to the degree of speech intelligibility that was to be expected:

Figure 4

Figure 4: Speech Transmission Index, single person speaking, no reinforcement (Talker at lower left; Listener at lower right) Dark blue to black color indicates fair to good intelligibility

Figure 5 - E_07_SOUND_SYSTEM_ON_40_STI_Noise

Figure 5: Speech Transmission Index, single person speaking, with sound reinforcement (Talker at upper left; Listener at lower right) Bright pink to red color indicates excellent intelligibility

Not surprisingly, communicating this to the design team and House of Commons in a way that provided a high level of confidence in the results was required. We again used audible simulations to demonstrate the results:

Audio file 3: Speech with Sound System, reduced absorption. STI 0.82

 

The rendering below shows the space configuration associated with the latest results:

ARCOP / FGM ARCHITECTS

Figure 6 - House of Commons Glass Dome rendering

Figure 6: Rendering, House of Commons, West Block, Parliament Hill Proposed Design Configuration, showing sound absorptive panels integrated into laylight and structure supporting roof

5aNS5 – Acoustic absorption of green roof samples commercially available in southern Brazil

Stephan Paul – stephan.paul@eac.ufsm.br
Undergrad
Program Acoustical Engineering
Fed. University of Santa Maria
Santa Maria, RS, Brazil

Ricardo Brum – ricardo.brum@eac.ufsm.br
Undergrad
Program Acoustical Engineering
Fed. University of Santa Maria
Santa Maria, RS, Brazil

Andrey Ricardo da Silva – andrey.rs@ufsc.br
Fed. University of Santa Catarina
Florianópolis, SC, Brazil

Tenile Rieger Piovesan – arqui.tp@gmail.com
Graduate program in Civil Engineering
Fed. University of Santa Maria
Santa Maria, RS, Brazil

Investigations into the benefits of green roofs have shown that such roofs provide many environmental benefits, such as thermal conditioning, air cleaning and rain water absorption. Analysing the way green roofs are usually constructed suggests that they may have also two interesting acoustical properties: sound insulation and sound absorption. The first property would provide protection of the house’s interior from environmental noise produced outside the house. Sound absorption, on the other hand, would reduce the environmental noise in the environment itself, by dissipating sound energy that is being irradiated on to the roof from environmental noise sources. Thus, sound absorption can help to reduce environmental noise in urban settings. Despite of being an interesting characteristic, information regarding acoustic properties of green roofs and their effects on the noise environment is still sparse. This work looked into the sound absorption of two types of green roofs commercially available in Brazil: the alveolar and the hexa system.

Fig 1: illustration of the alveolar system (left) and hexa system (right)

Sound absorption can be quantified by means of a sound absorption coefficient α, which ranges between 0 and 1 and is usually a function of frequency. Zero means that all incident energy is being reflected back into the environment and α = 1 means that all energy is being dissipated in the layers of the material, here the green roof. To find out how much sound energy the alveolar and the hexa system absorb standardized measurements were made in a reverberant chamber according to ISO-354 for different variations of both systems. The alveolar system used a thin layer of 2.5 cm of soil like substrate with and without grass and a 4 cm layer of substrate only. The hexa system was measured with layers of 4 and 6 cm of substrate without vegetation and 6 cm of substrate with a layer of vegetation of sedum. For all systems, high absorption coefficients (α > 0.7) were found for medium and high frequencies. This was expected due to the highly porous structure of the substrate. Nevertheless the alveolar system with grass, the alveolar system with 4 cm of substrate, the hexa with 6 cm of substrate and the hexa with sedum already provide high absorption for frequencies as low as 250 or 400 Hz. Thus, these green roofs systems are particularly interesting in urban settings, as traffic noise is usually low frequency noise and is hardly absorbed by smooth surfaces such as pavements or façades.

absorbtion coefficient

Fig 2: absorption coefficient of the alveolar samples (left) and hexa samples (right).

In the next step of this research is intended to make computational simulations of the noise reduction provided by the hexa and alveolar system in different noisy situations such as near airports or intense urban traffic.