Re: Book needed: Ranke 1931

[Pierre Divenyi <pdivenyi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The problem arose because an author had the audacity of naming himself
³Cook² without specifying that he was not a captain.
-Pierre

On 8/20/14, 3:53 AM, "Jont Allen" <jontalle@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Thanks! this is much better, and I even now understand what he is saying
>;-)
>
>Jont Allen
>
>On 08/18/2014 04:46 AM, Jan Schnupp wrote:
>> Dear List,
>>
>> google translate is always fun, but in case you are puzzling what a
>> "most used cooking neglect" might be, or what "gross simplifications
>> in purchasing" has to do with the cochlea, here a proper translation
>> posted by Dick:
>>
>> In developing the potential flow, the mass of the diaphragm and its
>> super-structures have been neglected. But almost all investigators
>> take the membrane mass as a starting point, or believe its influence
>> on the vibrations in the cochlea to be substantive enough that it
>> should not be neglected. So I have to explicitly demonstrate that it
>> is permissible to neglect the membrane mass for all those cases in
>> which waves in the cochlea play an important role. Admittedly, very
>> detailed studies should not overlook the mass of the membrane.
>> However, in a first instance we are dealing with rough approximations.
>> As a consequence, and in contrast with previous investigators, the aim
>> is to demonstrate that, in a first approximation, neglecting the
>> membrane mass is of less importance than neglecting the mass of the
>> entrained liquid, as was done by Koch.
>Sondhi (JASA 1978?) has carefuly looked at this question, and the BM
>mass is quite important around the CF.
>
>>
>> In the case of a potential flow in narrow channels, for which the
>> potential flow has been developed above, the mass of the membrane
>> cannot be easily introduced, unless one is prepared to accept coarse
>> simplifications. However, through the study of simple cases which can
>> be solved rigorously one gains a judgement for the situations in which
>> the mass of the membrane becomes non-negligible. We will therefore
>> restrict ourselves to the simplest case, which is easiest to solve
>> mathematically.
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Jan
>>
>> On 17 August 2014 00:57, Richard F. Lyon <dicklyon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Thanks to our auditory-list friends in Montreal, we now have a good
>>>scanned
>>> and OCR'd copy of Ranke's 1931 book.  It definitely has a
>>>well-developed 2D
>>> model of cochlear waves.
>>>
>>> It even addresses the question of how important membrane mass is, a
>>>topic
>>> that has come up many times since.  Here's what the OCR does with that
>>> section (after 2 or 3 minor OCR corrections):
>>>
>>> Einfluß der Membranmasse.
>>>
>>> Bei der Entwicklung der Potentialströmung wurde die Masse der Membran
>>>und
>>> ihrer Auflagerungen bisher vernachlässigt. Fast alle Untersucher gehen
>>>aber
>>> gerade von der Masse der Membran aus, oder halten wenigstens ihren
>>>Einfluß
>>> auf die Schwingungen in der Cochlea für so wesentlich, daß er nicht
>>> vernachlässigt werden darf. So muß ich ausdrücklich nachweisen, daß
>>>die
>>> Vernachlässigung der Membranmasse für alle die Fälle erlaubt ist, die
>>>bei
>>> den Schwingungen in der Cochlea von Wichtigkeit sind. Freilich ist
>>>für eine
>>> genauere Betrachtung auch die Masse der Membran nicht zu übersehen.
>>> Vorläufig handelt es sich jedoch um grobe Annäherungen. Es ist daher
>>> gegenüber den bisherigen Untersuchern nur der Beweis zu erbringen,
>>>daß in
>>> erster Annäherung der Vernachlässigung der Membranmasse eine geringere
>>> Bedeutung beizumessen ist als der besonders von Koch benutzten
>>> Vernachlässigung der Masse der mitbewegten Flüssigkeit.
>>>
>>> Für den Fall einer Potentialströmung in engen Kanälen, für den die
>>> Potentialströmung oben entwickelt wurde, läßt sich die Masse der
>>>Membran
>>> nicht sehr einfach einführen, wenn man nicht grobe Vereinfachungen in
>>>Kauf
>>> nehmen will. Doch gewinnt man auch aus der Betrachtung einfacher
>>>Fälle, die
>>> sich streng durchführen lassen, ein Urteil, wann die Masse der Membran
>>> nicht mehr vernachlässigt werden darf. Wir wollen uns daher auf den
>>> einfachsten Fall beschränken, der mathematisch am leichtesten
>>>durchzuführen
>>> ist.
>>>
>>> and Google Translate:
>>>
>>> Influence of the membrane mass.
>>>
>>> In developing the potential flow, the mass of the diaphragm and its
>>>deposits
>>> has been neglected. But almost all investigators go straight from the
>>>mass
>>> of the diaphragm from, or at least keep their influence on the
>>>vibrations in
>>> the cochlea so essential that it should not be neglected. So I have to
>>> explicitly demonstrate that the neglect of the membrane mass for all
>>>the
>>> cases is allowed, which are at the vibrations in the cochlea of
>>>importance.
>>> Certainly not to be overlooked for a closer look at the mass of the
>>> membrane. Being there is, however, only rough approximations. It is
>>> therefore to provide over previous investigators only the proof that
>>>in a
>>> first approximation, the neglect of the membrane mass of less
>>>importance
>>> should be attached as the most used cooking neglect the mass of the
>>> entrained liquid.
>>>
>>> In the case of a potential flow in narrow channels, for which the
>>>potential
>>> flow has been developed above, the mass of the membrane can be
>>>introduced
>>> not very easy when you do not want to take gross simplifications in
>>> purchasing. But you also gain from consideration of simple cases that
>>>can be
>>> strictly carry out a judgment, when the mass of the diaphragm can no
>>>longer
>>> be neglected. We will therefore restrict ourselves to the simplest
>>>case,
>>> which is mathematically perform the easiest.
>>>
>>>
>>> I can't republish it, but I'm happy to share it for fair-use research
>>> purposes, especially with anyone who will help translate parts of it.
>>>With
>>> the decent OCR by Abbyy, we get a good start with Google Translate,
>>>but it
>>> will be a lot of work to make sense of pages full of equations and
>>>such.
>>> It's only 85 pages total.
>>>
>>> Dick
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 9:49 PM, Richard F. Lyon <dicklyon@xxxxxxx>
>>>wrote:
>>>> This seems to be where the 2D cochlear wave model first came up,
>>>> but I can't locate a copy with 2000 miles, though WorldCat shows a
>>>> few around, includes 2 in North America:
>>>>
>>>> 
>>>>http://www.worldcat.org/title/gleichrichter-resonanztheorie-eine-erweit
>>>>erung-der-helmholtzschen-resonanztheorie-des-gehors-durch-physikalische
>>>>-untersuchung-der-flussigkeitsschwingungen-in-der-cochlea/oclc/14726186
>>>>
>>>> Anyone at Princeton or McGill or elsewhere up for checking one out
>>>>for me?
>>>>
>>>> @book{ranke1931,
>>>>    title={Die Gleichrichter-Resonanztheorie (The Rectifier Resonance
>>>> Theory)},
>>>>    author={Ranke, Otto Friedrich},
>>>>    year={1931},
>>>>    publisher={Lehmann}
>>>> }
>>>>
>>