Subject: Re: voice tracking From: Eckard Blumschein <Eckard.Blumschein(at)E-TECHNIK.UNI-MAGDEBURG.DE> Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2002 08:01:00 +0200Anybody will find the Psymus archive via http://www.srpmme.org/uk/lists/listinfo/psymus Perhaps very few physiologists and physicists tend to look into it on a regular basis. So I found ideas like Arnie Cox's theory, speculations based on the most sensitive loudness range, etc. Mok's first argument might be correct although I don't consider higher time resolution to be decisive. However, the so called "acoustic energy" is a notorious source of fallacies. I already pointed to some of them in my 106 Oldenburg theses. Additionally, acousticans remind us that ears of mammals are a pressure sensors rather than sensitive to acoustic power. Furthermore, Peter Heil told me, that he made pertaining studies. The notion of acoustic power is closely linked to Ohm's law of acoustics. I consider it overdue to accept the stria vascularis as the primary source of energy inside cochlea, at least near threshold. Also, wasn't Seebeck right? Do we really need empirical data in order to recognise what is obvious to everybody and what corresponds to Theodor Lipp's law of the number two as well as to basic neural function? I strongly recommend http://neuro.bio.tu-darmstadt.de/langner/langner.html Eckard http://iesk.et.uni-magdeburg.de/~blumsche/