Subject: Re: Book needed: Ranke 1931 From: Pierre Divenyi <pdivenyi@xxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 07:34:21 +0200 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>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@xxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxx> 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@xxxxxxxx> >>>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? >>>> >>>> @xxxxxxxx{ranke1931, >>>> title={Die Gleichrichter-Resonanztheorie (The Rectifier Resonance >>>> Theory)}, >>>> author={Ranke, Otto Friedrich}, >>>> year={1931}, >>>> publisher={Lehmann} >>>> } >>>> >>