Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
At 05:15 AM 8/27/2004, Suit & Tie Guy wrote:
>hopefully at this point a more educated member of this list will chime in
>and either provide more significant and thoughtful information or inform
>me of my extreme mistaken-ness. either way, if you have more info on this
>please chime in, as googling presented me with no reference pages to
>include in this post.
Eric,
You might also try querying for the term ELF (Extremely Low Frequency), or
even ULF (Ultra Low Frequency). I think LRAD is a fairly new term. I
know
this is the first time I've heard it formally to refer to this sort of
thing.
Scientists, including the government ones, have been researching this for
years, and I can remember having conversations on this back in the
80's. Applications include everything from crowd control, as Per pointed
out (some ULF frequencies have been shown to induce nausea and even
vomitting) to reinforcement of brainwashing techniques (other frequency
ranges can cause a subject to become more susceptible to suggestion).
Biggest problem that I've seen come up is the difference in biology from
subject to subject. You can be off by a fraction of a Hertz and miss the
desired result. Obviously, it's easier to fine tune the experiment and
get
what you want if you're working with a single subject. For something like
crowd control, it gets really dicey since you have so many individuals
with
which you're attempting to work. It makes it really hard to get
consistent
results across many people in a space.
Also, for riot containment, you've got other issues like the amount of
power you have to pump into these things to be effective, acoustic
reflections out on the street causing your frequencies to get messed up,
and, on the most pedestrian level, tear gas is just plain cheaper.
I could see this likely getting more real play at Guantanamo Bay than the
RNC.
--m.
_____
"i want to reach my hand into the dark and *feel* what reaches back"
-recoil