I will attempt to give a figure to the graph, but please keep in mind this is only an approximation. The 100 mark reading on the graph is approximately equal to .4 Watts per square metre. This was measured indoors, in an open space this figure would be reduced by a factor of 10 giving .04 Watts per square metre. Compare this to the research of Allan Frey who estimated the threshold of Micro Wave Hearing would require .003 Watts per square metre.
Over the past 40 years the location of Hum sufferers in England has been well established and using the above figure the energy required to produce the Hum over this area would be very approximately 5.2 GW. This may seem high but taking Frey’s estimate as the lowest level the Hum would still require .39 GW On Jun 13, 10:08 am, Trev <[email protected]> wrote: > What was the input /measurement source, John? > Was the base line of 100 meaningful? > They do look random, true -and a lot more variable than I detect, local to > me. > > > > On Wednesday, 13 June 2012 08:36:00 UTC+1, john dawes wrote: > > > For the past 22 days I have measured the relative Hum level at 6 hour > > intervals to see if there is any pattern to the variation in Hum level. > > > I have posted a graph of the results which appear to be random. > > > Although only a small sample, there appears to be no daily cycle and no > > connection with atmospheric surface pressure. > > > The readings were made in Bristol UK from 22/5/2012 to 12/6/2012- Hide > > quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hum Sufferers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hum-sufferers?hl=en.
