The blog post explores the physics behind the distinctive "whoosh" sound created by passing objects like airplanes. It explains how this sound isn't simply the object's engine noise, but rather the Doppler-shifted frequencies of ambient noise—like wind, traffic, or conversations—being compressed as the object approaches and stretched as it recedes. This effect, similar to how a siren's pitch changes as it passes by, is most noticeable with fast-moving objects in relatively quiet environments. The post further delves into how our brains perceive these shifting frequencies, potentially misinterpreting them as the sound of the object itself and sometimes even creating phantom whooshing sensations when no physical source exists.
Purple has no dedicated wavelength of light like red or green. Our brains create the perception of purple when our eyes simultaneously detect red and blue light wavelengths. This makes purple a "non-spectral" color, a product of our visual system's interpretation rather than a distinct physical property of light itself. Essentially, purple is a neurological construct, a color our brains invent to bridge the gap between red and blue in the visible spectrum.
Hacker News users discuss the philosophical implications of purple not being a spectral color, meaning it doesn't have its own wavelength of light. Several commenters point out that all color exists only in our brains, as it's our perception of different wavelengths, not an inherent property of light itself. The discussion touches on the nature of qualia and how our subjective experience of color differs, even if we agree on labels. Some debate the technicalities of color perception, explaining how our brains create purple by interpreting the simultaneous stimulation of red and blue cone cells. A few comments also mention the arbitrary nature of color categorization across languages and cultures.
Research suggests that poor audio quality during video calls can negatively impact how others perceive us. A study found that "tinny" or distorted audio leads to participants being judged as less competent, less influential, and less likeable, regardless of the actual quality of their contributions. This "zoom bias" stems from our brains associating poor sound with lower status, mirroring how we perceive voices in the natural world. This effect can have significant consequences in professional settings, potentially hindering career advancement and impacting team dynamics.
HN users discuss various aspects of audio quality affecting perceived competence in video calls. Several point out that poor audio makes it harder to understand speech, thus impacting the listener's perception of the speaker's intelligence. Some commenters highlight the class disparity exacerbated by differing audio quality, with those lacking high-end equipment at a disadvantage. Others suggest the issue isn't solely audio, but also includes video quality and internet stability. A few propose solutions, like better noise-cancellation algorithms and emphasizing good meeting etiquette. Finally, some note that pre-recorded, edited content further skews perceptions of "professionalism" compared to the realities of live communication.
Pippin Barr's "It is as if you were on your phone" is a web-based art piece that simulates the experience of endlessly scrolling through a smartphone. It presents a vertically scrolling feed of generic, placeholder-like content—images, text snippets, and UI elements—mimicking the addictive, often mindless nature of phone usage. The piece offers no real interaction beyond scrolling, highlighting the passive consumption and fleeting engagement often associated with social media and other phone-based activities. It serves as a commentary on how this behavior can feel both absorbing and empty.
HN commenters largely agree with the author's premise that modern web browsing often feels like using a constrained mobile app, even on desktop. Several point to the increasing prevalence of single-column layouts, large headers, and hamburger menus as key culprits. Some suggest this trend is driven by a mobile-first design philosophy gone too far, while others argue it's a consequence of sites prioritizing content management systems (CMS) ease of use over user experience. A few commenters propose solutions like browser extensions to customize layouts or the adoption of CSS frameworks that prioritize adaptability. One compelling comment highlights the irony of mobile sites sometimes offering more functionality than their desktop counterparts due to this simplification. Another suggests the issue stems from the dominance of JavaScript frameworks that encourage mobile-centric design patterns.
The article analyzes Erowid trip reports to understand common visual hallucinations experienced on psychedelics. By processing thousands of reports, the author identifies recurring visual themes, categorized as "form constants." These include spirals, lattices, vortexes, and other geometric patterns, often accompanied by visual distortions like breathing walls and morphing objects. The analysis also highlights the influence of set and setting, showing how factors like dosage, substance, and environment impact the intensity and nature of visuals. Ultimately, the research aims to demystify psychedelic experiences and provide a data-driven understanding of the subjective effects of these substances.
HN commenters discuss the methodology of analyzing Erowid trip reports, questioning the reliability and representativeness of self-reported data from a self-selected group. Some point out the difficulty in quantifying subjective experiences and the potential for biases, like recall bias and the tendency to report more unusual or intense experiences. Others suggest alternative approaches, such as studying fMRI data or focusing on specific aspects of perception. The lack of a control group and the variability in dosage and individual responses are also raised as concerns, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the typical psychedelic experience. Several users share anecdotes of their own experiences, highlighting the diverse and unpredictable nature of these altered states. The overall sentiment seems to be one of cautious interest in the research, tempered by skepticism about the robustness of the methods.
John Salvatier's blog post argues that reality is far more detailed than we typically assume or perceive. We create simplified mental models to navigate the world, filtering out the vast majority of information. This isn't a flaw, but a necessary function of our limited cognitive resources. However, these simplified models can lead us astray when dealing with complex systems, causing us to miss crucial details and make inaccurate predictions. The post encourages cultivating an appreciation for the richness of reality and actively seeking out the nuances we tend to ignore, suggesting this can lead to better understanding and decision-making.
Hacker News users discussed the implications of Salvatier's post, with several agreeing on the surprising richness of reality and our limited capacity to perceive it. Some commenters explored the idea that our simplified models, while useful, inherently miss a vast amount of detail. Others highlighted the computational cost of simulating reality, arguing that even with advanced technology, perfect replication remains far off. A few pointed out the relevance to AI and machine learning, suggesting that understanding this complexity is crucial for developing truly intelligent systems. One compelling comment connected the idea to "bandwidth," arguing that our senses and cognitive abilities limit the amount of reality we can process, similar to a limited internet connection. Another interesting observation was that our understanding of reality is constantly evolving, and what we consider "detailed" today might seem simplistic in the future.
Robin Hanson describes his experience with various "status circles," groups where he feels varying degrees of status and comfort. He outlines how status within a group influences his behavior, causing him to act differently in circles where he's central and respected compared to those where he's peripheral or unknown. This affects his willingness to speak up, share personal information, and even how much fun he has. Hanson ultimately argues that having many diverse status circles, including some where one holds high status, is key to a rich and fulfilling life. He emphasizes that pursuing only high status in all circles can lead to anxiety and missed opportunities to learn and grow from less prestigious groups.
HN users generally agree with the author's premise of having multiple status circles and seeking different kinds of status within them. Some commenters pointed out the inherent human drive for social comparison and the inevitable hierarchies that form, regardless of intention. Others discussed the trade-offs between broad vs. niche circles, and how the internet has facilitated the pursuit of niche status. A few questioned the negativity associated with "status seeking" and suggested reframing it as a natural desire for belonging and recognition. One compelling comment highlighted the difference between status seeking and status earning, arguing that genuine contribution, rather than manipulation, leads to more fulfilling status. Another interesting observation was the cyclical nature of status, with people often moving between different circles as their priorities and values change.
Summary of Comments ( 32 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43713524
Hacker News users discuss various aspects of the "whoosh" sound phenomenon. Several commenters offer additional examples of sounds exhibiting similar characteristics, such as the Doppler shift observed with passing cars or the sound of a large truck passing a house. Some discuss the physics behind the phenomenon, including the role of air pressure changes and the shape of the object creating the sound. Others delve into the subjective experience of these sounds, noting how perception can be influenced by factors like background noise and individual sensitivity. One compelling comment highlights the prevalence of this effect in movies and its potential exaggeration for dramatic effect. Another interesting observation is the comparison to the "sonic boom" of a supersonic aircraft, contrasting the continuous whoosh with the sharp crack of the boom. Finally, a few commenters mention the psychological impact of these sounds, including their potential to be unsettling or even anxiety-inducing.
The Hacker News post titled "Passing planes and other whoosh sounds," linking to an article on windytan.com about the physics of whooshing sounds, has generated a modest discussion with several interesting comments.
One commenter shares a personal anecdote about experiencing the Doppler effect with the sound of a passing plane, noting the distinct drop in pitch as the plane moves away. They also connect this experience to the sound of cars passing by, highlighting the commonality of the phenomenon in everyday life.
Another commenter delves into the specifics of the Doppler effect, explaining how the frequency shift is dependent on the relative velocity between the source and the observer. They then raise the question of why the sound of a passing plane seems to "whoosh" down rather than up, even though both rising and falling frequencies are involved. They hypothesize that this perceived downward shift is due to the greater change in frequency occurring as the plane moves away, alongside the general decrease in loudness as the source recedes.
A subsequent comment builds on this hypothesis, suggesting that the human ear is more sensitive to downward frequency changes and that the decreasing volume of the receding sound source might contribute to the perception of a downward whoosh.
Another commenter links to a Wikipedia page about the sonic boom, a different phenomenon associated with supersonic aircraft, distinguishing it from the Doppler effect discussed in the original article. This comment helps clarify the different types of sounds generated by moving aircraft and their underlying physical principles.
One user mentions their experience with sailplanes, explaining how the quiet nature of these aircraft allows for a clearer perception of the Doppler shift and a more pronounced "whoosh." This adds another real-world example to the discussion and highlights how the surrounding environment can influence the perception of these sounds.
Finally, a commenter with a background in audio engineering provides a more technical explanation, mentioning how the perceived pitch of complex sounds like those produced by aircraft engines is not solely determined by the fundamental frequency but also influenced by overtones and harmonics. They suggest that the Doppler effect's influence on these different frequency components might contribute to the complex nature of the perceived "whoosh."
In summary, the comments on the Hacker News post provide a range of perspectives on the physics and perception of whooshing sounds, from personal anecdotes to detailed explanations and related phenomena, demonstrating a shared curiosity about the acoustic world around us.