Image
Courtesy Of:
Hear The Sounds
It
is often described
by using sounds that require open-mouth syllables. There is the
standard "crack", the well told "swoosh", and the subpar "hiss".
Lesser known descriptions have even included the likes of bristling and
whistling. For some lucky, onomatopoeia
-wielding
individuals,
our Aurora is quite the noisemaker!
The
legitimacy of an
audible aurora is home to a well worn open-ended debate. Three distinct
positions are readily taken up: there are those who honorably swear,
the fact toting few who physically experiment and study the air, and
the encompassing
rest of the public who quite simply don't care.
Although people claim
to hear sounds which seem to match the movement of the brilliant glowing
beams of light, the
physics of Aurora, as currently
understood, are rudely unforgiveable. The aurora rests just under
60-miles up in the sky, and any emitted sound would take roughly 5
minutes to reach any observer; much too long for any seamless
coordination between music and movement. In addition, our sky's
air is much too thin for sound to physically traverse from such a
height.
Image
Courtesy
Of:
Vlad
Studio
In spite
of refutation, reports of Auroral Sound ceaselessly
propagate.
Such reports are nothing new. A roman historian who has been dead for
almost 2000 years, Germania Cornelius Tacitus recorded observations
which are identical to the accounts of today's aurora watchers. The
commonalities are truly baffling.
Scientists
are
currently
unable
to
collectively
present any form of explanation describing audible auroral
emission. Although certain
theories
have surfaced in the past, and will boldly reappear in the
future, the birth of a credible model, one which will take the place of
the current conflict as successor, continues to await its time. The
debate lives on!
Image Courtesy of :EslPod
