[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A new paradigm?(On pitch and periodicity (was "correction to post"))

At 10:41 AM +0200 10/6/11, Peter van Hengel wrote:
I prefer the term transmission line models

My impression is that "transmission line models" is too tied to one-dimensional or long-wave approximations. Am I wrong? Is it the case that you can make a 1D electrical transmission-line analog of a 2D or 3D hydrodynamic traveling-wave system? Or do you mean to include 2D electrical analogs in what you call transmission-line models? We just need to be clear what the scope of your preferred term is.

... The experiments you [Heerens] are
refering to on retrograde waves and the delays of OAEs also fall in this
category. I wish I had the time to show what the outcome of a
transmission line model would be on simulations of these experiments. I
am sure they would show agreement with the experiments instead of
agreement with the criticism. Please don't take a lack of proof as a
proof of lack.

This exact question was looked at in a paper at the 2011 Mechanics of Hearing meeting, with the result that simulations using the traveling wave models do agree with Ren's observations on OAEs. The resulting book isn't out yet, and I'm not able to spot the right paper on the web site right now, but I'll look for it; maybe someone else will recall which one I refer to.

In other papers there, as too often elswhere, more than once someone said "the model would not do this" or something to that effect. It is too common to criticize a model for its failing without actually trying the experiment on it. Strange.