# Re: AUDITORY Digest - 24 Mar 2002 to 25 Mar 2002 (#2002-43) (Christopher Shera )

Subject: Re: AUDITORY Digest - 24 Mar 2002 to 25 Mar 2002 (#2002-43)
From:    Christopher Shera  <shera(at)EPL.MEEI.HARVARD.EDU>
Date:    Wed, 27 Mar 2002 10:16:49 -0500

Hi Jont, You wrote.... > The distance between the tectorial membrane and the reticular > lamina, where the cilia of the inner and outer hair cells live, is less > than $\delta$, so this region must be modeled as having damping, at all > frequencies \cite{Allen80a}. However this resistance appears at the > characteristic place of the transmission line for each frequency, > because the motion of the tectorial > membrane relative to the reticular lamina is significant only near the > characteristic place. I guess I don't understand your argument against Gold. You argue (convincingly) that damping is small at frequencies well below CF. But Gold's focus was on tuning at frequencies near CF. So to show that Gold was wrong, you need to demonstrate that damping at CF is close to zero. The paragraph above suggests that in fact damping near CF is not small. So what's wrong with Gold's argument? -- Christopher Shera 617-573-4235 voice Eaton-Peabody Laboratory 617-720-4408 fax 243 Charles Street, Boston, MA 02114-3096 http://epl.harvard.edu "Sadism and farce are always inexplicably linked." -- Alexander Theroux

This message came from the mail archive
http://www.auditory.org/postings/2002/
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <dpwe@ee.columbia.edu>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University