Re: A question on Bekesy. ("reinifrosch@xxxxxxxx" )


Subject: Re: A question on Bekesy.
From:    "reinifrosch@xxxxxxxx"  <reinifrosch@xxxxxxxx>
Date:    Sat, 20 Mar 2010 00:32:21 +0000
List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>

Hallo David ! >----Ursprüngliche Nachricht---- >Von: dcm@xxxxxxxx >Datum: 19.03.2010 21:07 >An: <reinifrosch@xxxxxxxx> >Kopie: <AUDITORY@xxxxxxxx> >Betreff: Re: A question on Békésy. > >[...] >I doubt very much that the "gelatinous mass" is the tectorial membrane >since, as you say, von Bekesy was very familiar with the TM and results from >TM measurements are mentioned elsewhere in the book. I agree now; see my recent answer to Harriet Jacobster. In an off-line message to me, Andrew Bell appears to have solved the problem: "[...] elswhere he [Bekesy] talks about endolymph having a very high viscosity (in his preparations)." I am convinced, however, that the normal viscosity of endolymph is similar to that of water, as you wrote earlier today. Now, a new problem: Human BM stiffness versus distance from base. Recently I attempted to calculate that function, using the Greenwood human cochlear map. My results for the stiffness differed from Bekesy's Fig. 11-73, but for x < 20 mm agreed well with the exponential function used by de Boer (1996) in his Chapter of the book "The Cochlea", Springer, New York. Reinhart.


This message came from the mail archive
/home/empire6/dpwe/public_html/postings/2010/
maintained by:
DAn Ellis <dpwe@ee.columbia.edu>
Electrical Engineering Dept., Columbia University