this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2025
6 points (87.5% liked)
AskPhysics
546 readers
1 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The point of my reply was to debunk what you said. I've not read that text and I am no expert. I can only speculate.
If you know that sound is caused by something vibrating, as was known, and you also know that when something moves through air it pushes the air away, you can reasonably conclude that sound is a vibration in the air caused by a vibration in an object.
But I don't know how he came to that conclusion, or what, of any he ran experiments he ran to show it.
My point is that anyone saying you need a microphone to learn about acoustics are talking nonsense. You have to already understand acoustics to even build the first microphone.
I gotcha. I have a bedroom which resonates at a certain frequency of my voice, and it could be compared to the resonance of a wave when you get the driving frequency just right. I didn't need a microphone to quickly realise this from my knowledge, but the ancients were extremely well-versed or understanding of it without using current modern terms or techniques.