W
WIND
Since electrical interference reception from microphones can be heard
while listening to speaker output while this cancels sound wave
production, all microphones receive this electrical interference
whether they are wired or wireless. Which path has the least
resistance? Those used for speaking or those used for listening? One
situation uses a microphone with a fixed location while the other
situation doesn't. Since sound wave production isn't canceled in one
situation as much as it is in the other, wouldn't those used for
speaking be considered in path with least resistance? If microphones
are used for listening, aren't ears being made to SEE electrical
interfering LIGHT waves coming from the Electromagnetic Frequency Wave
Spectrum where radio astronomers are having equipment difficulty from
the top of the microwave/radar region while the deaf are having the
same problem from the bottom of the radio frequency region? This
doesn't include metal detectors and store front electronic article
surveillance systems that like to interfere with all electronics?
When someone has ears that cannot hear, are they going to stop
receiving electrical interference that microphones love when they are
used for listening? How can this be stopped when the microphone is
still powered to receive even though the volume control is turned down
so this can't be heard with ears that cannot hear? What does movement
that can't be heard do to one's inability to process it? If ears
already cannot hear, doesn't this movement cause system to break down
further? What does physical vibrations involved with electrical
interference do to a body of water? Doesn't water conduct
electricity? Won't this damage all of the muscles attached to the ear
structure when microphones are used for listening? If eyesight is
primary means for survival when ears cannot hear, those that have ears
that cannot hear have a higher chance of having eyesight effected
because of what microphones love? Who wants to have eyesight effected
when they already have ears that cannot hear? Shouldn't the object be
to decrease movement not needed instead of increasing movement that
can't be processed while this does not necessarily have to be heard
(or seen) to know that it is still there? If ears cannot hear, isn't
system going to be effected FIRST based on what can't be heard before
adding increased movement with or without hearing level? Shouldn't
ears be using earphones or speaker system ONLY? Isn't this called
DIRECT AUDIO? Microphones do not convert sound waves into electrical
energy when there is electrical interference involved.
while listening to speaker output while this cancels sound wave
production, all microphones receive this electrical interference
whether they are wired or wireless. Which path has the least
resistance? Those used for speaking or those used for listening? One
situation uses a microphone with a fixed location while the other
situation doesn't. Since sound wave production isn't canceled in one
situation as much as it is in the other, wouldn't those used for
speaking be considered in path with least resistance? If microphones
are used for listening, aren't ears being made to SEE electrical
interfering LIGHT waves coming from the Electromagnetic Frequency Wave
Spectrum where radio astronomers are having equipment difficulty from
the top of the microwave/radar region while the deaf are having the
same problem from the bottom of the radio frequency region? This
doesn't include metal detectors and store front electronic article
surveillance systems that like to interfere with all electronics?
When someone has ears that cannot hear, are they going to stop
receiving electrical interference that microphones love when they are
used for listening? How can this be stopped when the microphone is
still powered to receive even though the volume control is turned down
so this can't be heard with ears that cannot hear? What does movement
that can't be heard do to one's inability to process it? If ears
already cannot hear, doesn't this movement cause system to break down
further? What does physical vibrations involved with electrical
interference do to a body of water? Doesn't water conduct
electricity? Won't this damage all of the muscles attached to the ear
structure when microphones are used for listening? If eyesight is
primary means for survival when ears cannot hear, those that have ears
that cannot hear have a higher chance of having eyesight effected
because of what microphones love? Who wants to have eyesight effected
when they already have ears that cannot hear? Shouldn't the object be
to decrease movement not needed instead of increasing movement that
can't be processed while this does not necessarily have to be heard
(or seen) to know that it is still there? If ears cannot hear, isn't
system going to be effected FIRST based on what can't be heard before
adding increased movement with or without hearing level? Shouldn't
ears be using earphones or speaker system ONLY? Isn't this called
DIRECT AUDIO? Microphones do not convert sound waves into electrical
energy when there is electrical interference involved.
