motionless drivers?

ericerik
ericerik Posts: 53
is it possible to develop speaker drivers that do not vibrate or move to create sound?? or is there already??

Best Answers

«1

Answers

  • F1nut
    F1nut Posts: 49,709
    Sound waves themselves are a vibration. No vibration = silence.
    Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."


    President of Club Polk

  • joecoulson
    joecoulson Posts: 4,943
    and in turn, lots of vibration equals lots of smiles sounds
  • ericerik
    ericerik Posts: 53
    so your answers are no??
  • ericerik
    ericerik Posts: 53
    i disagree. we would still be useing candles if all , gave up this easily.
  • FestYboy
    FestYboy Posts: 3,861
    ericerik wrote: »
    i disagree. we would still be useing candles if all , gave up this easily.

    You can disagree all you like, but given the way we perceive sound, something has to vibrate our timpanum. So the answer is still "no".

    Also, if you're going to disagree, give a compelling reason or argument to support it, otherwise you're just using your feelings, and in the scientific world, they don't amount to squat.
  • ericerik
    ericerik Posts: 53
    fair enough, i will ponder.
  • halen
    halen Posts: 675
    ericerik wrote: »
    i disagree. we would still be useing candles if all , gave up this easily.

    Anything is possible right?

    Would you like to share what you have gained so far, on your quest for motionless drivers that produce sound? What kind of materials have you tried? How far are you in your research? How or what are you using to create sound, there must be an energy source. Last thing. What is the depth of your knowledge when it pertains to sound? What do you know about it?

    I invented the silent Velcro. So I have some understanding of the sound of silence.


  • ericerik
    ericerik Posts: 53
    now that i can use silent Velcro... that's awesome!! i like the way your thinking. im not trying to dismiss the laws of physics. was just trying to allude to , is that speakers ,because of this need to move/vibrate air to create a frequency. is the last "obstacle" to reproducing music. without friction or mechanical movement. such as tape decks having to turn the tape . and the stylus having to use friction to produce vibration. arnt speakers the only component that uses mechanical movement?? in reproducing an audible tone?
  • ericerik
    ericerik Posts: 53
    now I'm also trying to figure out n1nut's definition of political correctness
  • halen
    halen Posts: 675
    You are going on a tangent or deviating from your objective with that statement.


    I have fired countless because of that during go time. So let’s stay within objectives.

    Let’s get back to motionless drivers. How far along are you?
  • joecoulson
    joecoulson Posts: 4,943
    ericerik wrote: »
    now I'm also trying to figure out n1nut's definition of political correctness

    pick it up by the clean end then..
  • FestYboy
    FestYboy Posts: 3,861
    What is the end goal with this inquiry? Why would you require a "motionless" driver?
  • Tony M
    Tony M Posts: 11,009
    Here's some motion less music makers. :p
    z4zibtwc7kit.png
    Most people just listen to music and watch movies. I EXPERIENCE them.
  • ericerik
    ericerik Posts: 53
    well there's still the motion of air.
  • ericerik
    ericerik Posts: 53
    why i brought up the motionless speaker.... ???? i can't tell you for your own good. sorry
  • FestYboy
    FestYboy Posts: 3,861
    Well, then I'm done here, no sense in wasting any more time on this.
  • ericerik
    ericerik Posts: 53
    well thnx for your input and help.
  • halen
    halen Posts: 675
    ericerik wrote: »
    why i brought up the motionless speaker.... ???? i can't tell you for your own good. sorry


    Sounds dangerous. Care to answer my basic questions?
  • ericerik
    ericerik Posts: 53
    sorry the question was why i inquired , actually because i thought maybe something was already on the market . that was motionless, possibly.
  • halen
    halen Posts: 675
    ericerik wrote: »
    sorry the question was why i inquired , actually because i thought maybe something was already on the market . that was motionless, possibly.

    IC. Still sound of crickets.

    This thread should die and have no other responses.

    Please don’t feed this troll any longer.
  • delkal
    delkal Posts: 764
    Get an amp with a lot of watts and an extremely high dampening factor. The speakers will still be moving (and putting out lots of sound) but you should not see anything moving at listening distances.
  • ericerik
    ericerik Posts: 53
    now name calling. i am no troll , ok!!! some you guys need to lighten up a bit. i didn't intend to start anything. i was just curious. this is a general question.. i didn't see any place in my profile to list my specific names and models of components and speakers etc. used in my audio/video systems but most of your profiles do. must have missed something???
  • FestYboy
    FestYboy Posts: 3,861
    Yup, it's called a signature. That's where you can put your list, and it will show at the bottom of each of your posts.
    ericerik wrote: »
    why i brought up the motionless speaker.... ???? i can't tell you for your own good. sorry

    ^ this is why the "troll" monicure (sp) was tossed out there. Total troll move, along with not supporting your argument, just so you understand.

    Now, if you really want to explore the idea, scientifically, there first needs to be some basic research and understanding of principles on your end so that we're (you and the forum) closer to the same plane, knowledge wise. Then we can move forward on this idea with less disparity.
  • joecoulson
    joecoulson Posts: 4,943
    Well said Arty
  • diverdog
    diverdog Posts: 27
    So lets think out of the box. Sound waves are caused by compression and rarefication of air molecules. You don't need a mechanical motion to do that. I can think of an example of that everyone knows. Lightning causes thunder by rapidly heating air and causing it to expand. So in theory if you could rapidly heat and cool air you could cause sound waves with no moving parts. A "motionless" speaker. Case closed
  • joecoulson
    joecoulson Posts: 4,943
    edited August 2019
    You don’t have a clue on what makes Thunder generate sound. Lightning moves air when it creates a pathway from the ground. That channel of air is then closed (hence movement) and thunder is made.

    Edit. Last comment removed
  • diverdog
    diverdog Posts: 27
    Electricity has no mass. Therefore it can't push anything out of the way! LOL It is the heat caused by the massive current that causes the air to rapidly expand and then contract. That is what makes the sound of thunder. I know my physics very well.
    How does lightning cause thunder?

    Image: slideshare.net
    Thunder, the sound that follows lightning, comes from rapid air expansion around the lightning bolt. The heat from lightning causes the air around the bolt to reach temperatures of over 40,000 degrees Fahrenheit rapidly. The heated air compresses then explodes outwards, forming a shock wave and creating a loud noise.
    Does lightning make noise? | Reference.com
    www.reference.com/science/lightning-make-noise-4997f415d52efd11