Google Search

Showing posts with label Address. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Address. Show all posts

Sunday, December 15, 2013

How many people heard the Sermon on the Mount? Or the Gettysburg Address?

Have you ever wondered how many people in the audience actually heard the Gettysburg Address? How about the Sermon on the Mount or Moses at Sinai?

The answer to those questions, according to two New York University researchers, is more than you think.

People gave famous speeches for millennia without amplification. But how many people in the crowd could understand what was being said? In Monty Python's film, "Life of Brian," a large crowd shows up to hear Jesus' sermon, but by the time Jesus' words made it to the fringes of the crowd some clarity was lost. ("Blessed are the cheese-makers.")

The two researchers, Braxton Boren and Agnieszka Roginska at NYU's Music and Audio Research Lab, replicated a famous experiment by Benjamin Franklin using modern scientific techniques, and reported their findings at a meeting of the Acoustical Society of America in San Francisco last week.

The story begins in the late 1730s. A preacher, George Whitefield, was drawing immense crowds at his outdoor sermons in London. At one sermon, held in Mayfair, Whitefield claimed to have addressed 80,000 people, all of whom he presumed could understand him. Franklin didn't believe it and took an opportunity to test the claim in 1739 when Whitefield spoke in Philadelphia.

"I had the curiosity to learn how far he could be heard," Franklin wrote.

Whitefield was described as handsome, slim, and slightly cross-eyed, with a voice "like a lion," according to contemporary reports. He was one of the founders of Methodism in America and was among the most famous preachers of his time.

In Philadelphia, he spoke to an audience of perhaps 6,000 people stretched between Front Street and the Delaware River, a good crowd considering that Philadelphia's population at the time was only about 13,000. Franklin couldn't resist. He walked from the front of the crowd toward the river, listening for the point at which the preacher was no longer intelligible.

Then, he went home and did the calculations.

According to Boren, Franklin ran two numbers, the area over which Whitefield's voice was intelligible, and a guess at how many people could fit in that area. The area, he decided, was about 23,000 square meters.

Using modern modeling technology and archeological records of what Market Street looked like then, the NYU researchers thought Franklin nailed it.

Franklin also estimated each person took up 2 square feet, or about 0.2 square yards. His conclusion then was that Whitefield could have been heard by as many as 125,000 people under perfect conditions, but, Boren said, being a modest New Englander, Franklin concluded that figure was wildly off and settled on "more than 30,000," Boren said.

"There were certain things he didn't account for and certain things he over-accounted for, but by the end his estimate was a pretty good estimate," Boren said.

The original calculation was off, Boren said, because the kind of density Franklin was using is what modern acoustical researchers call "mosh-pit conditions." The crowd more likely was "solid," which is about half a square meter per person, little more than half a square yard, and much less dense.

Using those calculations Boren and Roginska concluded Whitefield could be heard by 20,000-30,000 people on a good day, a perfectly still crowd, no wind or carriages clattering by, just as Franklin said.

Still, how could someone be heard that far? Whitefield was speaking in an area of dense construction and the buildings and streets probably acted as sound reflectors.

But, it was probably more than just the acoustics of his environment.

The NYU computer models, based on Franklin's description, give one answer: Whitefield was very loud. They estimate that if you stood three yards in front of him, his voice would have registered 90 decibels, matching the loudest average sound levels from voices ever measured in a modern lab.

"The international standard for loud speech is 74 decibels," Boren said.

According to Jack Randorff, an acoustical consultant and engineer from Ransom Canyon, Texas, the NYU model assumed people could hear about 30 percent of what was being said. Since the audience knew the context of his material, their minds filled in the rest.

Additionally, the style of public speaking was different in the past. Randorff said the speakers stood up straight and might have raised and stretched their arms so their diaphragms were extended.

Speeches of the past also had an entirely different cadence. Orators often spoke in bursts of four or five words with considerable emphasis instead of long phrases. Lincoln might have said, "Four score...and seven years ago….our fathers...brought forth..." It also allowed them to take deep breaths so they could keep going.

The buildings around Whitefield would have added six decibels to his voice, which would have doubled the effective area his voice would have carried, Randorff said.


View the original article here

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

Obama Champions Science Research in Address

President Barack Obama expressed his unequivocal support for the science industry in a public address today (April 29), saying the nation cannot afford to make sweeping budget cuts that threaten to stall the depth and pace of research.

Obama spoke before an audience of scientists, engineers and doctors this morning to mark the 150th anniversary of the National Academy of Sciences.

"What I want to communicate to all of you is that as long as I'm president, we're going to be committed to investing in promising ideas that are generated by you and your institutions, because they lead to innovative products, they help boost our economy, but also because that's who we are," Obama said. "I'm committed to it because that's what makes us special, and ultimately what makes life worth living." [25 Amazing Facts About Science]

After policymakers failed to reach an agreement to avoid government-wide spending cuts earlier this year, $85 billion in across-the-board cuts — referred to as "the sequester" — was signed into law on March 1.

Making deep cuts to research and development programs could jeopardize the country's competitive edge, and it hinders the widespread benefits that these efforts could have, Obama said.

"What we produce here ends up having benefits worldwide," he explained. "We should be reaching for a level of private and public research and development investment that we haven't seen since the height of the space race, that's my goal."

The sequester is expected to take a significant toll on scientific research, with numerous federal agencies and organizations now facing the possibility of huge cuts to their budgets. In particular, the National Institutes of Health is expecting to face $1.5 billion in cuts; the National Science Foundation is estimating its budget could shrink by $283 million; and the American Association for the Advancement of Science is estimating an $8.6 billion cut in 2013.

Obama called the fallout from the sequester a product of "misguided priorities" in the nation's capital, adding that the country cannot afford to gut programs that are on the brink of important discoveries.

"It's hitting our scientific research," Obama said. "Instead of racing ahead … our scientists are left wondering if they'll be able to start any new research projects at all, which means we could lose a year, two years, of scientific research."

In his address, the president reaffirmed his commitment to "grand challenges," such as solar energy projects, NASA's Curiosity rover mission on Mars, and initiatives to better understand how the human brain processes information and memories.

Furthermore, he stated the government should continue to invest in the projects that promise the most return on taxpayer investment, without being influenced by politics.

"In all the sciences, we've got to make sure that we are supporting the idea that they're not subject to politics, that they're not skewed by an agenda," Obama said.

The president added that his administration will continue to focus on promoting science, technology, engineering and math — the so-called STEM subjects — to the next generation of Americans.

"We want to make sure we're exciting young people around math and science and technology," Obama said. "We don't want our kids to just be consumers of the amazing things that science generates. We want them to be producers as well."

Follow Denise Chow on Twitter @denisechow. Follow LiveScience @livescience, Facebook & Google+. Original article on LiveScience.com.

Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

View the original article here

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

NASA Rover's New Red Planet Address: Yellowknife, Mars

The patch of Mars where NASA's Curiosity rover touched down Sunday night (Aug. 5) has a name: Yellowknife.

The moniker is a tribute to the capital of Canada's Northwest Territories, a city that has long served as the jumping-off point for geologists interested in studying North America's oldest rocks, scientists said.

"If you ask, 'What is the port of call you leave from to go on the great missions of geological mapping to the oldest rocks in North America?' — it's Yellowknife," Curiosity chief scientist John Grotzinger, of Caltech in Pasadena, told reporters Friday (Aug. 10).

In the home stretch of Curiosity's eight-month space cruise, Grotzinger and his team divided the rover's predicted landing zone inside Mars' Gale Crater into a set of 151 "quadrangles," each of which measures about 1 mile (0.6 km) on a side.

The idea was to break the work of characterizing the landing zone into manageable chunks. The Curiosity rover landed on Quadrangle 51, which the team has dubbed Yellowknife.

Curiosity's main mission is to determine if the Gale Crater area could ever have supported microbial life. Mars appears hostile to Earth-like life today, at least on the surface. But things might have been different in the past, which is why the rover team is drawing connections with the 2.7-billion-year-old rocks of northwest Canada.

"We went to Mars to really get at the ancient geology, because that's where we think there might be evidence for past environments similar to on Earth," said Curiosity deputy project scientist Joy Crisp, of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. "So it's connected in that way — simply, ancient rocks that might preserve evidence of past environments favorable for life."

Curiosity will likely be in Yellowknife for a while (the rover won't even take its first drive for two weeks or so), but eventually the six-wheeled robot will leave the quadrangle to explore more of Gale and to investigate Mount Sharp, the mysterious 3-mile-high (5 km) mountain that rises from the crater's center.

The mission team is not in a big rush. Curiosity's prime mission is slated to last about two Earth years, and the rover's nuclear power source may keep it roaming for considerably longer than that if no key parts break down, researchers have said.

Visit SPACE.com for complete coverage of NASA's Mars rover Curiosity. Follow SPACE.com senior writer Mike Wall on Twitter @michaeldwall or SPACE.com @Spacedotcom. We're also on Facebook and Google+.

Copyright 2012 SPACE.com, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

View the original article here