| Science/Technology
|
[
Science/Technology ] [ Main Menu ] |
|
|
|
4652 |
|
|
Date: December 31, 2013 at 19:26:44
From: sheila, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Do Flowers React to Music? |
URL: http://www.ehow.com/info_8781724_do-flowers-react-music.html |
|
on the envirowatcher's bd, there's an ongoing thread about how plants, trees react, communicate and respond to exterior stimulus. To that end I open a discussion on this factor and your experiences. Music plays a very important role in our culture but how do other species respond to a multitude of sounds? Well, that's what scientists study and there's a lot of studies that show....they like classical music as do I for the calming effect, etc.
Great Britain's Prince Charles famously told an interviewer in 1986 that when he talked to his plants, they seemed to respond. His assertion that plants, including flowers, react to sound and voices was brushed off as the opinion of an eccentric Royal and derided by some experts, although this theory dates back to 1848. More recently, researchers have studied the effects of sound on plants and flowers, especially music, and found that they do respond.
How They Respond
South Korean scientists who conducted an experiment in rice fields discovered that all plants, including flowers, have genese that seem able to "hear" music. These two genes are the rbcS and Ald genes. The researchers played a variety of music, including Beethoven's "Moonlight Sonata," and discovered that sounds ranging from 125 hertz and 250 hertz made the genes more active, whereas sounds at 50 hertz made them less active. They also found that the higher the frequency, the more active the genes became. To test their theory even further, the scientists conducted the experiment in the dark with the same results. Some scientists remain skeptical of the results, as not enough plant varieties were tested to come to a solid conclusion.
Tones
In 1973, Dorothy Retallack published what she had learned from experimenting with sounds and plants and flowers. She conducted several experiments; the first one used constant tones with a control group. During the first experiment, she used a constant tone for eight hours. Those plants died within 14 days. In another area, she played a constant tone for three hours off and on. Those plants thrived. In another room, she played nothing. The plants survived, but did not thrive.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4726] [4703] [4706] [4705] [4704] [4662] [4668] [4669] [4670] [4671] [4663] [4673] [4674] [4675] [4683] [4689] [4688] [4686] [4692] [4695] [4698] [4700] [4690] [4655] |
|
4726 |
|
|
Date: January 30, 2014 at 22:12:40
From: Eve in FL, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Do Flowers React to Music? |
URL: http://www.amazon.com/Universal-Laws-Never-Before-Revealed/dp/1572820039/ref=sr_1_sc_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1391147667&sr=8-1-spell&keywords=science+and+sympathic+vibrations |
|
sheila,
A link to a book I found on Amazon as I pondered the Creation of the
Universe and felt it was A song of Peace, A song of Joy, of love...it began
with one note. It's still there holding up a tremendous amount of
pressure. One can look through a few pages, read others opinions...etc.
Some posters I read say no science behind sound and plants or other
things in nature...I find many studies when I go to look. This one I
purchased and enjoy...many times I pick it up and ponder some of the
words and the diagrams. It would not be me to prove it in such a way...I
just sort of feel it. Yet this study by Keeley did expand the way I view the
concept.
I have a migraine, off to bed soon...hope this makes sense.
Best to you in your endeavors on this topic! I don't feel I need proof, yet
many do and so many even if they experience it, such a road block in
their minds, I don't know they would believe it anyway.
Oh and I put up a video at the top of which one of the topics is plant
communication in science.
Best to you!
~Truly,
~Eve
http://www.amazon.com/Universal-Laws-Never-Before-
Revealed/dp/1572820039/ref=sr_1_sc_1?
ie=UTF8&qid=1391147667&sr=8-1-
spell&keywords=science+and+sympathic+vibrations
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
4703 |
|
|
Date: January 11, 2014 at 18:56:33
From: Dan, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Do Flowers React to Music? |
URL: The Secret Life of Plants |
|
This was a fascinating book for me in the seventies. And yes, plants
react to more than just music according to the documentation in the
book.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4706] [4705] [4704] |
|
4706 |
|
|
Date: January 12, 2014 at 17:04:34
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Do Flowers React to Music? |
|
|
|
Very interesting. So you're saying that just because there is some "documentation" in a book, then that satisfies as scientific proof? Or are we just supposed to assume that the "documentation" is valid because you said so?
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
4705 |
|
|
Date: January 12, 2014 at 16:26:35
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Do Flowers React to Music? |
URL: Backster |
|
|
Yes, indeed, it is fascinating that plants can communicate their feelings. How do I know? Backster says so. What's more, even yogurt can do it. Not really sure about fence posts, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
4704 |
|
|
Date: January 12, 2014 at 15:23:27
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Do Flowers React to Music? |
URL: Straight Dope |
|
|
Yes, very fascinating that even yogurt has sensitive feelings. I'm not really sure about fence posts, though.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
4662 |
|
|
Date: January 03, 2014 at 08:35:25
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: The New Age of Pseudoscience |
URL: Dorothy Retallack Debunked |
|
Sheila, most of the studies showing plant response to sound are poorly constrained because they are not done by scientists. I also can't help but notice that many of the authors of such studies are profiting from book sales. However, I am surprised that it is so difficult to find credible scientific information that refutes those studies. Most likely there are two reasons for that: real scientists don't want to waste time duplicating pseudoscientific work because there is more important work to be done, and because the unscientific public prefers the titillation of aliens and plants with human characteristics, legitimate science is swamped out on the internet. I doubt that anything will change your mind, but try the link. Scroll down to the title, "The New Age Pseudoscience of Dorothy Retallack".
Btw, if you knew anything about science, you would know that even though Prince Charles is now King, his comment is anecdotal and hence worthless as a source of evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4668] [4669] [4670] [4671] [4663] [4673] [4674] [4675] [4683] [4689] [4688] [4686] [4692] [4695] [4698] [4700] [4690] |
|
4668 |
|
|
Date: January 03, 2014 at 20:43:33
From: LaLuna, [DNS_Address]
Subject: ??? |
|
|
"...you would know that even though Prince Charles is now King..."
Did Queen Elizabeth die? I'm not finding any news about her death.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4669] [4670] [4671] |
|
4669 |
|
|
Date: January 03, 2014 at 22:10:20
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: ??? |
|
|
|
You are correct. I apologize for my error. Most likely I misread a headline and skipped the full text because I have no interest in following make-believe royalty. I once asked a Brit why they don't put an end to such nonsense, and he just shrugged his shoulders and said that he enjoyed the royal pageantry.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4670] [4671] |
|
4670 |
|
|
Date: January 03, 2014 at 23:30:22
From: LaLuna, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Yeah... |
|
|
The Brits do love their royals, about as much as Catholics seem to adore the Pope. Seems like a lot of money to hand over, just to watch the occasional parade and brouhaha over weddings and babies.
I read an article that said Prince Charles is taking over more and more of the Queen's duties as time goes on... But I can't see her ever abdicating the throne as long as she's still able to get out of bed in the morning!
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4671] |
|
4671 |
|
|
Date: January 04, 2014 at 06:25:22
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Yeah... |
|
|
|
Indeed, all I found while trying to find the source of my error were websites stating that the queen would never step down. As for successor, the pubic prefers William, so poor Charles will likely never get the job.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
4663 |
|
|
Date: January 03, 2014 at 09:19:21
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: The New Age of Pseudoscience |
|
|
|
Just want to add that in my opinion, any study of plant sensitivity that implies specific plant response to "Moonlight Sonata", or any other genera of music, is automatically pseudoscience, because the premise is invalid. There is no known way, nor any logical argument, that plants can respond to a quality distinction of sound, which is what music genera is. I accept the fact that some frequencies might be able to affect plants in a non-human manner, but I have yet to see any convincing evidence that such response is significant or relevant to this discussion of plant sentience, or conscience, or communication, or whatever you want to label it.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4673] [4674] [4675] [4683] [4689] [4688] [4686] [4692] [4695] [4698] [4700] [4690] |
|
4673 |
|
|
Date: January 04, 2014 at 17:45:42
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Errata: Genra, not Genera (NT) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4674] [4675] [4683] [4689] [4688] [4686] [4692] [4695] [4698] [4700] [4690] |
|
4674 |
|
|
Date: January 05, 2014 at 06:20:30
From: La Man, [DNS_Address]
Subject: I thought it was genre?(NT) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4675] [4683] [4689] [4688] [4686] [4692] [4695] [4698] [4700] [4690] |
|
4675 |
|
|
Date: January 05, 2014 at 08:33:45
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Mereley a short lapse into errorley onset stupiditis. |
|
|
|
You'ill get it two, one of these daze.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4683] [4689] [4688] [4686] [4692] [4695] [4698] [4700] [4690] |
|
4683 |
|
|
Date: January 09, 2014 at 01:52:56
From: La Man, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Mereley a short lapse into errorley onset stupiditis. |
|
|
I misspell words here and there, sometimes I'm just too lazy to either
fix it or look it up. Some very bright people are horrible spellers. My
wife included. I'm constantly pausing the TV and asking my eldest
which word is spelled wrong, because news station's captioning is by
far the worst. I mean really bad, so bad I'm surprised they leave it up
for the entire segment.
I was just having fun watching you correct yourself. Iow we know
what you meant so what's the point?
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4689] [4688] [4686] [4692] [4695] [4698] [4700] [4690] |
|
4689 |
|
|
Date: January 09, 2014 at 12:35:04
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Mereley a short lapse into errorley onset stupiditis. |
|
|
Twice I've tried to respond. I guess both times I neglected to post. Either that, or my messages are floating around in outer space waiting for a signal to land. I'm not going to attempt another try; instead I will go off on a tangent.
Ordinarily I enjoy your messages, but in this case, I am wondering why in all of my messages over the past one or two weeks, you would send me two messages questioning why I would bother to correct a diction error that might be confusing to some people here.
Are you bored? Nothing more exciting to work on?
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
4688 |
|
|
Date: January 09, 2014 at 12:19:10
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Mereley a short lapse into errorley onset stupiditis. |
|
|
|
Well, I answered your message in detail and forgot to hit post, I guess. Not worth redoing. Wondering why you would waste your time composing two messages questioning why I would make a correction on an error that might be confusing to some people here. Bored? Nothing better to work on?
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
4686 |
|
|
Date: January 09, 2014 at 11:58:25
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Corrections: |
|
|
|
Ordinarily, I don't correct obvious spelling, diction, or grammar errors. You can see that in some of my messages, but I consider this one important, because it could be confusing in it's context to some posters here. As for news captioning, you should give those typists some allowance--they have to type in real time as fast as people can talk, and to keep up, they have no time to go back and make corrections of typos--that would just lead to more typos.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4692] [4695] [4698] [4700] [4690] |
|
4692 |
|
|
Date: January 10, 2014 at 19:00:21
From: marja, [DNS_Address]
Subject: spelling correctly |
|
|
is important for moi since I operate in not my native language, -it's weird having two languages constantly running thru the mind......
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4695] [4698] [4700] |
|
4695 |
|
|
Date: January 10, 2014 at 21:51:40
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: spelling correctly |
|
|
|
You speak English well enough. You have a unique style of writing that makes you sound young and spirited, but you sometimes seem to be holding onto your deeper thoughts. Perhaps you could add more of your personal feelings about a subject, rather than just liking something? I know I'm going out on a limb here, but your personality seems open to more potential than you express, and that makes it tough to know who you are.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4698] [4700] |
|
4698 |
|
|
Date: January 10, 2014 at 22:16:46
From: marja, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: spelling correctly |
|
|
dib, -do you read the other forums here....
my personality surely comes thru lol...
I'm a wild girl, miowwwwww.....seriously though, -that's quite fascinating your opinion....
just like who are you, -some guy in the East Bay, -have you let your TRUE persona come thru here,
me thinks so not.....
I think some of you people go way back re the online posting, -I've only done it a few years and only on these ryan's boards....
what /whomever attracts themselves here is quite fascinating.....
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
[4700] |
|
4700 |
|
|
Date: January 10, 2014 at 23:26:04
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: spelling correctly |
|
|
|
I've spent, or wasted, about 15-years on this and JOB's old board. Can't explain why I'm still here, except as a form of addiction. mr bopp is kind of lovable when you get to know him. But I guess you knew that already, hmm? lol.
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
4690 |
|
|
Date: January 09, 2014 at 12:44:04
From: dib, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Well, that's disgusting. Sorry for the dupe responses. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
4655 |
|
|
Date: January 01, 2014 at 01:23:39
From: kay.so.or, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Do Flowers React to Music? |
|
|
|
we grew gardens in mt shasta starting in july...played sound to them as well as spraying nutrients after the sound as it opens their stemata....and it was awesome our crops....on never before planted soil, volcanic soil, and the crops lasted way into november...we experienced this first hand....so I am a believer..
|
|
|
|
|
Responses:
None |
|
[
Science/Technology ] [ Main Menu ] |