"Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
news:f6otp9$qtt$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>
> "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <this@aint.me> wrote in message
> news:468ff303$0$24708$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>
>> "Bob Myers" <nospamplease@address.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:f6oqdv$npt$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
>>>
>>> "Ron Baker, Pluralitas!" <this@aint.me> wrote in message
>>> news:468fe7df$0$16560$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...
>>>
>>> First of all, do you think you could possibly learn to trim your posts?
>
> Apparently, no, you can't. Too lazy to take the trouble to
> perform this common courtesy, or what?

You could always plonk me.

>
>>> An audible beat tone is produced by the constructive and destructive
>>> interference between two sound waves in air. Look at a pictorial
>>> representation (in the time domain) of the sum of sine waves,of similar
>>> amplitudes, one at, say, 1000 Hz and the other at 1005, and you'll
>>> see it.
>>>
>>> Bob M.
>>>
>>
>> How come you don't hear a 200 Hz beat
>> with a 1000 Hz tone and a 1200 Hz tone?
>
> For the simple reason that there isn't actually a "tone" involved -
> in other words, there is no actual signal at the difference frequency.
> There can't be, since there is no "mixing" (multiplication) of the
> two original tones.

There is no multiplication of 1000 Hz and 1005 Hz
either, is there? Why don't you hear 1000 Hz and
1005 Hz rather than a single tone varying in amplitude?

> The "beat" is really just the perception of
> the amplitude variation caused by the interference previously
> mentioned. You cannot sense such variations if they occur
> rapidly enough, any more than you can detect the flicker of a
> light source which is varying rapidly enough.
>
> Bob M.

Could it be that the human auditory system is not
linear?