Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site sdcc13.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sdcrdcf!sdcsvax!sdcc3!sdcc13!scott " " weisman
From: scott weisman@sdcc13.UUCP (scott " " weisman)
Newsgroups: net.startrek
Subject: Re: Hailing Frequencies
Message-ID: <260@sdcc13.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 13-Jun-85 16:25:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: sdcc13.260
Posted: Thu Jun 13 16:25:30 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 17-Jun-85 08:28:23 EDT
References: <297@tilt.UUCP> <16200039@haddock.UUCP> <305@tilt.FUN> <1562@orca.UUCP>
Organization: U.C. San Diego, Academic Computer Center
Lines: 18

In article <1562@orca.UUCP>, andrew@orca.UUCP (Andrew Klossner) writes:
> > I read somewhere that there are several "natural" frequencies.
> > One is the vibration frequency of the Hydrogen atom.
> 
> They're called natural frequencies because nature emits a good deal of
> noise on these wavelengths.  Therefore these are exactly the
> frequencies that you *don't* want to use for communications.
> 
>   -=- Andrew Klossner   (decvax!tektronix!orca!andrew)       [UUCP]
>                         (orca!andrew.tektronix@csnet-relay)  [ARPA]

actually, i believe they are called natural frequencies because they
ABSORB any electromagnetic radiation emmitted at that freq. this means
that this area of the spectrum is unnaturally quiet(which is what we
want).

scott weisman
(gone 6/15)