this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2025
660 points (99.5% liked)

People Twitter

8658 readers
1491 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

That's still a physical sound even if the source is internal or at the sensor.

"Non-physical sound" would necessarily be errant nerve signaling or hallucination, something on the brain side of the sensor.

[–] voracitude@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

Yes. I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with? The discovery was that it is possible to record tinnitus from someone's ear when we thought it was a neurological phenomenon. So tinnitus does actually produce a physical sound, even in cases that don't have a known physical cause like muscular tinnitus (https://dizziness-and-balance.com/disorders/hearing/tinnitus/ME.html). I'm just theorising what could be causing the physical sound in such cases.

edit: oh, I see, this is in context of the question I was replying to. "Physical sound" doesn't mean "it was perceived by something physical" it means it's actual vibrations in the air. We thought tinnitus was just abnormal brain activity, not a physical sound; turns out that is at least partially wrong.

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

Yeah you caught it in the edit 😁