Electrical Interference that Microphones Love

Since electrical interference reception from microphones can be heard while listening to speaker output while this cancels sound wave production, all microphones receive this electrical interference whether they are wired or wireless. Which path has the least resistance? Those used for speaking or those used for listening? One situation uses a microphone with a fixed location while the other situation doesn't. Since sound wave production isn't canceled in one situation as much as it is in the other, wouldn't those used for speaking be considered in path with least resistance? If microphones are used for listening, aren't ears being made to SEE electrical interfering LIGHT waves coming from the Electromagnetic Frequency Wave Spectrum where radio astronomers are having equipment difficulty from the top of the microwave/radar region while the deaf are having the same problem from the bottom of the radio frequency region? This doesn't include metal detectors and store front electronic article surveillance systems that like to interfere with all electronics? When someone has ears that cannot hear, are they going to stop receiving electrical interference that microphones love when they are used for listening? How can this be stopped when the microphone is still powered to receive even though the volume control is turned down so this can't be heard with ears that cannot hear? What does movement that can't be heard do to one's inability to process it? If ears already cannot hear, doesn't this movement cause system to break down further? What does physical vibrations involved with electrical interference do to a body of water? Doesn't water conduct electricity? Won't this damage all of the muscles attached to the ear structure when microphones are used for listening? If eyesight is primary means for survival when ears cannot hear, those that have ears that cannot hear have a higher chance of having eyesight effected because of what microphones love? Who wants to have eyesight effected when they already have ears that cannot hear? Shouldn't the object be to decrease movement not needed instead of increasing movement that can't be processed while this does not necessarily have to be heard (or seen) to know that it is still there? If ears cannot hear, isn't system going to be effected FIRST based on what can't be heard before adding increased movement with or without hearing level? Shouldn't ears be using earphones or speaker system ONLY? Isn't this called DIRECT AUDIO? Microphones do not convert sound waves into electrical energy when there is electrical interference involved.

Reply to
Loading thread data ...

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.