To me, they were as real as anything, and I did notice these sounds before actually noticing the bands of light or any other subconscious clue that might have contributed to a perception issue. I think what I perceived was as real as rain, but what caused it is anyone’s guess- either real sound or some sort of direct stimulation. In seeing dozens of northern light episodes since then, I have not heard this phenomena again despite trying.

And sometimes the broadcasts were also heard in the proximity of barbed wire fences, lending at least some support for the idea about fillings. It may have had something to do with some of the extremely strong signals being broadcast during this very experimental period.

But perhaps, with regard to the auroral sound, some other things may be playing a part. Synesthesia is an unusual overlapping of the senses that is quite interesting, and sometimes disturbing when it happens to you. Sometimes it is interpreted as hallucination. It is not.

But the second possibility does relate to hallucination. We have a strong inclination to “fill in the blanks” when our senses do not supply us with enough input to provide us with the sort of satisfyingly complete picture we wish. If we deliberately put ourselves in positions limiting the input of our senses to the maximum extent possible, while still retaining alert consciousness, we will hallucinate in very short order. This is not an entirely foolproof practice.

If we observe an aurora, we are getting far less sensory input than most of us are used to. We may, without realizing it, be filling in the gaps, trying to make the picture more familiar and complex.

Shall keep in mind when I next see an aurora.

Maybe my glasses and expander will exacerbate my hearing.”[/quote]

u r so rite!

What I observed was that the sound followed the auroral display instantaneously. The sound also lacked any ambient reverberation. I own a set of high end in-ear monitors, which sound very dry and precise. The auroral sound that I heard was dryer and more precise, and it ignited inside my head. It felt like a thousand different layers of noise would have delicately acted together. It lacked higher frequencies, and wasn’t white noise. Sort of an off-channel radio noise, a bit mechanical, but definitely natural. A thousand off-channel sounds distinctively together. On top of that there were these softest pops and cracks I’ve ever heard. Not many of them, a few (the experience lasted 3-4 seconds), but less than the rate of lightning in a VLF recording. The sound field was deep, but not very wide. I Immediately created a simulation of my experience with my synthesizers, and I’m in the process of re-acquiring this (I didn’t make a copy to myself). I can make it available when I get the copy.

The auroral display was exceptionally bright, and consisted of three bands in the beginning. At one point the belts fused together and the sound ignited. Immediately when the bands separated the sound ended. The appearance and disappearance of the sound followed the dynamism of the display to the detail, and had in the onset and the offset momentarily the same kind of curves.

My parents are from the Finnish Lapland, and in both families there are persons who have heard auroras. Finland is at the same latitudes as Alaska, so auroras are quite common when the solar activity is peaking.

But – the dental fillings and braces AM-receivers make me damn interested. My dad’s brother, born 1909, once told me how, back in the thirties, he and others could occasionally, not always as I understood it, listen to the radio in or close to the opening of an open cast-iron coal stove. Further details are unknown to me, such as whether the stove was being fired (I assume it was not), or whether it was rectangular or barrel shaped (I say it should have been rectangular). An independent source, a friend of mine raised in Copenhagen, also told me exactly the same thing (but his evidence is hearsay). Both said simply that an open iron stove could function as a crystal receiver (with headphones connected, I venture to add). Is this possible? Can anybody confirm this or corroborate such strange stories?

[quote]martym said: “I suppose what bugged me is that perhaps the most simplistic theory, that “it’s just people’s imagination”, is accepted by so many here. Is that a scientific conclusion? Because science does not have a clear answer, the most likely answer is that it is just imagination?”[/quote]
If a particular hypothesis best explains all of the facts, and is not contradicted by the facts, then yes, accepting that hypothesis is a reasonable scientific conclusion. However the reasoning is not “I don’t know, therefore it’s imagined,” it’s based on examinations of facts and testing of various hypotheses. A scientific hypothesis is supposed to be accepted or rejected based on whether it fits reality, not based on whether we like it.

[quote]martym said: “Mishearing things, adding sounds that aren’t there is something I can accept the brain might do for quick events where a noise is expected. However, to imagine a continuous sound, especially in cases where it was not expected (and the person is not suffering from anything), that to me is a theory with little if any evidence to support it. Could someone please point me to the scientific articles that show that many healthy, sane people experience sustained auditory hallucinations for singular specific events, sometimes several times for the same event (i.e. watching Northern lights)?”[/quote]
You might want to look into the McGurk effect. It’s an audio/visual illusion where the brain is tricked into hearing something that was not said by showing a person speaking one sound, while playing the audio for another sound. Even when somebody is aware of this phenomenon, they still repeatedly hear a third sound that is only “in their head.” It’s not quite the same thing, but it does show one way the brain can be fooled by unexpected inputs.