Talk:Bloop

Gas bubble?

I've listened to the Bloop recording and it hardly resembles a biological sound. In fact, it sounds like a very large air-bubble escaping its former confines. I've seen some recent Scientific studies on The Science Channel that energy companies are researching alternative energy sources (Methane) and that some of these sources could derive from the ocean floor. So, it would be possible to build a theory that these noises are gigantic methane burps eminating from the Earth's crust. --Bourbon King 20:08, 13 July 2005 (UTC)Bourbon King--Bourbon King 20:08, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

I think that scientist are very aware of gas rising from the bottom of the ocean. The sound file that has been made available has been speeded up also, and I think scientist have an idea of what makes that sound biological and they base their assumptions on some other information concerning oceanic life. The sound could be from bubbles, but perhaps bubbles caused by an animal. And I think Wikipedia is no place to build up new theories about the phenomeon but to inform about existing theories.

Oh, it does sound a bit like a bubble. But keep in mind that the various recordings you'll find on the net are sped up at least 16x. I've heard a slower version, and it doesn't sound like anything at all. Remember, these are very low frequency recordings. Radix 15:12, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, on the NOAA link, it says that the recording was sped up.

I'm fairly cetain that scientists may have considered the revolutionary "maybe it's a bubble?" theory. So on one hand we hand we have presumably well-funded and educated specialists with experience in the field and the correct instruments, and on the other we have some guy who downloaded a sound file from the net. Ummmm.... (Falcore)

Geez! Guy has an idea and you jump all over him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.160.174.24 (talk) 12:45, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

As of today, these well-funded and (supposedly) well-educated specialists haven't drawn to any conclusions, as the article points out they are OPEN to any suggestions which tells me that anybody's guess is as good as their well-funded ones. That hardly merits them as "gifted" in my book. LOL ---

"Anybody's guess is as good as their well-funded ones." Wrong! These people know more about what's going on down there than a random "anybody." They're aware it IS something different, but just because they don't have a clue of what it could possibly be it doesn't mean their opinions are as valid as any other. You can't try to make a grand unified theory if you don't know anything of physics, and just because physicists are battling to find one for years it doesn't mean theirs are just as good as yours would be. So, a good theory is backed up with data and knowledge, and these people have it, so their theories are better. ☢ Ҡi∊ff⌇↯ 05:57, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

From reading the article there's hardly much of a theory listed, nor explained in the provided links. All they say is that it's bigger than any living whale, but not how much bigger. Sounds pretty vague at best, not really a theory.--71.131.251.244 07:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Moved from the article: Bloop is also a slang term for marijuana popularized in the San Francisco Bay Area. -- Stephen Gilbert 22:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

What size creature are we talking about?

The creature believed to be responsible for this noise is said to be larger than any living whale, but just how much bigger are we talking? 2 times bigger, 3 times bigger?

Big enough to be the final boss in a video game!

--71.131.251.244 07:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that´s big...--Threedots dead 15:09, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I hear it'd also have power ratings of over nine thousand :O Wardrich (talk) 10:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Think Cthulhu big. In order to create sounds such as this, the monstrosity would have to be about that size. If you do not know what/whom Cthulhu is, the phrase "A mountain walked, or stumbled" sums up the creature's size. High Deity (talk) 12:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

About one and a half times the size of a blue whale. I found here: http://www.dearbluelobster.com/2008/01/bloop-crustacean-phenomenon.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bbbeto (talk • contribs) 02:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I think it's just Devil doing a bass solo :) 91.153.228.113 (talk) 23:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, the Blue Whale can be heard 500 miles away. The Bloop was heard 5000 miles away. Go figure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.153.204.26 (talk) 23:08, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Furthur Trivia Section

I'm removing the Furthur Trivia section, which states "The geographic coordinates of the sound were, interestingly, somewhat close to those of the lost city of R'lyeh from H.P. Lovecraft's Cthulhu stories." To me, this is completely errelevant, as there are millions of fictional works, and probably every coordinate on Earth has been described in at least one of them. MickeyK 22:35, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I can definitely see your point, but it does seem relevant to some people (v. the dedicated Bloop page) so I think it's worth mentioning, especially as mere trivia. I've changed the wording somewhat, if that helps. Lusanaherandraton 04:29, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

They're really not that close, though... 82.166.53.176 18:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, please leave it. That made me so happy I could plotz. (On the other hand, just how close was it? That'd be good to know.) --Masamage 04:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorta goes along with the article because Cthulhu is supposed to be very, very large. 69.255.21.213 01:46, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

There are millions of fictional works, but this is Lovecraft we are talking about. Plus its kind of a fun bit of trivia. 58.7.0.146 15:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Uh, hi. Not sure if I'm doing this right. First time contributing, I'll get an account later. Anyway, since it was asked, I checked my copy of the 'Call of Cthulhu' story (from 'The Best of H.P. Lovecraft', 1982 Ballantine Books). The exact quote is 'and in S. Latitude 47[degrees] 9', W. Longitude 126 [degrees] 43', come upon a coastline...' Not knowing much about geography, I have no idea how close that is to the bloop.

Thanks! That's very useful.

50 S 100 W compared to 47 S 126 W? *researches nautical miles about* Well, that's a small but countable number of miles/kilometers off. But then, how big is R'lyeh? :)

Since the subject matter is so mysterious, it's fun to know stuff like this. It would be worth working out exactly how far off the signal is, though, and putting that instead of 'somewhat close'. Much more informative. --Masamage 02:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Given that he died in 1937, I'd say he was pretty close! Kamikaze Highlander 16:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

The monolith-esque city of R'lyeh was large enough to house Cthulhu and many other minions and star-kin. I believe it would be quite the site, had it existed. (For enthusiasts as myself, I hope against hope in favor of its reality) High Deity (talk) 12:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

R'lyeh is BIG. It's said that the "city" that is seen in the story is only a tiny portion of it: "I suppose that only a single mountain-top, the hideous monolith-crowned citadel whereon great Cthulhu was buried, actually emerged from the waters." So, at least a really large island, and in "At the Mountains of Madness", it's implied to be an entire continent: "all the lands of the Pacific sank". Vultur (talk) 06:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Super Mario Bros. Reference

I removed the reference to the blooper enemies of SMB, due to the fact that they appeared before 1997 and the bloop itself.

Not to mention 'bloop' being a generic sound-effect word. Good call. --Masamage 02:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Possible Search

It seems to me that a rational thought towards investigating this, especially since it was heard several times in a local area, would be to possibly send something to search the area? Did no one send anyone or anything to the place to see if they could find anything? Has the area been searched since then?

As for being an animal or something, I don't know. You'd think we'd have heard it again, it has been almost a decade. Whatever it was, and assuming it hasn't been repeated or anything, we can assume it was some special event that hasn't occured since, or before(or at least in the past of the sensors involved).

Besides, the scientists only had a rough estimate of where something might be. Based upon this they would have to find the appropriate funding for an expedition, which would be almost impossible. On top of that, the ocean is, as you know, enormous. The chances of coming across something, even if it´s bigger than a blue-whale, are slim at best.--Threedots dead 15:18, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Odd Article

Some of the wording in this article is ambiguous or incomplete; it would be nice for the original author to go back and do a re-edit. For instance, this is from the article: "The Bloop, although it sounded like a blue whale, originated 4,800 km away, seemingly ruling out any known marine animal."

4,800 km away from what? I can only assume they meant the sensors that recorded the sound. Why does it rule out any known marine animal? Is it too deep? Too far from shore? Or does it mean that because the sound was so loud from so far away, it must have been something bigger than any known animal? I can only assume. This is an extremely ambiguous statement.

Some of the question about the trivia section discussed above would have been answered as well if it was mentioned WHY this is significant. Of course, as is stated in the discussion above, probably every single location on earth has been mentioned in a book somewhere before.

But how many books have mentioned a specific longitudal location of an ancient sleeping sea monster, and then, in real life, a mysterious noise is recorded underwater, which some scientists speculate may be from a huge animal, very close to the same position named in the book? I think that's very relevant. It should have been explained in the article.

50 S 100 W compared to 47 S 126 W: approx. 1000 nautical miles apart, i.e nowhere near, not "very close" (roughly 2000 Kilometers distant). It is as remarkable a coincidence as someone writing about strange lights in the sky over the southern tip of Italy and then something unexplainable being recorded over London a few generations later. Put a 2000Km wide circle on the globe and you're bound to find something to 'tally up' in the covered area, especially if you add several decades either way as an extra dimension, and then include works of fiction as another. 81.178.114.172 17:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm, 50 S, 100 W this was heard from. What a coincidence. How deep is the ocean at that spot? I'll bet you that nobody has ever explored the ocean at that depth, which may lead me to believe that there IS, in fact, something down there we don't even know that exists. Either this thing is a GIGANTIC, lifeform that can adapt to VERY cold water, a tiny creature that can emit very low pitched sounds, some sort of event that is triggered by something in the earth, the ruins of a lost city, or simply something we just don't know.--71.253.97.210 02:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Train etc

Has anyone proposed any theories for the other unidentified sounds available on the NOAA website? --71.189.165.175 01:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

SOSUS

I read something on CNN about Bloop and it mentioned that the sensor system is known as SOSUS. However, this article says something slightly different. I was just hoping someone more knowledgeable about the topic than myself could try to figure this out. 24.136.45.122 19:04, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Fascinating

This is fascinating. I gotta improve this article somehow.–Sidious1701_{(talk • email • todo)} 01:22, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Problem with a source

This source from CNN [1]. I'm not sure its actually talking about this bloop. including an unidentified "bloop" that crops up from time to time They seem to be talking about a recurring unidentified noise. This article is talking about a specific noise of unknown origin which seems to be during a single summer 4 years before this was written. Its written in such a way to indicate the "bloops" they are referring to are ongoing, not a past incident. I also removed another reference which was word for word copy of a previous one. I'm also clearing out the fictional sea monsters. While jokingly speculated at in the articles it doesn't seem to be any kind of serious consideration by the scientists.--Crossmr (talk) 02:58, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Audio file description

Who posted the awful .ogg file? Whoever did that doesn't even understand the concept of sampling rate. The .ogg file currently available for this article is a farce. The "chattering" sound is from the sampling algorithm used to "slow down" the sound while retaining the frequency. This is not at all what the bloop sounds like. It sounds like a very low frequency bloop. The description on the NOAA site and the wav file there is CORRECT. If you run a fast Fourier transform analysis on the wave file hosted on the NOAA site, the spectrogram is identical to that shown in the NOAA description besides being 16 times higher in frequency. I will upload a proper version of the file and link the article to it. -series8217, mar 30, 2008 talk

I fixed the file. It is now the 16x version from the NOAA site, simply cropped to the "bloop" sound. If you want to listen to it in real time you'll need a low-frequency speaker capable of recreating sounds at around 50hz. Play the file at a sampling rate of 2756 Hz to hear the true Bloop sound. -series8217, mar 30, 2008 talk

The audio file was described as being 16 times its original speed. This was incorrect; the file hosted here was taken from BloopWatch[2], where it is claimed to be a 16x slower version of that found at the NOAA Vents page[3]. NOAA claims to have increased the speed of the original 16x, so presumably the audio file used in this article is at the original (true) speed, although the pitch has clearly been increased. (I've done my own testing of the original file; when slowed 16x, the resulting "bloop" falls well into subwoofer territory, as the spectrogram suggests. The file here is much higher.)

I have corrected the description. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.198.109 (talk) 12:28, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I've "uncorrected" the description, since the .ogg file lasts 10 seconds, just like the "16 times sped-up" ones of BloopWatch. The "realtime" ones last 2 minutes 45 seconds. So the .ogg file is sped up. There is no reason to assume that the sound hosted here, before conversion from .wav to .ogg format, was taken from a different source than the reliable one it is claimed to be on its description page, which is the website of the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory of the NOAA, and not BloopWatch.  --Lambiam 00:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

No, it's original speed and cropped. Will ^(talk) 00:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

The more bold the claim, the more compelling the evidence need be. Original speed (16 times slower than the NOAA file) barely registers even on my subwoofer. I doubt sincerely it's original speed. Tar7arus (talk) 14:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Did you not look at the frequency spectrograph?! It is exactly correct if you slow down the sound by a factor of 16. Run a Fast Fourier Transform on the file (most wave editors should be able to do this, or you can import it into MATLAB and do it there) and look at the frequency power spectrum. Do this at 44100hz and at 2756hz. You will see which it is correct. The high frequency in this file is around the lowest that common subwoofers will reproduce. You need to be able to reproduce sounds which are even outside the human hearing range.. the frequency of the sound is one of the reasons this is so intriguing. An animal would have to be very large to produce the frequency of sound, not just the loudness level. -series8217, mar 30, 2008 talk

I've spent a considerable amount of time analyzing this sound file (and others at NOAA), motivated purely by a personal interest in the subject, only to have some pompous asshat swoop in and, with a barely-interested gesture of his royal scepter, undo my well-founded edit and saunter off with his nose in the air and his kingly robes flowing behind him. Most editors don't have any desire to engage in an edit war, and cranks like Lambiam know it. These people are perfectly happy to lay in the tall grass, monitoring Wiki articles, waiting for an edit to revert. Those of us who are motivated by personal interest alone will never prevail unless we become motivated also by a sense of turf, and are willing to monitor and defend our edits. I am not so motivated. This is why Wikipedia has failed as a serious reference, and will continue to fail unless these Wiki-thugs are reigned in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.241.198.109 (talk) 21:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

No original research. If you've spent considerable time on it, get your findings published somewhere and if its important it will likely end up, cited, in the article. 67.160.174.24 (talk) 04:17, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

C'thulu

Would it be unencyclopediac to put a big red box on the article which states, "Yes, we KNOW about C'thulu. Don't add it." ?

In all seriousness, does this count as vandalism that can merit long-term semi-protection? This article is unlikely to grow much, and I'm eventually going to expand it--there are more sources, and its on my to-do list on my user page. But the C'thulu thing is just nonsense. Lawrence Cohen 00:05, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

The Cthulu thing is retarded. The supposed relationship between Cthulu and the Bloop is far from encyclopedic. If its just a coincidence, don't add it. If H.P. Lovecraft meant for Cthulu and the Bloop to be connected, then there's a slight chance we could put it in. But for right now, I think its safe to assume its a coincidence. Besides, the supposed location of Cthulu is prettu far away from the Bloop, atleast from the information on the previous revisions that I've seen.–Sidious1701_{(talk • email • todo)} 22:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Considering the sound was heard on multiple sensors that were over 4300km apart, a 2000km or so difference in location(when the 'roughly 50 S 100 W' is obviously a very vague guess) really isn't that large. Also, I severely doubt a dead man could have 'meant' for Cthulhu to be related to a noise that occured long after he died. 71.102.31.14 (talk) 18:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I completely agree with you except for the distance thing, and yeah, it is a very vague guess. That's why I oppose the mention of that in this article.–Sidious1701_{(talk • email • todo)} 23:09, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it's pretty stupid. But enough people keep ramming it in that I'm still going to search for sources when I have time, just to satiate my own curiosity if nothing else. :) Lawrence Cohen 22:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

It was obviously either Cthulhu or Cloverfield. Or a battle between them. --NEMT (talk) 20:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm sticking the "Life Is Full Of Possibilities" reference back in. It was last seen in the Nov 16 07 revision. How do we cite to a recorded media source that isn't on the 'net? One Mississippi (talk) 06:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Obviously it wasn't REALLY Cthulhu, but the correspondence is better than the distance given above makes it sound. R'lyeh was an entire continent, or at least a very, very large island.Vultur (talk) 03:16, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I do find it bizzairy amusing that C'thulu is the only explanation ;) 81.79.210.120 (talk) 19:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Popular Facts

If your going to remove an entire section let the talk page know first. Wikipedia is not a place to uncover the truth of a matter. We're here to highlight facts, not resolve mysteries (Crossmr). KriticKill (talk) 18:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Why slowed down?

The article doesn't clarify for the sake of laymen why the sound has to be sped up to be heard. If the original sound is, say, 8 minutes long, and only sounds like a "bloop" when you play it in 30 seconds, why would you assume that it was 30 seconds of animal blooping and not 8 minutes of background noise? Does the oceanic layer it was recorded in dampen the sound waves so that the sound is slower than it should be or something? 174.46.172.13 (talk) 10:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

First off, these clips are provided by NOAA, so they made the choice. However, my best guess at why it's provided in 16x sped up form is: 1) These sounds are very slow "sweeps", and not significantly noticeable when played at 1x speed, and 2) it saves on bandwidth costs. 24.205.42.102 (talk) 19:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Also, "If you want to listen to it in real time you'll need a low-frequency speaker capable of recreating sounds at around 50hz. Play the file at a sampling rate of 2756 Hz to hear the true Bloop sound. -series8217, mar 30, 2008 talk" ----

Spectrogram

Spectrogram image with Y-axis 0 to 50 hz looks like absurd and nonsence! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.218.231.67 (talk) 15:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Has it ever happened again?

Because if it's only ever happened once in history that's not really likely to be biological is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 22:08, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

It has appeared multiple times during the summer of '97. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.235.109.104 (talk) 03:15, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Uh...quite obviously he meant "did it happen again after that year". Since the "bloop" is not just a single thing from one point, but the instance of the "bloop" over that year. 119.11.16.241 (talk) 13:02, 2 August 2009 (UTC) Sutter Cane

Bloop and Slow Down proof enough?

Bloop and Slow Down were both heard in 1997 and both in May/June. Both nearly in the same region. Both sounds were never heard again. This can't be a coincidence. Both sounds surely originated from the same source. Isn't that proof, that is has to be an animal? Slow Down was heard several thousand miles away from Bloop. So whatever the origin was, it moved (or better swam) several thousand miles between both sounds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.153.204.26 (talk) 23:13, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Please no more articles like this

I am scared of the Bloop. My child read the Bloop. Now she scared! She won't sleep at night because of it. This website is worst than any Jason or Freddie "movie". Those aren't reall "movies" they are just trash! And I have to say this "Bloop" is an evil peace of garbage! When will the Bloop go away, Mommy is what my dawghter tells me every morning, she is too scared to go to school. 76.105.157.77 (talk) 09:44, 16 August 2009 (UTC)