What frequencies are physically present?
Fourier analysis decomposes the waveform into sinusoidal components. Think ingredient list, not “what pitch do I hear?”
Four tones enter. A fifth note is never played. Yet the whole waveform can repeat at that absent note’s period—and your ear may still organize the sound around it. Build the signal, slide its ghost by one period, and watch the impossible-looking overlap.
No prior theory is required. Tap through the three recipe states, then operate the full signal below. The explanation follows the spectacle.
When both ideas are clear: the spectrum tells you the ingredients; a time shift tells you whether the whole waveform repeats.
Fourier analysis decomposes the waveform into sinusoidal components. Think ingredient list, not “what pitch do I hear?”
A period is a shift in time that makes the complete waveform land back on itself.
Your auditory system can organize a complex signal into a perceived pitch. That report is real evidence about perception—but it is not a spectral inventory.
The canonical construction has all four partials active. You may mute them for exploration, but the canonical inference uses 220/330/440/550 all nonzero.
There is no n=1 term. So there is no synthesized 110 Hz sinusoid.
Each component picks up an integer number of full cycles: 2πn. The whole waveform therefore repeats after 9.091 ms.
With all four constructed harmonics nonzero, there is no smaller common integer divisor that shortens the canonical period.
A report near 110 Hz is an empirical perceptual observation. It does not manufacture a missing spectral component or prove a 110 Hz source.
The amber ghost has shifted by exactly 9.091 ms—and it lands on the blue waveform. The signal repeats at the period associated with 110 Hz even though no 110 Hz sinusoid was put into the spectrum.
The constructed ingredients are 220, 330, 440 and 550 Hz.
All four ingredients return to the same phase after 1/110 second, so the full shape repeats.
A listener can report a pitch near 110 Hz. That is a perceptual fact—not proof of a hidden 110 Hz source.
This is the heart of the puzzle. You are sorting evidence by what produced it—not hunting for green buttons. Each answer explains the measurement behind it.
| Question | What we can say | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Physical 110 Hz component? | Canonical spectrum contains 220/330/440/550 only. | awaiting classification |
| Repeats after 1/110 s? | Test with +T₀ waveform overlay. | awaiting time test |
| Pitch near 110 reported? | Possible empirical listener report; not guaranteed. | awaiting classification |
| 110 Hz source proven? | Would require source evidence not supplied here. | awaiting classification |
Four bounded checks. Immediate feedback. No free-text storage and no answer payload sent anywhere.
Absent as a 110 Hz Fourier line. Present as a 1/110-second temporal structure. Potentially reported as a pitch near 110 Hz. None of those facts, alone, proves a physical 110 Hz source.