The definitions of sound as found in the ANSI/ASA documentation (S1.1-2013) play an important role
in the abjection of ultrasound. However, the threshold of ultrasound is a matter of debate as the
enhanced abilities of some humans to sense ultrasound are now being discovered. While definitions and standards are useful for enabling structures of knowledge, they also situate knowledge in power
structures, leaving epistemological blind spots in their wake. Particularly within policy making on noise and health this may have palpable consequences in the future. My foci with this paper are not only to map out how anthropocentric definitions of sound contribute to the abjection of ultrasound, but also to address some serious consequences for the human relationship to nature. First, I discuss definitions of sound and present examples of anthropogenic ultrasound production in the environment. Then I survey research on the negative consequences for the environment of anthropogenic ultrasound production. Finally, I show how the abjection of ultrasound is a consequence of our definitions of sound and the accompanying situated knowledge. With tools like resourcification theory and the concept of waste as scat, I then suggest ways in which anthropogenic ultrasound production can be encompassed in environmental impact debates.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationInterNoise24
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2024


Dive into the research topics of 'The Abjection of Ultrasound'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this