work as an archaeo research professor in, at the University of Barcelona. Today I will explain about my work on acoustics and rock art. One of the issues with archaeology has been that archaeologists have been obsessed with the tangible aspects of archaeology. Whereas they've been completely unaware of other aspects that might have influenced the creation of archaeology. But that whenever properly studied. So my work with acoustics has been trying to relate whether acoustics were connected somehow with the production of rock art in Spain. Prehistoric rock art, and we did that. We did this work in the gorge of Valtorta, which is in the province of Castellon, 40 kilometers from the sea. And this is a gorge of about 10 kilometers in which six, six of them, six kilometers within that gorge, you find several Sides, shelters with paintings. So why were those paintings made in that particular sector of the gorge? And we tried to answer to this by studying whether these places were better for the acoustics for the sounds produced in them. We then looked at the gorge before the painted area, in the painted area, and beyond the painted area, and looked for the results of values of reverberation and echoes. And the results were very clear that before the painted area of the court, we couldn't find much in terms of reverberations and no echos whatsoever. But once we entered in the painted area, we started to find and it goes in reverberation. And mainly in the areas with painted [INAUDIBLE] shelters. So even within the decorated area, there were, there was a distinction between the areas where the painters had been made and others without any paintings. When we left the decorated area, again all the values went down. We, we discriminated between all those sides with more paintings, more motifs painted in them, and sides that were smaller with less motifs. And again, there were differences in the way sound behaved in them. The mega-sites, that we called u, there are three major sites in Baltorka. These had better values for echoes mainly, than reverb, reverberation. so, how to interpret this. It is obvious that acoustics had something to do with the location of these sites. So in our hypothesis is that people were looking in the landscape for places that had better sound. And depending on what they felt, they experienced in these places then they painted or not. I have to make, again, the same question, how to interpret these values. We can say, perhaps they were ritual places. And there are several factors that can tell us that these places were special. Not only because of the way in which sound was looked after, but also because we don't really have habitation areas. So these places had a symbolic meaning that led us to think that they were probably used at three tool sites. Can we go beyond that? Can we go beyond saying that these were places that, in which most likely people were sort of looking for a meaning beyond the daily experience. Well we can't really there are limits of interpretation. Archeologists can say, yes we can think that these are special places. What we will never be able to retrieve is the particular rituals that were taking place in those places.
Raising Mentally Strong Kids: How to Combine the Power of Neuroscience with Love and Logic to Grow Confident, Kind, Responsible, and Resilient Children and Young Adults