"1, Periodogram analyses performed on oceanic wave records do 

 not appear to give correct geophysical information. The numerous 

 wave periods, and bands of periods, indicated by this type of analy- 

 sis do not necessarily possess physical significance, 



2, Application of the hypothesis of generalized harmonic analy- 

 ses to western North Atlantic wave records indicates that ocean wave 

 patterns are not complex interference patterns resulting from combi- 

 nations of many wave frequencies, but frequently consist of a single 

 sinusoidal wave ("cyclical component") on which is superimposed an 

 "oscillatory component." (In the case of the published wave record 

 53-X [11] the latter component appeared with the same period as the 

 cyclical component.) 



3. The cyclical component appears to be that generated under 

 the influence of a dominating oceanic meteorological situation, and 

 the oscillatory component by local winds and other local disturb- 

 ances tending to change the basic ocean wave pattern." 



The physical meaning of these mathematical results seems some- 

 what obscure. But there is a fact to which we have to pay attention 

 when considering the results of Seiwell's investigations: the re- 

 cords of Seiwell, as far as published, comprise sea bottom pressure 

 observations and the results mentioned above are based on these press- 

 ure-recordings. However the pattern of pressure-fluctuations at the 

 sea bottom does not agree with the actual pattern of complex surface 

 waves. Shorter waves are filtered out, and in his papers of 1948, 

 H. R. Seiwell [10] calls special attention to the fact that siirface 

 wave lengths less than 240 feet were not registered by the Bermuda 

 wave recorder at a depth of 20 fathoms. The average bottom period 



