I actually thought about using Static as the subject line, as in, when you’re listening to the radio on the edge of a station’s range, the interplay of static and signal can sometimes be interesting in and of itself. Assuming you’re not too intent on actually hearing what’s being broadcast, of course. Does that make it more interesting to you?
If you would have titled it Static.. hmmm.. I'd probably have thought a scene that doesn't move.. as opposed to dynamic. And nature is forever on the move and each scene is changing. Static Noise I think would work.. Noise is a engineering if not also a scientific term and when paired with static would fit the scene.
Some images stand on their own in their beauty. This isn't one of them. Or interest. Or based on repetition, patterns, or one of the known photo school subjects we begin with. But some images just need context to create viewer interest.. at least imo.
With that said.. when digital and photo sites started I coined a term (at least I think so, you can never be sure) called "thumbnail art." This relates to whatever it is that draws interest to a thumbnail (other than T&A) over others. Why are some images clicked on 1000x more than others based only on a thumbnail. I wrote about this and did a bunch of experiments. I likened it to a magazine or paperback rack.. what makes you pick up one over the other based only on the cover? I've done a bunch of CD/Book/Album covers and explaining this to a client is difficult. They think you're nuts. But getting someone to pick it up, or click on it, is a mandatory prerequisite to the purchase. (sans a recommendation). So you should really be interested on why I clicked on your great image and not the other great images.. and took the time to leave a critique. Pat yourself on the back for that one.. the image and your description were enough. That's a lot.