Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 45 minutes aspect is misleading. They haven't been using the room to test that, its just that no-one has spent longer than that so far.
Our title is (currently) "A room so quiet, no one can spend more than 45 minutes in it", and the Times Herald headline is even more specific: "A room so quiet no one can stand it for more than 45 minutes." I'm wondering what it is they 'can't stand.' The article text is pretty vague. '“ Your eyes don’t feel as comfortable in this room,” Orfield pointed out, adding that some visitors have had hallucinations during or…
Have they had open competitions? I feel relatively certain that people would endure in there effectively indefinitely: People can tolerate remarkable things.