Audiophile Vindication! - Cables Are Different And Now There's The Science

Browntrout · « **Reply #60 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 02:49 pm »

Natural Units are not arbitary.

geezer · « **Reply #61 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 03:02 pm »

Quote from: sts9fan on 24 Oct 2009, 02:09 pm

So by your thinking all units are arbitary? You got to be kidding.

Of course they're arbitrary, in the following sense: The amp might just as well have been defined in terms of 1X10-7 N/m instead of 2X 10-7. Or it could've been in terms of 1 ounce per inch.

For a more familiar example, consider the arbitrary choices we have available for the unit of length: mil, inch, foot, yard, mile, cubit, rod, chain, league, fathom, furlong, nose, head, length (in horse racing), hands (height of a horse), AU (astronomical unit), light year, light week, light hour, light minute; not to mention all the metric units.

In certain situations we might choose to define our own units when it happens to be more convenient than using the common ones. It is not unusual to see this in published physics paper, for example.

Aether Audio · « **Reply #62 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 03:06 pm »

sts9fan,

Quote

Bob
thanks for the thoughtful response. I wish you luck proving your theory if that is your goal. Maybe you should contact some universities. I am sure you could find a grad student that may be interested in this.
Have a great weekend
kris

Thank you kris and and the same to you sir!

Quote

The words matter very much. Some are marketing bs and others are science.

Amen to that brother! While I may not have the credentials, I do have the utmost respect for the science community and their unbelievably heroic efforts at times. While I may stretch the boundaries a bit to make what I believe to be a valid point, as in this case it's only to get their attention focused on something that I don't have the means to pursue further. My paper was never intended to be in a form that they would universally recognize and respect as though it were presented from one of their peers... as I'm just a "wannabe," so I'll take "butt whooping" from them and go on. The one thing I will never do is turn on them or dismiss their basic structures that have served all of us so well for so many decades.

A little healthy disrespect for orthodoxy can be a good thing at times, but telling them they have to accept anything that comes along as a valid scientific argument is like calling one of us an idiot - so you tell me if words matter?

Browntrout,

Quote

There are very few people I've talked to on hifi forums who have any idea what electricity is, people consistantly show to me they don't understand in what they write, like the original poster saying electron density changes as current increases this is wrong and shows that his understanding of electricity is incorrect at the BASIC LEVEL.

While I'm not about to get into a debate over this as I don't have time to spend on such fooloishness, I have to say I take strong issue with that statement. While I may be far from a PHD, I'm no novice by a long shot either.

Even my recent paper effort of "sticking my big toe in the pond of scientific levels that are considerably beyond my credentials" has not been shot down by any failure of "first principles" physics by those that are well equiped to do so. I'd say that says something when a guy like me makes waves in an area well outside of his league.

Then you add the fact of my experience. How many guys around here have worked in 40KW power engineering? I've helped to develop an 8-phase, 2MHz switch-mode tracking power supply, 5KHz H-Bridge converter, 16 level/4-bit power DAC and analog amplifier that all operated at 40KW. Heck, when the early H-Bridge converter would blow it went off like a cannon. Plasma would shoot out the 100 amp/3-phase AC breaker box almost 2 feet when the breakers popped and the current was so high running through the metal conduit on the wall that when the wires would snap against the conduit on the inside from the current spike it would shake the walls. By the way... I modified a failing magnetic flux sensor for the transformer in the design and made it work such that it prevented that from happening. Got a nice "ataboy" for that one too.

The upshot is that in every case and in every circuit or piece of test gear, ever since those days to the present, the basic principles of Ohms Law have served me well and never failed to hold true in my observations. If you wanna talk alternative physics and how all of this is an "illusion" - thats cool... I'm open to anything. But in that it would only be an exercise of mental musings for personal entertainment. I have to live and operate within the realm of practical reality, and in that electrons have mass/density and occupy a finite statistical set of limits within the regions of space. I think my science buddies will back me up on this one and even though I may have ruffled their feathers recently, they'll stand by my side in my defense this time. Family members may fight like dogs at times, but when push comes to shove outside the home, we stick together.

-Bob

PS. For those that are interested I've posted some links below that might help in you understanding. I hate to rely completely on Wikipedia... but they were the fastest to find. Caveot Emptor.

The Basics:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauli_exclusion_principle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampere http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power

Regarding My Paper:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brillouin_zone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloch_wave
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debye_temperature

PSS. Pick your units... the physics remain the same.

PSSS. This (*^&*^$ server is whacked! I've edited the format 3 times now and it still shows up screwy!!!

Curly Woods · « **Reply #63 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 03:13 pm »

Quote from: gerald porzio on 24 Oct 2009, 12:24 pm

Current & voltage are hardly arbitrary units. To label them as such shows littlle regard for what is scientifically valid. No wonder Objectionist get their hackles up & shift into attack mode.

They get their hackles up due to the fact that they can not make sense of it with their math. They refuse to use their ears, as they feel that there must be some "bias mechanism" at work with their brains. Jemmenie Christmas. How do people survive if they refuse to trust their own brains! How did they ever learn anything if knowledge is based upon a bias mechanism

I have been listening to cabling system for over 30 years. I have never questioned what I hear as I always repeat the process over and over until I come to a conclusion based on these repeated trials. I truly feel pity for those that do hear the differences, then tell themselves that it must be some form of bias that accounts for these differences. Amazing!

Bob Wilcox · « **Reply #64 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 03:24 pm »

The whitepaper is an interesting read. It occurs to me that for certain designs impedance, dialectrics or other considerations may have large impact relative to metal characteristics. The cables that have bias voltage appled and uncoventional designs like Magnan Signature interconnects (high impedance, conductive paint over substrate conductor) come to mind.

gerald porzio · « **Reply #65 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 03:25 pm »

Their math makes sense because it's formulaic. Current & voltage are verifiable. There's a none too subtle difference what's verifiable & what's claimed. Without getting into a semantic battle, many claims are not verifiable.

Curly Woods · « **Reply #66 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 03:41 pm »

Quote from: gerald porzio on 24 Oct 2009, 03:25 pm

Their math makes sense because it's formulaic. Current & voltage are verifiable. There's a none too subtle difference what's verifiable & what's claimed. Without getting into a semantic battle, many claims are not verifiable.

What claims? That people can hear differences in cabling? Please let's move past this tired diatribe and find the real answers as to why people hear the differences, not the continual put downs that they can't. Why is it the few try to persuade the majority that they are wrong?

gerald porzio · « **Reply #67 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 04:58 pm »

For the simple reason that current & voltage are not arbitrary. I wasn't the one who claimed that they were, & I'm unwilling to let it be claimed that they are. In audio, as in life in general, all is not arbitrary or relative. This no longer has anything to do with the "White Paper".

geezer · « **Reply #68 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 05:21 pm »

Quote from: Browntrout on 24 Oct 2009, 02:49 pm

Natural Units are not arbitary.

"natural" units are just as arbitrary as any others. For convenience sake, it is common in physics to choose unusual units that, in certain applications, simplify equations. These are "natural" for those applications, but would be terrible for most others.

The most common example of this is in the quantum physics of atoms, nuclei, and elementary particles where the factors h/2(pi) and c occur in many equations. (h is Planck's constant, and c is the speed of light.) The "natural", meaning most convenient, choice of units for these applications is one that makes both these factors equal to one.

gerald porzio · « **Reply #69 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 05:37 pm »

It's specious to use quantum physics to claim that voltage & current are arbitrary. One can be proven with mathematical formulas while the other is highly theoretical. It has nothing to do with what audiophile claim to hear. That's not the issue. All is not arbitrary, to wit, water doesn't flow uphill & hot air doesn't descend,

art · « **Reply #70 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 05:37 pm »

Quote from: Bob Wilcox on 24 Oct 2009, 03:24 pm

The whitepaper is an interesting read. It occurs to me that for certain designs impedance, dialectrics or other considerations may have large impact relative to metal characteristics. The cables that have bias voltage appled and uncoventional designs like Magnan Signature interconnects (high impedance, conductive paint over substrate conductor) come to mind.

The reason for the conductive paint is the same thinking that went into the design of Sumiko's OCOS speaker cables. It lowers the frequency where the cable acts like a true transmission line.

Pat

geezer · « **Reply #71 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 05:54 pm »

Quote from: gerald porzio on 24 Oct 2009, 05:37 pm

It's specious to use quantum physics to claim that voltage & current are arbitrary. One can be proven with mathematical formulas while the other is highly theoretical. It has nothing to do with what audiophile claim to hear. That's not the issue. All is not arbitrary, to wit, water doesn't flow uphill & hot air doesn't descend,

I don't think anyone said all is arbitrary. I don't think anyone said voltage and current are arbitrary (whatever that means). I said choice of units is arbitrary.

I don't understand your distinction between quantum theory and electromagnetic theory. Both are expressed in terms of mathematical equations.

And finally, my post made no reference at all to audiophile claims.

TerryO · « **Reply #72 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 06:11 pm »

Quote from: Curly Woods on 21 Oct 2009, 06:47 pm

Quote from: JimJ on 21 Oct 2009, 06:02 pm
Quote
They have no idea how to be civil with anyone

Uh...

A lot of us here are also on DIY.

I have no comment about the original post, but...c'mon.

Jim You must be familiar with Sy and his henchmen's attitude over there. They lack any degree of civility. Their idea of civility is figuring out how to belittle you in such a way as to not be construed as a personal attack. It is a game to them. You either agree with their views or be prepared to be skewered! No in between with them. I can honestly say that I have never been to site that has so many people that are purely hateful in my life.

I post on AC and diyaudio and have to say that one of the worst flame fests I've ever witnessed was an attack by an AC group on a couple of DIY people that had posted on diyaudio. Comments in that thread were taken out of context by one individual, posted on AC and the lynching began. It was obvious that nobody on AC bothered to actually read the original post on diyaudio. Taken as a whole, the comments in the diyaudio thread were quite different from what they were portrayed as. In spite of the efforts of a few to try to explain that to them, it was absolutely futile.
It would seem that the fundamental requirement of any discussion, namely the ability to read (and to consider what was written) in a critical manner was completely lacking. The level of mass hysteria in that AC thread was enough to convince me that the Salem witchcraft trials were a closely reasoned, unbiased presentation of facts by comparison.

Best Regards,
TerryO

Curly Woods · « **Reply #73 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 06:38 pm »

Quote from: TerryO on 24 Oct 2009, 06:11 pm

Quote from: Curly Woods on 21 Oct 2009, 06:47 pm
Quote from: JimJ on 21 Oct 2009, 06:02 pm
Quote
They have no idea how to be civil with anyone

Uh...

A lot of us here are also on DIY.

I have no comment about the original post, but...c'mon.

Jim You must be familiar with Sy and his henchmen's attitude over there. They lack any degree of civility. Their idea of civility is figuring out how to belittle you in such a way as to not be construed as a personal attack. It is a game to them. You either agree with their views or be prepared to be skewered! No in between with them. I can honestly say that I have never been to site that has so many people that are purely hateful in my life.

I post on AC and diyaudio and have to say that one of the worst flame fests I've ever witnessed was an attack by an AC group on a couple of DIY people that had posted on diyaudio. Comments in that thread were taken out of context by one individual, posted on AC and the lynching began. It was obvious that nobody on AC bothered to actually read the original post on diyaudio. Taken as a whole, the comments in the diyaudio thread were quite different from what they were portrayed as. In spite of the efforts of a few to try to explain that to them, it was absolutely futile.
It would seem that the fundamental requirement of any discussion, namely the ability to read (and to consider what was written) in a critical manner was completely lacking. The level of mass hysteria in that AC thread was enough to convince me that the Salem witchcraft trials were a closely reasoned, unbiased presentation of facts by comparison.

Best Regards,
TerryO

Terry,

I guess I have never noticed anything "EVER" like I have seen on the DIY Audio forums before. It is like a lynch mob mentality. People try to describe things that they hear and they are beaten and ridiculed as "delusional" and "insane" on top of the innuendo that reigns down like a flash flood over there. Either you provide scientific reasoning, or you are obviously a quack to almost all of the moderators and their followers. I only know what I hear, not why. Their belief is that if you think that you hear anything, then you must be one brick short of a full load is childish and reprehensible. They could at least act like human beings, but they seem to want to beat you down and run you off rather than even consider the notions.
Personal attacks are OK if you are one of the moderators or their followers it would seem. It is difficut to stand up for yourself, for if you do you will either be banned or placed on "moderator approval only" to post. Then they censor you and not allow you the opportunity to address the low rent scum that attack like dogs. I for one am sick of the treatment.

ted_b · « **Reply #74 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 06:42 pm »

This thread is rarely on topic. I propose that Bob shuts it down, or that the "who's-worse-DIY-or-AC ?" gang take it somewhere else please..

Curly Woods · « **Reply #75 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 06:46 pm »

Quote from: ted_b on 24 Oct 2009, 06:42 pm

This thread is rarely on topic. I propose that Bob shuts it down, or that the "who's-worse-DIY-or-AC ?" gang take it somewhere else please..

Sorry if this upsets you. Bob commented on how he was attacked on DIY Audio with never saying a single word to anyone over there. I sent him an email to let him know so that he might defend himself against those morons. I guess it does have something to do with this thread, but you are right, it was not the original intent.

Browntrout · « **Reply #76 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 06:55 pm »

Quote from: ted_b on 24 Oct 2009, 06:42 pm

This thread is rarely on topic. I propose that Bob shuts it down, or that the "who's-worse-DIY-or-AC ?" gang take it somewhere else please..

I think you are wrong to say this thread is rarely on topic and also wrong and out of order to suggest that it gets shut down.

On another point if the OP is unwilling to enter into debate with me (he only said with me, no doubt he'll talk to others

) and specifically admit to being incorrect regards electron density increasing with current then there is no point in me posting , which I'm sure most will be releaved about.

doug s. · « **Reply #77 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 06:58 pm »

Quote from: gerald porzio on 24 Oct 2009, 03:25 pm

...There's a none too subtle difference what's verifiable & what's claimed. Without getting into a semantic battle, many claims are not verifiable.

true - many claims are not werifiable, not yust in audio, but everywhere. but, yust because a claim is not werifiable, this does not ipso facto mean it is not true. some unwerifiable claims are true, some not. it's funny that many people believe everything unwerifiable is therefore not true.

reading this thread is a trip!

doug s.

maxwalrath · « **Reply #78 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 07:01 pm »

Quote from: Browntrout on 24 Oct 2009, 06:55 pm

Quote from: ted_b on 24 Oct 2009, 06:42 pm
This thread is rarely on topic. I propose that Bob shuts it down, OR that the "who's-worse-DIY-or-AC ?" gang take it somewhere else please..

I think you are wrong to say this thread is rarely on topic and also wrong and out of order to suggest that it gets shut down.

On another point if the OP is unwilling to enter into debate with me (he only said with me, no doubt he'll talk to others ) and specifically admit to being incorrect regards electron density increasing with current then there is no point in me posting , which I'm sure most will be releaved about.

I think the key word in ted's suggestion is OR. The AC/DIY debate is off topic, and it's pretty clear that's what he's saying.

ted_b · « **Reply #79 on:** 24 Oct 2009, 07:04 pm »

I realize it started to grow from this thread, but it's so far off topic now that it's distracting to Bob's theories and white paper (the original intent of the thread IMO). Maybe I'm off base, but seems like the bickering noise is a lot louder than the arguments for and against his ideas.

Browntrout, I don't think he has an issue with your being allowed to have contention about electron density...it's only your somewhat rude comments that started with he has "no idea what electricity is". Keep in mind this is his Circle, he posted a revolutionary topic, and wants some healthy debate. But to start your side of the debate with, basically, "you're stupid" is likely gonna polarize the topic. Ya think?