onto themselves
It's unto themselves.
If you're going to claim to be exact, might want to get grammarly. And a headshot of yourself on Madrona's website that isn't 40 years old.
Did Amir Change Your Mind About Anything?
It’s easy to make snide remarks like “yes- I do the opposite of what he says.” And in some respects I agree, but if you do that, this is just going to be taken down. So I’m asking a serious question. Has ASR actually changed your opinion on anything? For me, I would say 2 things. I am a conservatory-trained musician and I do trust my ears. But ASR has reminded me to double check my opinions on a piece of gear to make sure I’m not imagining improvements. Not to get into double blind testing, but just to keep in mind that the brain can be fooled and make doubly sure that I’m hearing what I think I’m hearing. The second is power conditioning. I went from an expensive box back to my wiremold and I really don’t think I can hear a difference. I think that now that I understand the engineering behind AC use in an audio component, I am not convinced that power conditioning affects the component output. I think.
So please resist the urge to pile on. I think this could be a worthwhile discussion if that’s possible anymore. I hope it is.
- ...
- 1423 posts total
Now being unable to answer my point about the IMPOSSIBILITY and UNSCIENTIFIC attitude which consist as you did and trying to convince others that a small linear set of electrical measures from Fourier Maps are the only OBJECTIVE way to qualify audio audible impressions QUALITIES, because if not , they are anyway "illusions" or artefacts we must eliminated by blind test, this techno babble ideology has nothing to do with psycho-acoustic as demonstrated CLEARLY not only by the results of Oppenheim and Magnasco but by the way they constructed their experimental protocol to demonstrate the way the ears/brain do not compute mere Fourier maps but perceived REAL QUALITATVE INFORMATION FROM THE REAL NATURAL ENVIRONMENT in his time dependant domain and extract this information essential for his survival in a non linear way... What is your answer and argument AGAINST this fact ? Instead treating me like a deluded idiot you set me a childish trap with a paradox in quantum theory... If i explain to you the solution , you will not be able to UNDERSTAND it... I will also treat you as you treat me, i know how to liquidated your paradox , and i will suggest to you first TWO solutions at this paradox, one in non commutative geometry by Alain Connes about TIME in this video : "the shape of music."...and i will briefly resume it :"The thermal time hypothesis has been put forward as a possible solution to this problem by Carlo Rovelli and Alain Connes, both in classical and quantum theory. It postulates that physical time flow is not an a priori given fundamental property of the theory, but is a macroscopic feature of thermodynamical origin." For clarity i will add this "The thermal time hypothesis predicts that the ratio of the observer's proper time to his statistical time – the time flow that emerges from Connes and Rovelli's ideas – is the temperature he measures around him. It so happens that every event horizon has an associated temperature."
there exist another solution which do not contradict this one but complement it but you are not able to understand it sorry ... it is in the Book by the physicist Anirban Bandyopadhyay; Nanobrain or how to make an artificial brain with time crystals...
Now instead of playing with me as an idiot ANSWER WHY MY OBJECTION TO YOUR REDUCTION OF AUDIBLE QUALITIES TO ELECTRICAL FOURIER MAPS OF ELECTRICAL CIRCUITS IS WRONG ?
|
Why asking ? Is it not evident i am an idiot ? 😊 i know how to read...Prove me wrong... i am interested by links between fields, cracks between theories.. My most important reflection subject was the links between semiotic and linguistic.. I am interested by number theory meanings for philosophy... I am interested by the way the Temple of Louxor was designed.. I am interested by the meaning of the poetic act speech... I am interested by categoey theory in the approach of Alexander Grothendieck... i am interested by the links between all that and more.. i like Dyonysos the areopagite the syrian mystic and the link between his three methods and set theory through Cantor works ... i studied it for 10 years... Etc.. I am interested by the morphology of mammals and the Goethe method in the work of the physicist Henri Bortoft...< I am interested by The work of Swedenborg about reality and quantum theory... i dont understand for now the link with Roger Boscovich... i am interested bby READING and THINKING... I am interested by the difference and similarity between Goethe more oriented perceptual phenomenology and Husserl more oriented conceptual phenomenology and their deep link through the "crisis of modern science" the deep last book of Husserl..... i am interested by the way human brain perceived QUALITIES and OBJECTIVE INFORMATION from sound source in natural environment.. I am interested by the PHYSICAL OBJECTIVE INVARIANT which explain the information of sound sources to the geaturing and acting human body and why our generative ability to become sound source ourself and produce sound conditioned nature affordances and conditioned us in a particular direction of time to extract what is useful to our survival in a non linear way because our cochlea is non linear... By the way what is a spiral as mathematical object and symbolic object as Cassirer called them "symbolic forms" ... it is why the thesis that audible informative qualities which must be reducible to ONLY Fourier electrical map seems preposterous to me . We need an ecological set of experiments protocols to understand hearing... you are not able to understand a two page psycho-acoustic article it seems NOBODY answer me ANYTHING about it Amir dance around it with his measures schemas without adressing it : Magnasco and Oppenheim https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.044301 |
- 1423 posts total