Corona: FWIW, I am not, among other things (like being an engineer or scientifically trained), a 'measurements uber-alles' type who doesn't like to rely on his ears (not that I feel ears can't be fooled!). It would be a false sylogism to suggest that someone discounting your string theory inferences is by implication rejecting subjective auditioning, or is a 'slave' to design-by-numbers. I tend to believe that there are likely many aspects of audio design for which there may not be very informative quantitative measurements available, and that qualitative judgements ultimately must come down to the human ear. For the most part, I am open to the proposition that any piece of gear deserves to be judged by listening to it, but there is simply too much gear in this world, and one of the factors I employ in the winnowing-out process is to preemtively reject gear I feel is being marketed based on some sort of specious claim, such as the fast'n'loose bandying about of pseudo-science, or the deceptive distortion/excessive extrapolation of true science.
So though I feel I am reasonably open-minded without being gullible, I do want my gear designed by scientifically competent engineers, and I likewise want its performance attributes explained in some sort of plausible scientific context. There may be some merit to your claims regarding 'symmetrical resonance' between PC's and PS's or whatever, I don't know. All I know (OK, think, but I'm sticking to it - at least until you come up with a more coherent argument than, essentially, 'you know too little to disprove me') is that even if those claims were supportable, they would still have nothing to do with sub-sub-atomic theory and nothing to do with field unification, as three of the forces involved (strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force, gravity) haven't any bearing on electromagnetic phenomena observable or manipulable on a human scale within the present state of our universe, to the best of my knowledge. I suppose if one wanted to design a cable exclusively for use at the moment of the Big Bang, then a working knowledge of a valid unification theory might come in handy. (That was a joke.) Until then, I'm taking the eminently non-revolutionary position that you're working within the same parameters of physical possibility as any other cable designer, but that you enjoy pretending otherwise, dubious as I personally am about that plan's marketing efficaciousness.
So though I feel I am reasonably open-minded without being gullible, I do want my gear designed by scientifically competent engineers, and I likewise want its performance attributes explained in some sort of plausible scientific context. There may be some merit to your claims regarding 'symmetrical resonance' between PC's and PS's or whatever, I don't know. All I know (OK, think, but I'm sticking to it - at least until you come up with a more coherent argument than, essentially, 'you know too little to disprove me') is that even if those claims were supportable, they would still have nothing to do with sub-sub-atomic theory and nothing to do with field unification, as three of the forces involved (strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force, gravity) haven't any bearing on electromagnetic phenomena observable or manipulable on a human scale within the present state of our universe, to the best of my knowledge. I suppose if one wanted to design a cable exclusively for use at the moment of the Big Bang, then a working knowledge of a valid unification theory might come in handy. (That was a joke.) Until then, I'm taking the eminently non-revolutionary position that you're working within the same parameters of physical possibility as any other cable designer, but that you enjoy pretending otherwise, dubious as I personally am about that plan's marketing efficaciousness.