Swing and a total miss @teo_audio. Once again, you are attempting to deflect from your own inadequacies and trying to make this about me, and not your inability to support the rather outlandish statements you have made. As a commercial interest, which you are, it is not only morally and ethically defunct to make claims that cannot be supported there are other implications. I suggest you should threaten me less, and think more about what you are posting and whether you can factually support what you claim.
You have the floor here teo_audio. Instead of your ill-attempt to attack me, I suggest your concentrate more on justifying what you, as a commercial interest, wrote. 1) I would start with that 1 pico-second claim. That would be the best place to start. I would suggest using evidence from actual experts in the field, not some random conjecture on the web. 2) Then I would think about your claims about digitization in the MHZ claim. 3) Then I would try to justify your claim that 100% -- 100% of our hearing is based purely on the transient edge. Then 4th, why not the one that is easy for you, show us how liquid metals defy inductance measurements. That should be easy since that is your expertise. If you want, you can justify some of those other liquid metal claims. Perhaps cite some scientific papers like I did??
p.s. I actually posted my bio here. Feel free to search for it. I do not now, nor have I ever received a dime from direct sales of home audio equipment unless you count selling my used gear :-) It would be best to find another tree to bark up. I have no advantage, hidden or otherwise, except knowledge. I do not put words in your mouth. You have the ability to control your own actions including what you post on these forums. Govern yourself accordingly. If you cannot justify what you wrote, that does not reflect on me, that reflects on you. Act appropriately.
You have the floor here teo_audio. Instead of your ill-attempt to attack me, I suggest your concentrate more on justifying what you, as a commercial interest, wrote. 1) I would start with that 1 pico-second claim. That would be the best place to start. I would suggest using evidence from actual experts in the field, not some random conjecture on the web. 2) Then I would think about your claims about digitization in the MHZ claim. 3) Then I would try to justify your claim that 100% -- 100% of our hearing is based purely on the transient edge. Then 4th, why not the one that is easy for you, show us how liquid metals defy inductance measurements. That should be easy since that is your expertise. If you want, you can justify some of those other liquid metal claims. Perhaps cite some scientific papers like I did??
p.s. I actually posted my bio here. Feel free to search for it. I do not now, nor have I ever received a dime from direct sales of home audio equipment unless you count selling my used gear :-) It would be best to find another tree to bark up. I have no advantage, hidden or otherwise, except knowledge. I do not put words in your mouth. You have the ability to control your own actions including what you post on these forums. Govern yourself accordingly. If you cannot justify what you wrote, that does not reflect on me, that reflects on you. Act appropriately.