Why is science just a starting point and not an end point?


Measurements are useful to verify specifications and identify any underlying issues that might be a concern. Test tones are used to show how equipment performs below audible levels but how music performs at listening levels is the deciding criteria. In that regard science fails miserably.

Why is it so?
pedroeb
     "So we wee that tired old refrain from some audiophiles "Science has been wrong before you know!" and "science doesn't know everything!"
     "It's the same refrain used by every crackpot theory in the world.
Ask yourself: When science has been corrected: how was it corrected?"
     "You don't get to say "I'm justified in believing something that contradicts or isn't validated by current science...because MAYBE science is wrong and we'll discover I'm right."   Literally any nonsense idea would fly under such conditions."

     It's the complete (or: perhaps, willful) ignorance of so many, as to what's either been proven and/or obviated, since the dawn of the Scientific Method, that still astounds me.

     It's not so much that Science has been proven, "wrong", but: that it's moved on, in so many areas.

      What those that adamantly want their antiquated, "Science" to make sense (ie: their Math to eloquently balance, or: their universe to yet be based on Newtonian, or strictly Relativity principles) have missed, is that, SO OFTEN: what's been observed and tested/proven makes no sense.

       That's been the argument between some of the greatest minds, especially in the area of Physics an Electrical Theory, since the early 1920s.

        Anyone that's been paying any attention, AT ALL, to what's been happening subsequent to that time period; would be up on all of that!

         For one NOT to be current, on what's been going on; as regards the inventions and scientific proofs, based on such a, "crackpot theory" as either QM or QED and yet refer to themselves as a, "prof", seems to me: the height of hubris.

         UNLESS of course: they were a Professor in a field such as Geology or one of the Liberal Arts (ie: Home Economics).    
                                                  In which case: my apologies!
   Correction, for clarity:  "That's been the argument between some of the greatest minds, especially in the areas of Physics AND Electrical Theory, since the early 1920s."
Science is the starting point and it is the end point in audio reproduction. Science is what gave us the medium and tools to enjoy music from the wax cylinder to digital storage and on to processes unknown. It won't be brain dead audiophiles arguing over $200 fuses and $10,000 cables and the shilers that promote them but the theoretician and engineer that fails and succeeds that moves us forward. Scientists who "argue" over the esoteric boundaries of QM have no interest in the mundane workings of basic sound reproduction. Any new findings from research in areas of nanotechnology, nanoparticles,  quantum interactions etc.. that may trickle down to the audiophile bubble will be the result of dedicated engineering not the smear this goop on your wires crackpots. 
"Science is what gave us the medium and tools to enjoy music from the wax cylinder to digital storage and on to processes unknown. It won't be brain dead audiophiles arguing over $200 fuses and $10,000 cables and the shilers that promote them but the theoretician and engineer that fails and succeeds that moves us forward. Scientists who "argue" over the esoteric boundaries of QM have no interest in the mundane workings of basic sound reproduction."

                                      Thanks again.

      That exemplifies the kind of ignorance, to which I referred!

      ie: Were it not for the study of QM and QED: there would be no, "digital storage" to enjoy.    Nor: LASERs, transistors/semiconductors, home computers/laptops, smart phones, atomic clocks, GPS, MRIs, etc.

      That's NOT any kind of debate.     It's what's known as, "HISTORY"!
 
                                    Talk about, "brain-dead"!

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/everyday-quantum-physics/

       Even the wiki-physicists have more understanding, than some in this forum (how pathetic):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_quantum_mechanics
You're unable to comprehend what was written or being intentionally obtuse. Noone is debating digital storage, lasers , laptops, smart phones. PET, MRI etc.. those are not the "esoteric" boundaries of QM those are the practical results of years of research. Those who research these areas have very little to no interest in the practical results that's the province of applied science. And once again it will be the engineers and technicians who apply this knowledge not the ignorant who think sound reproduction is some mysterious goop slopped on a wire or cable lifters isolating EM fields from carpets.