scientific double blinded cable test

Interesting. Got a link?

Here's a 1 cent challenge for all of you. Point to one business / professional area (science, communications, pro audio, IT, cryptology, military, medicine, power, space exploration, aviation, etc)  where cable directionality is a technical standard. Link that standard, please.

Big deal. No one ever suggested there was a standard for directionality. Recall directionality is sound related only. Duh! There are no technical standards for Polarity, for soundstage, for realism, for room acoustics, for speaker placement, for vibration, for RFI/EMI, for Noise, for Distortion, frequency response, dynamic range. Yet somehow we are able to find our way. Well, sometimes...fortunately, directionality is often the easiest to get to the bottom of. All you have to do is reverse the cable or fuse, whatever. Fortunately some companies control directionality, even for power cords making it pretty much a no brainer. No comment.  I wouldn’t hold my breath for a MIL STD for directionality any time real soon. 😡

@nugat

It’s not a concern for their particular forms of use.


@Geoff

As for Randi’s lack of validity, that is easy to find on the interwebs. I cannot immediately find the web link for the ’scientific regimen’ test designing dude’s report on Randi’s test, but here’s quite the bit of damning evidence in just one article out of what is likely to be more than a few.

https://weilerpsiblog.wordpress.com/randis-million-dollar-challenge/

Sorry, that article you linked to is completely inaccurate. Randi’s education foundation is/was loaded to the gills with technical folks who helped Randi develop his test procedures. Randi had precious little to do with it. He did not get involved with discussions with potential challengers either. He had a committee that dealt with all that. Randi was neither technical nor an audiophile. He was a magician.