The Science of Cables

In 1961, when Wigner introduced the idea that would eventually become known as "Wigner’s friend," only one scenario was used. With the new experiment, it was doubled and the results that Wigner had first discussed more than 50 years still rang true.

Quantum mechanics gives detail on how the world works at a scale so small that the rules of physics do not apply, Live Science added. With the new findings of the study, the field of quantum mechanics may change if measurements are not the same for everyone.

"It seems that, in contrast to classical physics, measurement results cannot be considered absolute truth but must be understood relative to the observer who performed the measurement," Ringbauer told Live Science. "The stories we tell about quantum mechanics have to adapt to that."

~~~~~~~~~~~

Note: the underlying characteristic of all Newtonian objectivity is entirely quantum mechanical in nature and type.

That above excerpt regards a study that was released the other day.

And a thousand other places to look and find more supporting data, if one is brave enough to look.

This is how groups if ’deniers’ can do a multitude of ’psychic sensitivity’ testing at the most rigorous levels of quality possible and always come up empty.

Where those who believe that psychic sensitivity is real, when enacting the most rigorous scientifically objectively enacted studies (just like deniers) will receive back...a perfect confirmation of it’s reality. As they have in thousands of instances of rigorously perfected studies, for many decades.

It really is: You get back what you put out. Objectivity cannot and does not exist. It is a figment of your imagination and projections, as tied to the underlying nature of reality.

So, in essence, you can ignore this study and shut your mind from recalling this point. (which quite a few will) and you will be successful in that, as that path through reality takes over...

Or you can go and find the other thousands of data points that support the reality of objectivity’s non existence - the impossibility of classical objectivity. And then move toward ruminating all of reality, not just self created boxes and limits. The ’problem’ for the objective ground hugger mentality, is... linear space-time takes a hit so hard it openly fails in this space, this reality, in the now.

What the situation says...is...You are free to lie to yourself however you may want about what you project, and you will interact with those realities and ’receive’ them. Or you can look at the world in how it truly is, where potential and reality is tied to you and what you can accept, understand, and bring into this world.

Essentially, the monkey has to get smart, get it straight, and finally relax, or it’s going to kill us all.

What does this have to do with contentious argument threads about audio?

Well, obviously...everything. Cable deniers, hearing deniers, logic deniers, etc.

Electricity by necessity, by reality, by fundamentals, is a quantum calculation and system. So is the human mind.

Hence the line, "feel free to disagree'.

But the reality says.... that one may be butchering themselves and their potential...in the process. And never know it, or understand it.

Of course you don’t have to consider quantum mechanics for almost all everyday calculations or observations. So let’s not get too carried away. Nor does the FAA or Boeing have to consider quantum mechanics when it performs its extensive and comprehensive testing for critical systems, you know, like navigation, radars, avionics, air-ground radios and flight dynamics software. Let’s not make this more complicated than it has to be. 

GPS location calculations use quantum adjustment, but I agree with the point.  Generally quantum mechanics are required for things outside of normal human scale - very far, very small, very fast.

And indeed, electrons and soundwaves are quantum-scale. Nonetheless, without evidence of human-perceived palpable differences, bringing quantum theory into a discussion of human-perceived palpable differences in cables looks like hand-waving to me.  I could be wrong, as always, but none of the quantum references here have looked like cogent arguments, rather indirect allusions to possibilities that don't seem to be connected to real world listening.

The issue for me is simply that if I perceive a difference only in a sighted test with the encouragement of a motivated onlooker (dealer), but can't perceive that difference accurately under controlled conditions, why, exactly, am I spending more than most people make in a quarter (or $1k a year of retirement income, depending on my age) on it?

And then there's a question of whether even a palpable difference at the dealer matters much to your repeated daily listening pleasure at home. Right now I'm previewing the programs I'll hear at the NY Philharmonic tonight and Wednesday.  I'm using my ancient beloved Thiels, which have no tweeter in the right channel.  It bugs me, and plays havoc with the cello section and winds locations, but I'm still loving the music. 

 I thought I heard a difference between a direct and conditioned ethernet cable (to my chagrin), but it wasn't huge.  I thought the introduction of a power conditioner and Naim separates was a material step *down* from the Naim Uniti (some remaining question in my mind as to whether the dealer took the speakers out of phase, as the image died, but he did sit down next to me and immediately tell me how much more awesome it sounded). None of these differences were big enough to merit a lot of money.

A separate and personal question indeed, but I spent 20 years listening to the same speakers and amp happily, with only two changes of source as tech developed from SACD to hi-res streaming.  What differences are *material enough*, let alone distinguishable blindfolded, that I can spend the money and achieve that again?