What do we hear when we change the direction of a wire?

I was reading an article about a month ago saying the brain is more like a network than a single computer. 

Sorry a bit off topic. 

I observed a UFO last night, I'll verify it was a valid UFO. 

The brain is not a computer at all and one of the greatest scientist think so with many others.. ( Penrose/Hameroff) and there is others...

Forgetting for a minute that Penrose has limited to zil knowledge of modern theoretical neuroscience, this is not at all what he claimed. What he claimed, paraphrasing and summarizing, is that the brain can tap into quantum computing. That is still computing.  He is misquoted or selectively quoted as saying "not computational", but in full context, more accurately it would be not algorithmic, though many brain and thought processes absolutely are.  Of course, this is just a mental exercise, outside his area of expertise, and for all the brilliance, many brilliant people make leaps outside and inside their expertise that turn out to be colossally wrong. We shall see, but at the base, he did not say "not a computer", in fact he specifically references quantum computing.


This is a topic for another thread, and really quite meaningless within the scope of the topic, and pure diversion, as it matters not how the brain works, it only matters the outcome, that outcome being whether you can audibly discern the direction of wire. 

Sorry for not using quotes, there's too much, I will try to just write my thoughts.
If we accept the theory that homo sapiens emerged around 300.000 years ago, and Hertz came up with his theory about 120 years ago and was officially accepted/adopted ~60 years ago, it's quite a young theory compared to mankind. And if everything we scientifically know and measure is based on such a young theory there could potentially be things we don't yet know or understand. As every generation thought they knew everything there is to know and proven wrong time after time, we could experience the same, maybe in our lifetime. It's more like a thought-provoking exercise, not an assumption nor stating facts.

Regarding the acquired taste concept, I believe it's true to wine, food sound, and other things. It's the phenomenon that you don't know what you don't know. I didn't know what was hidden in music while I was listening on simple headphones or speakers in a room full of reflections.
As I started to optimize, get more resolution, more clarity, got rid of some reflections, I started to hear things that were not there before. If some soundwaves cancel each other out you might not perceive them. If some equipment colours the sound, or simply doesn't have the capability to transmit it to your ears, you won't know about it. But once you hear it once you will miss it if it's not there anymore. Same as with food or wine, or with driving a fast car. When you go from 50hp to 150hp you feel the wow effect, then you get used to it and you will miss the power if it's not there. Once you taste really amazing food, you will miss it when you go back to salt and pepper. If you try really amazing wine you will notice the difference when drinking a simple wine, even though it might please you just as much. But to know what you don't know you need to experience it first. So maybe, there is something science cannot explain but you can feel it, once the environment is prepared to reveal it, when your system and listening room and your own experience reaches that point, maybe the direction of a cable can make a difference. Maybe science did not discover everything there is to discover. It usually starts from the point that is considered and accepted as the non-disputable truth, then works from there. But there many theories which someday might be challenged, it's all relative in the end :)

I think a blind test using one's own equipment if the person is open-minded, self-aware, and critical, could work, it would also imply using a wire which is built exactly the same, except the actual direction, meaning no ground on one side of the connectors and no special electronics etc., that obviously skew the results, just simple soldered connectors. 

Forgetting for a minute that Penrose has limited to zil knowledge of modern theoretical neuroscience, this is not at all what he claimed. What he claimed, paraphrasing and summarizing, is that the brain can tap into quantum computing. That is still computing. He is misquoted or selectively quoted as saying "not computational", but in full context, more accurately it would be not algorithmic, though many brain and thought processes absolutely are

Hameroff is a specialist in neurons microtubules...He works with him for 20 years and more...

And ALL computations are algorithmic by definition of a computation...Quantum "computations" are more a controlled physical process first which we will harness second, like a horse, with classical computers for rider...

The brain does not tap in an hypothetic quantum cosmic computer for Penrose....You dont know his "orchestrated objective reduction" theory sorry.... I made another point here...


Simple to correct you in 5 seconds with WIKI( the uppercase is mine) :


« Penrose suggested that objective reduction represents neither randomness nor algorithmic processing but instead a NON-COMPUTABLE influence in spacetime geometry from which mathematical understanding and, by later extension, consciousness derives.[18]

You are right it is OFF topic but i could not let this pass free....

By the way there is no best theory of consciousness in neurology circle save the Phi theory of Tononi...which is interesting but way less deep and revolutionary....Anyway none of the 2 are incompatible with one another and what i like with Tononi is the separation between intelligence and conciousness... I think Tononi is right with that relative separation....
😊

For the direction of the wire i cannot discuss i will let Anton speak for him...I dont experimented with wire direction myself then....

I am interested by Essien more....