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
Post removed 
       "Reality is merely an illusion," Einstein once admitted, "albeit a very persistent one."

                                  re: that falling tree...

                https://blog.oup.com/2011/02/quantum/

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

                              Is a scientific, "end point" possible?

       For inquiring minds, as opposed to the (so common) expiring ones:

https://www.livescience.com/65628-theory-of-everything-millennia-away.html
@millercarbon. +1

I was trained as a scientist and practiced professionally as one for ten years. I have used the methods and approaches for my entire life in all aspects of my career and life. Science is the starting point and it is like peeling the layers of an onion… you learn about one layer after another, towards full knowledge at greater levels of detail.


If high end audio had a large multidisciplinary group of scientists that were not working for profit and we’re publishing their results for the last fifty years we would have research documenting all component characteristic and be able predict several levels below where general knowledge is today. Many companies have drilled down many layers.. typically in the design processes and material science. But they do not make it public knowledge for obvious reasons.
Post removed