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

         Should anyone need a rationale for trying new cables or fuses in their system and is dissuaded by the Naysayer Church's antiquated electrical doctrines: take heart!

        Many new electrical facts have been established in the past 100 years, that support audible differences, between various cables, etc.

         I couldn't find anything like, "Updated Electrical Theory For Idiots", but- did manage to find something resembling a cartoon, that even a child (perhaps: even, the POOF) could follow.  It neither mentions AC in wires, nor does it go into the photon propagation of electromagnetic waves.   It does, however, emphasize/demonstrate how Electrical Theory has progressed, since the 1800s:

              (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGJqykotjog)

        These next few presuppose a certain amount of knowledge, in the field of modern Electrical Theory.    Click, "more" in the first link's first answer, to get it's entirety.    Note how it mentions the OLD, "... commonly held misconception that the flow of electricity through a wire resembles a tube filled with ping pong balls...", to which the Naysayers fervently adhere.  

https://www.quora.com/Are-photons-involved-in-all-forms-of-electricity-for-example-when-it-flows-through-wires?utm_medium=organic&utm_source=google_rich_qa&utm_campaign=google_rich_qa

                                            and:

        https://van.physics.illinois.edu/qa/listing.php?id=2348

        It's an established (measured) fact that an electromagnetic wave's propagation and speed, are dependent on the materials, of which the transmission line (cable) are made (ie: Dielectric Constant/permittivity).     The better (lower) the Dielectric Constant the better the flow and the longer it takes for that material, to become polarized.     One reason that anything that comprises an LC circuit (ie: capacitors, cables, PC boards), takes time to, "form", or, "break/burn-in".*      

          *Something that makes the Naysayers apoplectic.

   https://resources.pcb.cadence.com/blog/2019-dielectric-constant-of-pcb-substrate-materials-and-signa....

   https://unlcms.unl.edu/cas/physics/tsymbal/teaching/EM-914/section4-Electromagnetic_Waves_2.pdf

          Even the most inane (regarding the sciences) must admit; braiding and twisting wires eliminates/reduces EMI interference.              
          That must lend credence to various cable geometries.

          That better dielectrics enhance the propagation of electromagnetic waves (ie: your music signal), lends the same credence to choosing cables with better materials (ie: Polypropylene, Teflon, air, etc).

           Of course: anything the Naysayer Church's popes can't fathom, they'll summarily dismiss.

                           PATHETIC twits, that they are!  🙄

                     btw: Someone mentioned lifting cables off carpeting.

        Whether that's audible or not: I can't say, as none of mine have ever been on the carpet, in the past 40 years..

         I can say: whatever your cables are contacting, along their lengths, will become a part of their dielectrics, which can (potentially) affect signal propagation.

         Some carpeting/flooring is manufactured of really bad materials (re: permittivity).

                                                       Just sayin'.

      Make that, "Of course: anything the Naysayer Church's popes can't fathom, they'll VACUOUSLY dismiss."

                                It's their modus operandi.

Look class! This is the sound someone makes when they can’t produce a reasoned rebuttal to an argument.

Sorry but all your "arguments" are sophism around a mantra...the mantra is Blind-test....Your idea of science is akin to a comic book fiction... and in this comic book superman is a scientific superpower debunking astrology and ground bare walking.... Is it not pitiful enough?


Ears are not replaceable by equations or arguments...

Psycho-acoustic use measures, very precise one, of all kinds, but none of them replace hearing experience or even explain it...Psycho-acoustic is precisely an exploration of hearing mysteries...One of the problem for example covered in a 800 hundred page book i own is : what is musical timbre...


Save for religious scientism mind, measure of electronic design is very far to explain what we hear through and audiob system or what we could hear with an improved  an audio system modified by many embeddings controls......

Dont test your ears ,educate it....

No human ears is perfect for sure, no need to prove it at all, but all ears can be educated by our own strike of EXPERIMENTS...For our own pleasure....

This audiophile claims of mine is not a zealot mantra like your obsession with blind test but an invitation to be creative....

Well, I asked for a clear example from rodman99999 about some tweak he "hears" making a difference at home, and we get yet more scattershot rambling and links...as if someone else needs to do the job to piece it all together.


Again, this is a thread about science and audio.


rodman99999, if you are such a fan of science, you must acknowledge the relevance of blind testing, right?   Have you successfully passed any blind tests for your tweaks?


That's the problem:  for most if not all the controversial claims in high end audio, nobody has produced reliable results showing people can tell differences when they are not peeking.


*(there are some intriguing reports here and there, e.g. occasionally for cables, but there doesn't seem to be any sturdy replication of these results to put the debate to rest).