What is the science behind audiophile fuses?

I have had SR purples in my Primaluna pre and power for a couple of years and loved them, but it took about 20 hours of play to really start to hear what they were doing. At 50 hours the juice really started to come on.

A few weeks ago I added the SR "Master" fuse to my Holo Audio May Level 3 Kitsune DAC. The Holo May came with a "Nano Red" fuse which claimed audiophile level enhancement. The pricey Master fuse had a 30 day trial period, so I thought, "why not?" This fuse takes somewhat longer to break in than the Purples, but it has been worth the wait. There is more "solidity" and tonal accuracy along with sound stage enhancement with an increase in detail - clearer sustain and decay - all the goodies. The Master was played as much as I could within the 30 day trial period. At first the fuse sounded a bit stiff and flat footed, but then opened up after about 20 hours. Now after about 200 hours it has bloomed extraordinarily. Again, make sure you take the time to play it as much as possible within the 30-day window.

These are being played through Cornwall 4 horn speakers, and it may be that high sensitivity speakers show these fuses off better,

"Science can’t prove the earth is older than 6000 years. "

@tonywinga ,

I suggest a bit of in depth research on radiocarbon dating.

Extreme accuracy up to 12,000+ years. After that, less accurate to 50,000.

I researched it.  Perhaps you should research it a little more yourself.  It might open your eyes.  Radiocarbon dating is more art and guesswork than science.

We have the science/engineering that we rely on for our day to day technology- a pretty reliable working knowledge.   But the sciences that are more theoretical, astrophysics, anthropolgy, etc are built on a fragile system of suppositions and yet people build a belief system around these theories as a way to find comfort in their existence.

My eyes are open. If you had researched it, then you would know about dendrochronology and Bayesian Modeling and would know that it’s not art and guess work and wouldn’t have made that statement. It's come a long way since its inception.

Since radiocarbon dating is strictly for organic material, do you also discount methods to date the Earth itself, such as Rubidium-Strontium Dating, Potassium Argon Dating, and Uranium-Thorium-Lead Dating? If so, what is behind your belief?

" But the sciences that are more theoretical, astrophysics, anthropolgy, etc are built on a fragile system of suppositions and yet people build a belief system around these theories as a way to find comfort in their existence."

I also don’t understand this statement. I think the exact opposite to be true.

People find comfort in their existence by building a belief system around religion, not scientific theories.