A Copernican View of the Turntable System

Dear Raul,
Your examples are ones that are 'detectable' but perhaps not explainable?
If you cannot detect something......how is that different to its non-existence?

And just saying something exists but is 'undetectable'....is no proof of its existence?
It is just mumbo jumbo :-)
There is enough 'pseudo science' and 'voodoo science' in this hobby as it is?

Regards

Dear Raul,
I hear 'gravity' every time I release the tonearm lifter and every time I adjust the VTF.
Bad example.......

Regards

Dear Henry, Some support from the philosopohy of science.
The truth and existance are not adjectives or properties of
statements. They are implicit in any indicative statement.
But we have the language part and the so called 'reality
part'. The correspondence theory is problematic because
we can't equal lingvustic part with the rality part. The
semantics threat about the relatioship between the two. By
Frege there is the distiction between 'sense'(meaning) and
'reference'. Say the particle physicist all know what
Higgs particle means. Ie its contribution to the meaning of
the theory (the standard model). But till recently nobody
was sure if Higgs particle 'exist' or, to put it otherwise
if the 'name' Higgs particle has a reference. We in Europe
spend a huge amount of money to answer this question. But
if the Higgs particle was not 'discovered' the whole theory
would be refuted. The existance is considered to be an
'ontological' question. In 'On what there is' Quine
invented the so called 'ontology detector': to know what
kind of ontology one presuposes one need to know what
values one will put in the place of the variables he uses.
Ie: 'to be is to be a value of an variable'.
Frege called statements without a referent as not belonging
to science. Those are not truth-functional statements. Ie
it make no sense to ascribe whatever properties to not
existing entities.

Regards,

Dear Nikola,
Philosophy,science and mathematics share many admirable qualities.
Lewm asks me if I can't 'imagine' two structures on a shelf reacting differently to each other?
Yes......I can imagine such a thing.
But I can also 'imagine' a man flying?
I ask Lewm to give me an example of how the base for my turntable and armpods is 'moving' as he claims,and also some proof of such movement?
Yet all I get is a parable that equates a 'solid' shelf affected only by gravity to a 'liquid' ocean affected by winds, currents, depth, thermal movents and tides.
And Raul thinks that's a highly attractive analogy?!
Lewm accuses me of claiming that "the world is flat"......yet that analogy seems odd as it was the general population claiming that the world was flat whilst initially one man claimed otherwise?

As you say Nikola.......claiming the existence of phenomena without scientific proof places this hobby of ours in the same realm as 'religion'.
Statements of faith reign supreme with non-believers labelled as heretics?

And we wonder why audiophiles......to the rest of the population.....are a laughing stock?

Hello Halcro, **As you say Nikola.......claiming the existence of phenomena without scientific proof places this hobby of ours in the same realm as 'religion'.
Statements of faith reign supreme with non-believers labelled as heretics?**

Since you used a question mark, I assume you're asking a question, otherwise you're making a statement, but you're unsure?

Your statement presupposes that everything and all phenomena, can be proven scientifically. Many scientists believed the Higgs particle exists, before there was evidence to support that.

Regards,