I finally have time to respond to the last comment made to my post on 2-28-02. Clueless asked me a couple of questions. Rereading my post where I stated
polarization of electrons
I had posted this on my lunch half-hour and I concatenated a couple of different thoughts. One being the dielectric does polarize when a signal is present, and electrons can be polarized by magnet fields creating, a no force, magnetic moment usually when the electron is spinning. Atoms most certainly become polarized when they lose a valance electron to the conduction band, but not your point.
The audio signal is a complex signal that can have a negative swing assuming no bias, but there is little guarantee of symmetrical relationship between the plus and minus halves. Electrons have mass and they do collide/push other electrons, so I think a single electron moving back and forth seems too simplistic. I could find little if any information on the small signal analysis of audio signals or signal analysis of amplifier outputs to support or deny your analogy. Please feel free to point me somewhere on the net. All I see is semi-conductor signal analysis or DC theory applied to conductors.
The electron is the reference point for the electric/magnetic field generated by electrons flowing creating a current from a potential difference. I completely support your statement that the EM field transfers the signal (information) near the speed of light as per my questions. The electrons guide these waves albeit at a speed far slower than the speed of light. One cannot happen without the other. Since power is a square function, it is always positive, unaffected by swings. The 1st order equations guarantee this too.
The more interesting question to me is as far as I can tell unanswered, is that science knows from empirical data and scientific calculation the relationship between I and EM, but science does not seem to under why this relationship exists. Why is an EM field created when a current flows through a conductor? I am open to comments on that item. Why do we care about polarization? I guess I think capacitance and resistance to movement.
I still havent seen much of a response to any of my questions which definitely point to the design issues of cable designers. I have taken the liberty of trying to find Internet based information from reputable sources. Ironically (to the pro guys Im sure), I trust John Dunlavy. I voted with my wallet. I think that he is a reference for scientifically correct design based on solid physics. However, I disagree with the notion that science has determined and can measure every single aspect of cable performance. History has taught us time and time again this is not true.
********** The good stuff **********
First I think it is time clarify the statement of pro audio members which boils down to,
all cables sound the same... To clarify, ALL cables measure differently, the real question is whether or not the differences are audible. To me a worthwhile distinction, because poorly designed cables are audibly inferior sounding and potentially harmful to the system. Not all high-end cable companies produce snake oil and buzzard salve products, but there are some, the same as with any other industry. Most of the claims put forth are valid design points, but may not be of audible significance until system interaction is thrown into the mix.
Dunlavy post to support above
http://home.austin.rr.com/tnulla/duncable.htm
As Mr. Dunlavy points out, cables need to follow the good design principles to produce documentably accurate cables, but the interaction with the system must be considered as well. A 1 meter pair of balanced Dunlavy ULC cables cost around $300. We are to assume no frills, properly designed, etc. While the $7500 cables are a stretch, there are many others to choose from at considerably less. I dont know how much it costs to essentially suspend multiple cable strands in air. Whether or not it produces measurable or audible differences is the question.
Almost all of the design parameters cable makers play with are covered in the link below. One of the best layman based discussions with the supporting mathematics I have seen to date. I think all will find it well worth the read. A couple of links were visible at a file level, but not on the HTML page so they are listed separately.
Start with Analog & Audio on the Main page
http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/cableshift/cp.html
http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/audio/skineffect/page1.html
Thanks for reading.