You ?
The guy who speaks always about HIFI, MidFI, hi end, no compromise etc...
choosing blind a cable, better on his enclosure and worse on an other one ?
Canceling the symptom instead of curing the disease ?
I'm sorry, a speaker system with a tortured impedance curve is NOT correct engineering. Even if all the manufacturers don't care.
It's all got to do with causation and correlation.
Either causal influences are not limited to the speed of light, or events can be correlated for no reason.
Either qualifies as spooky in my book.
Confirmation of Bell correlations is commonplace. Apparently absolute confirmation requires 2 widely spaced observers to exclude any possibility of a loophole in Bell's experiment. Having somebody on the Moon would do, the 1.3 second radio delay is sufficient that human reaction time in recording an event would be negligible.
Either causal influences are not limited to the speed of light, or events can be correlated for no reason.
Either qualifies as spooky in my book.
Confirmation of Bell correlations is commonplace. Apparently absolute confirmation requires 2 widely spaced observers to exclude any possibility of a loophole in Bell's experiment. Having somebody on the Moon would do, the 1.3 second radio delay is sufficient that human reaction time in recording an event would be negligible.
As I said, no experiment to date (and there have been some very good ones) has shown violation of causality. Events correlated for no reason has no meaning here, quantum mechanics predicts the results and the observer has no control as Feynman said it is not intuitive to anyone.
The whole thing centres around definitions of causality and correlation.
Basically you've got correlated events occurring at a remove from each other at times so close that light couldn't have travelled the distance.
Einstein's principle of Relativistic Causality says that says that causal influences cannot propagate faster than light.
The principle of common cause is that if two events are statistically correlated, then either one causes the other, or they have a common cause, which, when taken into account, eliminates the correlation. Basically it says that correlations have explanations.
Local causality is an amalgamation of Einstein's principle of Relativistic Causality and the principle of common cause, basically it boils down to 'causal influences are limited to the speed of light, and events cannot be correlated for no reason.' Good common sense, but not good enough for QM.
In 1976, Bell proved that concept of local causality was ruled out by Bell correlations.
So given the correlation demonstration, and the speed of 'communication', either the causal influences propagate FTL, or events can be statistically correlated for no reason.
Spooky.
Now both of these ideas, causality and correlation, are all through physics, so it's a big mess.
Basically you've got correlated events occurring at a remove from each other at times so close that light couldn't have travelled the distance.
Einstein's principle of Relativistic Causality says that says that causal influences cannot propagate faster than light.
The principle of common cause is that if two events are statistically correlated, then either one causes the other, or they have a common cause, which, when taken into account, eliminates the correlation. Basically it says that correlations have explanations.
Local causality is an amalgamation of Einstein's principle of Relativistic Causality and the principle of common cause, basically it boils down to 'causal influences are limited to the speed of light, and events cannot be correlated for no reason.' Good common sense, but not good enough for QM.
In 1976, Bell proved that concept of local causality was ruled out by Bell correlations.
So given the correlation demonstration, and the speed of 'communication', either the causal influences propagate FTL, or events can be statistically correlated for no reason.
Spooky.
Now both of these ideas, causality and correlation, are all through physics, so it's a big mess.
Last edited:
You keep saying correlated for "no reason" but quantum mechanics predicts the observed result, observing an entangled particle collapses the entanglement and the state of the second particle is determined, but of course you have no say in the first observation the result is completely random.
You know I got tickled in one thread for using the word Quantum too much to refer to a perfect reproduction of an audio signal that would record the Quantum state of each air molecule surrounding a microphone and perfectly reproducing it on the speaker end. And that Analog is the only medium which could achieve this...
I just play with wet string now.
Has anyone got a link to the Bybee thing thats caused all of this huccus?
I just play with wet string now.
Has anyone got a link to the Bybee thing thats caused all of this huccus?
@scott
It's the timing. That's why doing the second observations on the Moon is being mooted. If it's instantaneous then it should show up easy on a clock with a radio delay of 1.3 seconds even if a guy has to punch a button. Be wild to see it live on TV.
It's all about the nature of reality. One of the objections they actually have to contend with is the idea that the reality doesn't actually coalesce until a consciousness makes the observation, an instrument may not be enough. It's like audio, always somebody raising absurd objections.
I missed a good bit of the program, and I've wiped it. I didn't pay close attention to the experiment, and I don't remember it clearly, which probably means I found it a bit much to take in at the time. I'll see if I can get a copy.
@freax
Yes, but you didn't know that you didn't know what you were talking about, whereas I do.
It's the timing. That's why doing the second observations on the Moon is being mooted. If it's instantaneous then it should show up easy on a clock with a radio delay of 1.3 seconds even if a guy has to punch a button. Be wild to see it live on TV.
It's all about the nature of reality. One of the objections they actually have to contend with is the idea that the reality doesn't actually coalesce until a consciousness makes the observation, an instrument may not be enough. It's like audio, always somebody raising absurd objections.
I missed a good bit of the program, and I've wiped it. I didn't pay close attention to the experiment, and I don't remember it clearly, which probably means I found it a bit much to take in at the time. I'll see if I can get a copy.
@freax
Yes, but you didn't know that you didn't know what you were talking about, whereas I do.
Last edited:
Both equally scary thoughts.
And here is that link I was after:
http://bybeetech.com/?page_id=2
Is this take-1 for this filter thingy?
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0702/bybee.htm
Also has anyone who is super rich and happens to buy really expensive toilet paper taken one of these things apart?
Uh Oh.
Similar to what I was rabbiting about except that I was concerned about the ability of a sound recording and additional reproduction recreating the exact circumstances of the air molecules in the recording studio or live event at the time.
Basically this focuses on a method of removing Quantum noise from the power distribution network going to your home/caravan.
Have a guess what though, I've got a far more scientifically valid and more expensive method of doing this. Use an inverter on an off-grid solar power and wind power system instead of plugging your equipment into the wall.
Ehhhhh yeah I guess you could say that but I would have to say that 99.99999999999999999999% of it would be electrons dissipating that heat, dunno what the constituent parts are of electricity to be honest, is electricity 50% electrons and 50% quantum joohickery?
Or do I need to stick my tounge on the wall outlet inorder to coerce those quantum baddies out of the wall? Does Observing the quantum state of an electron still apply to this? do I have to observe the electric shock that I would get by touching a live wire in order to make them work?
Last edited:
This latest hullabaloo is about a new Bybee gizmo....although JC has said very few actuals about it.
The original resistor shaped Bybee Quantum Purifiers have been well argued about in the past.
Most of the arguing is from those who do not have personal experience of them.
Some measurements were done, but revealed nothing more than a simple low value resistance.
Of those who do have personal experience of QP's the opinions differ, from system stellar change through to nothing noticeable.
I have a pair, and they do most certainly change systems ime.
Dan.
The original resistor shaped Bybee Quantum Purifiers have been well argued about in the past.
Most of the arguing is from those who do not have personal experience of them.
Some measurements were done, but revealed nothing more than a simple low value resistance.
Of those who do have personal experience of QP's the opinions differ, from system stellar change through to nothing noticeable.
I have a pair, and they do most certainly change systems ime.
Dan.
It's been done. And they've been measured. They do nothing that a cheap 30 milliohm resistor doesn't do. They're a scam. Some people have fun believing scams, some people are just gullible, others promote them for profit. I don't understand how someone can do that and look at themselves in a mirror, but there are folks out there who can very conveniently turn their consciences off when they want to.
Fair enough.
Thats probably the audible effect, a simple low value resistance would be able to do quite a few things to the resulting sound, namely starving a transformer and the power supply circuit of current, increasing the impedance obviously and changing the sound that results from the other end.
I propose a logical ladder:
If I were sitting down one evening reading a book underneath my floor standing reading lamp. I tend to prefer incandescent light globes. And If this light globe were to have these magical devices placed inbetween it and the wall outlet and I noticed a dimming in light output or I noticed a capacitive effect (the light flickered slower), or I noticed something else like the color temperature of the light emitting from the light globe changed to be redder.
All of those effects would be attributable to one of the three basic measurable properties of electricity.
Resistance
Capacitance
Inductance
And the resulting changes in:
Amps
Volts
Ohms
What Quantum change or effect would I notice if a Quantum noise filter were placed inbetween the globe and the wall outlet?
Audio waves are created by various physical motions and the resulting frequency of that action, that energy being released is what creates an audible sound.
Light waves are given off through the reaction of a substance as its exposed to heat, electricity is just the force used to transfer that energy from one place to another.
So what effect does Quantum noise have on a loudspeaker/globe, etc?
Puzzling to say the least.
Last edited:
Dan, I have too much respect for you to think you would swallow the BS on Bybee's site without question.
Maybe he recently came across a lot of money and is thinking about an impulse purchase.
Nothing can stop an impulse buy, not even Logic or Science.
That brings up another point, the gullibility of human beings, at what point does perfection in audio reproduction hit the wall where human gullibility takes over?
Lets say you wanted to sell an Apple.
An ordinary red Apple.
A girl walks past (who happens to like pink) and asks:
"Hey, how good do these Apples taste?"
You reply:
"Oh they're the worst apples in the history of mankind, I only recommend them for use as cooking apples, they are dry and perfect for making an Apple pie but not for eating outright."
"Hmph" she says then walks off.
So you pick one randomly out of the pile and paint it pink (in Pink Sugared frosting).
The girl is back the next day, she sees the Pink apple and grabs it then asks:
"Hey these aren't the same apples that you had yesterday are they?"
You say:
"Yes they're exactly the same apples, I just painted that one pink."
"Hmm, that's interesting, I'll take this one, it looks delicious."
She eats it, and the frosting on the apple sweetens it just enough that it no longer tastes dull and bland but nice.
She says "mmm that tastes great!, I'll have any more of the pink ones that you get in future."
What just happened here? We have two exactly the same Apples, one has just been covered in Pink Sugar frosting, the girl likes pink and it was sugared by the frosting.
So using that Analogy. What are we doing in Audio reproduction? Measurement is telling the truth, we told the girl exactly what she wanted to hear, fact for fact, we didn't lie. But she still didn't buy any of the Apples to make an Apple pie, In her mind she wanted an apple that was tasty enough to eat right then and there, and we provided it for her through the means of painting an apple in Pink Sugared Frosting.
You see, we are all just the same as that girl, we are sugar addicts. We have all grown up on Pop music and have been fed heavily compressed and distorted music which we've come to love over the years because we have to, if we like a specific song (like lets say, Gangnam Style) because it makes our toes move to the beat then that is to us Audio perfection.
Delicious Audio is audio which makes us happy, anything else "oh this capacitor must be messing with the sound, I'd better swap it out for a more expensive one."
We're addicts and we need our fix, and these Audio Drug Dealers are selling it to us. We could be happy listening to music on a $20 boom box.
That is whats going on, we have nearly reached audio perfection but we're still not happy because we haven't got that sugar fix yet.
You could make a $20 boom box sound "great" by putting Gangnam style on it and playing it to the right crowd.
That's the psychology of it as I see things. There is measurement, and then there is Pink Frosting and Gangnam Style.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.