This post is a bit off the far end of this discussion, but it does bear direct relevance to the current topic type at hand, and seemingly, from what I've read of John's comments..might fit the situation rather well, in the final analysis. It also echo's his signature. I have pulled it from another forum. Considering the nature of what may be seen as a rant, I should not have to make it clear to some folk here...that it is my own post. 
The original subject matter was 'perception' itself.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Science itself is riddled with the very same point, (name). For example, within the realm of all known sciences that investigate the physics of existence, or wave/particle..this, down to and including basic math.. the vast majority of those points, over time, have been misconstrued to be something called a 'fact'. 'Laws', even. The point is, that any good scientist knows that they are merely modeling functions, with regards to attempting to define 'reality' in some fashion. All of these laws, are subject to revision upon the findings of new data that can be correlated into a new paradigm..and thus a new or revised 'model'.
"Model"
Not 'Law' or 'fact'.
'Law' tied to scientific matters is a gross mishandling and application of a human social term, which ironically refers to the idea of isolation , separation, management, and or incarceration of human elements and/or considerations which are deemed to be offensive and/or detrimental to the larger group consensus. Nothing more. This point clearly illustrates the more hidden/unrealized aspects of the human function intruding into the logical function that humanity should observe when attempting to be true to the basic tenants of the sciences.
All is theory....nothing more.
So we investigate openly, and attempt to define and correlate our observations --- which is the very Raison d'être (reason for being) of science itself.
If you mentally shut the door on that, you deny science itself.
A point is that we have deeply investigated the particle function of science but are only now beginning to understand (meaning:look toward) the wave aspect, with regards to it existing. Our basic sciences, including the idea of organization, values and numbers, even basic math, all rest on the idea of the particle function. The wave aspect, can seemingly make mockery of even those points. Yet, we are forced to 'realize' that the wave function exists..and is an unexplored consideration..which may always defy categorization and or valuation.
Valuation itself may suffer revision, as well as basic methodology of human function with regards to such, before any semblance of understanding the wave function exists in the 'human particle function/aspect' arena.
For example, once again, the basic plausible potential for the two never meeting, with regards to definition or categorization, even though we are forced to deal with the point that both exist. This point can be difficult for a linear thinking person with a mind that has not gone through, or toward these possibilities, with regards to mental juggling and rumination, and they also have the potential to cause considerable stress in the given person, depending on the function of the person's basic mental modeling and underpinnings of their psychology.
In other words and terms..it's a simple case of people who've made it past that point themselves, attempting to help those who have not understood and do not understand the basic existence of these points and considerations...without the base psychology of the uninitiated wreaking havoc in the given situation.
This illustrates the point that 'brick walls' in science have a tendency to be more of psychological issue than anything else.
Irony: I'm listening to a song on the sat radio right now and the lyrics say: "We..all..want ..to be free....and there's always someone in the crowd who just won't let us be".
The original subject matter was 'perception' itself.~~~~~~~~~~~
Science itself is riddled with the very same point, (name). For example, within the realm of all known sciences that investigate the physics of existence, or wave/particle..this, down to and including basic math.. the vast majority of those points, over time, have been misconstrued to be something called a 'fact'. 'Laws', even. The point is, that any good scientist knows that they are merely modeling functions, with regards to attempting to define 'reality' in some fashion. All of these laws, are subject to revision upon the findings of new data that can be correlated into a new paradigm..and thus a new or revised 'model'.
"Model"
Not 'Law' or 'fact'.
'Law' tied to scientific matters is a gross mishandling and application of a human social term, which ironically refers to the idea of isolation , separation, management, and or incarceration of human elements and/or considerations which are deemed to be offensive and/or detrimental to the larger group consensus. Nothing more. This point clearly illustrates the more hidden/unrealized aspects of the human function intruding into the logical function that humanity should observe when attempting to be true to the basic tenants of the sciences.
All is theory....nothing more.
So we investigate openly, and attempt to define and correlate our observations --- which is the very Raison d'être (reason for being) of science itself.
If you mentally shut the door on that, you deny science itself.
A point is that we have deeply investigated the particle function of science but are only now beginning to understand (meaning:look toward) the wave aspect, with regards to it existing. Our basic sciences, including the idea of organization, values and numbers, even basic math, all rest on the idea of the particle function. The wave aspect, can seemingly make mockery of even those points. Yet, we are forced to 'realize' that the wave function exists..and is an unexplored consideration..which may always defy categorization and or valuation.
Valuation itself may suffer revision, as well as basic methodology of human function with regards to such, before any semblance of understanding the wave function exists in the 'human particle function/aspect' arena.
For example, once again, the basic plausible potential for the two never meeting, with regards to definition or categorization, even though we are forced to deal with the point that both exist. This point can be difficult for a linear thinking person with a mind that has not gone through, or toward these possibilities, with regards to mental juggling and rumination, and they also have the potential to cause considerable stress in the given person, depending on the function of the person's basic mental modeling and underpinnings of their psychology.
In other words and terms..it's a simple case of people who've made it past that point themselves, attempting to help those who have not understood and do not understand the basic existence of these points and considerations...without the base psychology of the uninitiated wreaking havoc in the given situation.
This illustrates the point that 'brick walls' in science have a tendency to be more of psychological issue than anything else.
Irony: I'm listening to a song on the sat radio right now and the lyrics say: "We..all..want ..to be free....and there's always someone in the crowd who just won't let us be".
Thank you Scott, I am sure that your taste in wine is exceptional. The last time I was impressed by a bottle of wine was a $60 french wine purchased in Switzerland in 1964. The students, faculty, and I shared a small glass with gusto. I took the bottle home, to remove the label, and put it in my scrapbook. Wow!
Cryoing has to be done right, OR it WILL do damage. Some components can't be cryoed because they WILL crack or break. We have tried almost everything. However, when Jack Bybee wanted to Cryo his BLOWTORCH, I threatened to void the guarantee. We had tested the raw circuit board by putting a sample though the Cryo process, but I was concerned about the polystyrene bypass caps, as they are usually problematic. Even Jack Bybee Cryo's his bare devices, BEF0RE sealing them up.
The discussion here is at least 10 years behind what people in the audio business already know.
Cryoing has to be done right, OR it WILL do damage. Some components can't be cryoed because they WILL crack or break. We have tried almost everything. However, when Jack Bybee wanted to Cryo his BLOWTORCH, I threatened to void the guarantee. We had tested the raw circuit board by putting a sample though the Cryo process, but I was concerned about the polystyrene bypass caps, as they are usually problematic. Even Jack Bybee Cryo's his bare devices, BEF0RE sealing them up.
The discussion here is at least 10 years behind what people in the audio business already know.
scott wurcer said:
I wouldn't mind hanging out with the odd physicist, Scott, but I never made it through the universities, only the college system, which is a slightly different animal here in Canada, than it is in the states. Two and three year degrees, or diplomas. The Canadian universities are the 4 and 5 and 7 year 'bachelor degree/master/Phd' aspect. The few I run into find my musings interesting, for the most part. It's always better in person, as we all know. It cuts the crap out of it fast, so we can get onto the fun parts of the discussions, and past the issues. I'm invariably told I was excellent university material. The vagaries of my childhood and earlier life in a small remote location conspired to have me walk a different path.
For example, my business partner is an ex-university junkie, as in Canada..education was relatively free for a quite long time. So he stayed in and excelled in the university system, for somewhere in the 10-12 year range. I came along to enter that system,and then the new conservative government of Canada at that time, ripped the heart out of a vital and working university system, and only the rich could afford any degrees, after that. One interesting point and result of the 'free ride' is the huge crowd of Canadians with doctorates, masters, and degrees which populate US technical areas.
For the record, MY distortion measurements are MAGIC distortions. You see, it depends on WHICH 75 ohm shielded cable is hooked up, to get a specific spectrum. Change the external cable, change the measured distortion spectrum. Put the original cable back, the earlier distortion spectrum returns. I should patent this. 
scott wurcer said:
Sure, understood. It would be a fun crew. I'd likely challenge then on all of their individual current assumptions.
I'll not say much more in this particular thread, as my pulling myself out the basement as the "wave/particle duality /alternate view - get yer poo together" gimp is wearing thin and past it's need for immediate expression.
KBK, I find your input refreshing. I have a BA in Physics, but that was 42 years ago, and only classical physics for the most part. However, a few years ago I got interested in quantum mechanics, and having the math background, I thought that I could teach myself to understand some of the fundamental ideas. I bought books, 40 on quantum mechanics at last count, and still pick and poke at them. Every time I read Feynman I fall into a 'coma' the concepts being so overwhelming. I find Heisenberg easier to read.
Have I ever gotten help from anyone on the internet? No, the Ph.D's scoff at me and tell me what an intellectual wimp I really am (it is now happening to you, KBK) and will not help me further understand what I might not know well. In fairness, SY helped me once or twice, but no further. Keep on target, KBK.
Have I ever gotten help from anyone on the internet? No, the Ph.D's scoff at me and tell me what an intellectual wimp I really am (it is now happening to you, KBK) and will not help me further understand what I might not know well. In fairness, SY helped me once or twice, but no further. Keep on target, KBK.
john curl said:
My biz partner's 12 years in university encompasses physics, mathematics, philosophy, and history. He is also an actual champion debater. He tells me on Friday nights (while at the university), he and his buddies would get drunk at someone's house party or whatever...and then the drunken debates would begin. Luckily, everyone survived. I do challenge him, and successfully hold my end up, on almost any front. I liked it that way, running into him was a nice, fast, and efficient school of hard knocks. He taught me not to lose my temper, no matter how bad the mental slugfest becomes. I believe I did the same for him.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.