John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II - Page 2000 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Member Areas > The Lounge

The Lounge A place to talk about almost anything but politics and religion.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 26th January 2012, 09:46 PM   #19991
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Quote:
Originally Posted by janneman View Post
I don't disagree with you on that, but disagree with your example on the -1 apple. That is very real: it's an apple I owe. I don't have it so you can't touch it but as soon as I get it I can.
If you say that math and reality are not necessarily the same you're on dangerous ground. We use math to send probes to Mars and the math bloody well corresponds to reality because the probe gets there. If the reality of the mechanical construction and electronics hold together.

janwe :
Yes, but the math does not dictate reality, reality must dictate the math. These are not reversible principles. I find it interesting that such a basic logical notion of which dictates the definition of the other, seems to provoke confusion and even some mild offense.
__________________
Ken
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2012, 09:47 PM   #19992
diyAudio Member
 
Johnloudb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Right on DF96! You tell him.

Math is just a type of language - language is abstract especially when you don't speak it, but different languages can be used to describe the same thing in most cases.

English still doesn't have a neuter term to describe people in general, so in talking about people we use "He." Some use "he/she," in some cases and is a kind of a political correctness, so women don't feel bad, or just to be clear. We are so far behind!
__________________
My Website: Hyperacusis, Tinnitus, My Story
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2012, 09:59 PM   #19993
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
Not sure I agree. There is a view that maths is discovered by us. We may invent the symbols, the language of maths, but the concepts already existed before we knew about them. On this view, reality and maths have a common origin. I can't say more, as it would be seriously OT!
I can essentially agree with that. Although, I would say that reality has rules which define existence in our universe. Material and energies in this universe inter-relate according to such rules. So, in that sense, yes, math coexists as the language which precisley describes these rules. We observe phenomena and search for the rules, the math, which are governing it. The important distinction is that the history of science is filled with math which we though completely desribed some rule of existance, only to have further observation reveal our understanding to have been incomplete or even faulty. In those cases, the math is revised to reflect reality, the reality isn't revised to reflect the math. This is more than a distinction without a difference.
__________________
Ken
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2012, 10:56 PM   #19994
diyAudio Member
 
Chris Hornbeck's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Little Rock
Quote:
Originally Posted by DF96 View Post
For example, I vaguely remember reading a Hawksford paper about noise in BJT bases. He calculated the noise, assuming that the discrete nature of electrons would create statistical fluctuations. His calculation may well have been perfect, but it was based on the false assumption that the electrons acted independently when in fact in a conductor or semiconductor they are reasonably well correlated. If not, we would get shot noise from wires and partition noise from circuit junctions! Apologies if I have remembered his argument incorrectly - it was a while ago.
Is this the one about "fuzzy distortion"? I took that to mean that carriers injected into the BJT's base come in integral quantities, so in effect "quantized" the input current in very small signal very high Beta situations. I'm not smart enough to say whether or not it's real, but it's certainly interesting. Any comments?

Thanks,
Chris
  Reply With Quote
Old 26th January 2012, 11:42 PM   #19995
diyAudio Member
 
john curl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: berkeley ca
Ken, right on! I am always annoyed when I find that Ohm's law is sometimes violated, or that our galaxy needs dark matter to keep it together. I thought that my education in Newtonian laws, 50 years ago, were a darn good approximation of how the galaxies hung together. Oh well, so much for math! '-)
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th January 2012, 08:52 AM   #19996
Jakob2 is offline Jakob2  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
Where was this published? I would indeed be interested in reading it.
No, these tests were never published.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th January 2012, 09:21 AM   #19997
diyAudio Member
 
abraxalito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 103
Send a message via MSN to abraxalito Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito Send a message via Skype™ to abraxalito
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Newton View Post
Although, I would say that reality has rules which define existence in our universe. Material and energies in this universe inter-relate according to such rules. So, in that sense, yes, math coexists as the language which precisley describes these rules. We observe phenomena and search for the rules, the math, which are governing it.
Nope that's the wrong way around. We observe patterns in the behaviour of nature and infer that there are rules - however the rules are an artifact of thinking. Nature just has habits which we observe. We use math to model those habits and our models evolve over time. Math no more governs reality than grammar governs what people write in a natural language.
__________________
No matter if we meanwhile surrender every value for which we stand, we must strive to cajole the majority into imagining itself on our side - Everett Dean Martin
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th January 2012, 09:33 AM   #19998
SY is offline SY  United States
diyAudio Moderator
 
SY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Chicagoland
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakob2 View Post
No, these tests were never published.
So when you said "see various tests from me and my collieagues (sic) on capacitors, cd-players and amplifiers," how am I supposed to do that?
__________________
The more you pay for it, the less inclined you are to doubt it.- George Smiley
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th January 2012, 09:46 AM   #19999
Jakob2 is offline Jakob2  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThorstenL View Post
Don't forget ABX Ace Tony Faulkner who somehow always scores way higher than average, I am aware of a number of highly publicised tests (including on watermarking for DVD-A) where his score was simply thrown out as 'lucky coin" (a statistical device that allows you to exclude outliers, which in case of a test of "can anyone hear this" incidentally is not allowable) because it way, way above average and in some cases would have forced a rejection of the null hypothesis.
Yes, i remember that although i have never seen some official presentation of data.
Under the question you have quoted, the exclusion of socalled outliers were indeed highly questionable.
But, although i personally don´t like the ABX-protocol and had to note that listeners had the same problems in ABX-tests, it seems that people who are used to the ABX are able to get useful results. Bruno Putzeys would be one example for this group-

There is actually no need to rely on ABX as there other methods to choose from.
The ITU for example relies on ABC/HR or MUSHRA.

Quote:
Having been then as press in one of the these tests in London, all I can say that the test conditions where dreadful, the system lousy and music not at all to my taste. The effort needed to not get up and walk out was such that you could have inverted one channel polarity and I would have literally heard nothing...
That seems to happen quite often. Demonstration of extra high quality attempts on lower than average systems. Hard to understand.

Quote:
Again, something to note, just like "excessive false negative identifications compared to chance" over many individual tests seem to plague ABX, ABX Tests of Tony Faulkner seem plagues by "excessive false positive identifications compared to chance", however the ABX Mafia makes it all readily disappear while grinning all the while like that proverbial cat from Cheshire.
The "ABX mafia" might exist, but the ABX supporter group is as heterogen as every other group, i think.
See for example Arny´s ABX website- as long as it did work, he at least emphasized the need of training to get used to controlled listening tests and that was a really good advice.

Otoh, interesting enough his posts over at hydrogenaudio wrt to the Pras/Guastavino ABX on Hi-res/downsampled material were quite funny.
  Reply With Quote
Old 27th January 2012, 10:37 AM   #20000
Jakob2 is offline Jakob2  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by SY View Post
Good. Defend the idea. What is incorrect in jn's analysis or the analysis of the professor quoted in Audio Critic? No-one will be afraid if you use equations.
At that time i read the comments of the anonymous professor in the Audio Critic, but had not read (and have still not) Hawksford´s article and afair the anonymous got at least two things wrong in his rather short statement.

The funny thing is, that according to jneutrons arguments, the anonymous professor might have missed a lot more.

So it´s time to read the original papers.

Quote:
So when you said "see various tests from me and my collieagues (sic) on capacitors, cd-players and amplifiers," how am I supposed to do that?
Sorry for the inconvenience, but i thought i did post some descriptions of these tests over the years?!
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 11:41 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2