1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.

    Dismiss Notice


Discussion in 'Sound Science' started by know talent, Jul 9, 2008.
1 2 3 4 5 6
  1. helicopter34234
    I agree that the public is largely unaware of what science entails and what it has to offer. I also understand that you cannot prove anything unless it is in a restricted framework (e.g. an axiomatic system of logic like math). However science (as in a rigorous scientific method) is the best tool that we have in providing the most persausive evidence to believe a hypothesis, IMHO. There is of course the danger of bad science, poorly controlled experiments and narrow minded data analysis where an outcome is attributed to one variable when it is really caused by another. Or extending the results of an experiment and its supporting conclusion too far into other systems where it does not apply. This is how many misconceptions originate, sometimes extremely dangerous misconceptions. And then there is the dreaded psuedo-science, where someone (usually woefully underqualified) boldly asserts that one piece of scientific evidence implies something completely different (usually to sell a new product) and never bothers to actually test the new hypothesis. This brings to mind things like colliodal silver and all of the untested miracle cures.
  2. melomaniac Contributor

    Originally Posted by helicopter34234 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
    all of the untested miracle cures.

    hey, I underwent cryogenic treatment, and it totally works - all the time I lived in the upper midwest I scarcely aged at all!
  3. Young Spade
    Wow. After reading all the posts in this topic I learned SO much. I even went and opened a Word document so I can type the topics of interest I found and am going to present them in Chem 2 when I go to school Tuesday (if I don't forget :/)

    But yea, thanks a lot guys for discussing this; it isn't every day that you get to learn about cryo treatment and how it affects stuff.
  4. Kicksonrt66
    I find it makes the mouthpiece stick to my lips, and with the frostbite the sound really sucks.
  5. leeperry

    Originally Posted by Wolffy /img/forum/go_quote.gif
    Every experience I have had with the cyrogenic has led me to realize that it degrades the sound by rolling off the high end and reducing harmonics of various instruments.

    fully agreed! sorry for the back-from-the-dead bump [​IMG]
  6. dhruvmeena96
    When somebody treat something with cyro is very slow cooling, constant cooling and slow ambienting

    For real changes you have to use helium 3 and helium 4 techniques to reach near 0 Kelvins

    It takes 30day for cooling, 30 days for immersion and 60days for ambience to really change the structure with this method.(can be done with nitrogen too)

    This makes structure of crystal achieved in supercold to retain when you get back to normal temps very slowly.

    This is not always 100% the same...it gets the following

    its defect realigned and corrected
    Microcracks filled
    Ductility enhancement
    40% increased signal transmission

    If done properly
1 2 3 4 5 6

Share This Page