Quote:
Originally Posted by Chef /img/forum/go_quote.gif
pdupiano, you're not saying anything innovative. I don't know why you needed to rant so long about nothing, but essentially your point boils down to not being able to prove something doesn't exist. Thankfully, karma already punishes people like you by allowing slimy salesmen to take your money in exchange for lies.
|
Don't push your hatred of salesmen towards me. I made one point, and that this debate is beyond the ability of science to prove or disprove the existence of a person's perception. You've made no point to counter this, right now you're just complaining about prices. And you are obviously a horrible salesman, who calls a device a triangle, when it is obviously a trigonal acoustic head dampener, used to reduce the amount of vibrations caused by your hair. And they come in different sizes for different hair lenghts because of the different wave resonances caused by different hair lengths.....
Quote:
| If it can't be demonstrated that something improves something, there is no reason—outside of research and development—to pay for it. Okay, so I can't prove that expensive cables don't sound better than normal cables. You know what? You can't prove that normal cables don't sound better than expensive cables. All you have to go on is the market, and believe me that doesn't belong in a science forum. |
As far as I'm concerned you're just rehashing my point with this statement. And yes, you can't prove jack using science, you can only demonstrate it and thus this WHOLE THING does not belong to the realm of science let alone the science forum. And once again, you are still agreeing that this is beyond the abilities of science. But you seem to think that it therefore pushes the subject onto the "market," I certainly don't prescribe to that idea, I don't buy gadgets just because salesmen make their claims. In fact I buy different cables because of what I've found and learned from science. While I admit that science cannot tel me whether or not my perceptions exist, it does have the ability to show me which products have notable merits and are worth buying (and yes I do mean wires).
Quote:
| What tests actually tend to show, as I've already posted in this thread, is that normal cables perform better at large distances (like 100 feet), but that under 6 feet you're not going to hear any distortion. That's 1 point against expensive cables. |
WHAT HAVE YOU TESTED? This is precisely my point about people making large conclusions based on experiments. WHAT EXACTLY DID YOU TEST? Did you test impedance? Did you test signal propagation? Did you test capacitance, did you test EMI distortions? WHAT DID YOU TEST? And afterwards, what exactly did you conclude? Did you conclude that people were able to detect something from high end cables that they did not from stock or low end ones? Because that's the real question here, not that the signal is kept constant below 6ft. Additionally did you look at the test equipment? How did they record the signal propagation at 100ft? What kind of cables did they use -but I shouldn't digress, none of that matters because none of that has anything to do with what people are able to perceive.
Your post is riddled with this notion that everyone who perceives differ
ences in cables are all idiots who pay thousands of dollars for their cables, and quite frankly it is insulting. At the moment, you are actually backed up into a corner because
1. Science has FAILED YOU. It is unable to shed anymore light on the subject
2. Science has BETRAYED YOU, it has in fact showed you the EXACT opposite of what you wanted. The material I brought up in my earlier posts depicts how science TELLS you that these different properties should affect the propagation of the signal.
3. You're cowering with one idea left... that people who believe in cables, pay large sums of money for no reason. and you are better because you only buy reasonable items.
So I guess that's what it really boils down to doesn't it, you're only argument against cables is that it is expensive. Right? That's why you're so against it, is that it? And there it is folks.... thats the real culprit to this whole cable issue. Once again it has nothing to do with science, it has nothing to do with perception, its just people's wallets -get over it. This whole thing is non scientific so stop asking for scientific proofs and stop acting all high and mighty because you believe in something different.
Quote:
That's not really "beyond" science in any way shape or form. It's scientific fact . . . though I have yet to see placebo cure cancer or anything of that degree like you seem to implied. It's usually smaller problems or ailments.
There was an entire thread on it a while back, did you miss it by chance? |
When I stated beyond science, I meant that the question at hand is not in the realm of science (the question being, does an individual perceive something different from different cables").
As far as the placebo stuff is concerned, I'm not sure which thread you are referring to, I rarely visit the science forum because of the whole cable issue and the large amounts of "wallet based" arguments rather than science based ones.
Oh and my claims on placebo and cancer can be found in the Scientific American Mind February Issue 2009. They stated that 2-7% of the people in a group had their tumors shrink and disappear completely using placebos. I think scientific american carries back issues online so you should be able to find the article, they did a whole thing on placebos in that issue.
