I am a fan of Chris Sommovigo's Black Cat and Airwave interconnects. I hope he does not mind me quoting him or naming him on this subject, but Chris does not mark directionality of his IC's. I recently wrote him on the subject and he responded that absent shunting off to ground/dialectric designs, the idea of wire directionality is a complete myth. Same with resistors and fuses. My hunch is that 95% of IC "manufacturers", particularly the one man operations of under $500 IC's mark directionality because they think it lends the appearance of technical sophistication and legitimacy. But even among the "big boys", the myth gets thrown around like so much accepted common knowledge. Thoughts? Someone care to educate me on how a simple IC or PC or speaker cable or fuse without a special shunting scheme can possibly have directionality? It was this comment by Stephen Mejias (then of Audioquest and in the context of Herb Reichert's review of the AQ Niagra 1000) that prompts my question;
Thank you for the excellent question. AudioQuest provided an NRG-10 AC cable for the evaluation. Like all AudioQuest cables, our AC cables use solid conductors that are carefully controlled for low-noise directionality. We see this as a benefit for all applications -- one that becomes especially important when discussing our Niagara units. Because our AC cables use conductors that have been properly controlled for low-noise directionality, they complement the Niagara System’s patented Ground-Noise Dissipation Technology. Other AC cables would work, but may or may not allow the Niagara to reach its full potential. If you'd like more information on our use of directionality to minimize the harmful effects of high-frequency noise, please visit http://www.audioquest.com/directionality-its-all-about-noise/ or the Niagara 1000's owner's manual (available on our website).
twoch i always keep everything running one direction then if i change that wire move it someplace else I keep same direction. On reinstalling it. But i don’t hear any differences. I just keep flow always 1way
>>>>>What does that mean, "everything running in one direction?" And when you say you don’t hear any differences what are you referring to? Did you reverse the cable when you reinstalled it? And, you say you keep the flow one way, but how do you know which way a cable goes to keep the flow in the right direction?
I have the black fuse. Im not even thinking about reversing 4
>>>>Let me get this straight. You bought $500 worth of fuses and you didn't put them in the right direction? If you happen to change your mind remember to try them one at a time.
For those that believe wire is directional (be it low-level signal IC or high-level outputs to speakers), suggest you open your amps and pre-amps, look for the arrows showing the direction within the unit that are marked by the manufacturer (note: not the + or -, red or black connect point), then insure you are installing your IC correctly. Of course all manufacturers pay attention to these details when they design and build the signal inputs within the unit
However, having said that, you'll be reviewing schematics and making phone calls to your respective manufacturer, because you likely won't find those provided within the unit. Those can be are trade secrets.
As for directionality in speaker IC's, remember that speaker outputs are basically AC- one would NEVER want directionality in speaker IC wiring. However, you should be using IC wiring that is broken in. Meaning that you actually used your 14 ga. lamp wire in a actual lamp @
120V/60 Hz
for a period of time, this "season's" the wire, aligns the electrons, drives out the free oxygen in the copper- try it you can hear the difference!
There are so many things wrong with the last post I hardly know where to begin. I will say almost everything in the post involves the typical, tried-and-true non-believer arguments, what we commonly refer to as false arguments, all of which have been addressed on this thread already and shown to be false idols of the overly skeptical. I realize it’s the OPs first post. Better luck next time. Great name, though. Muzzleblast. Seems appropriate somehow.
As Geoff states above, a difficult first post using confusing terminology i.e. speaker IC. IC is usually interpreted as shorthand for interconnect. Interconnects connect one component to another either in single ended (RCA style connectors) or balanced configuration. What leaves the amplifier and attaches to the speaker inputs are usually referred to as speaker cables.
hifiman, I’m getting a bad feeling that maybe he’s pulling our leg. You know, what with the looking for arrows inside the component and trade secrets, making phone calls, driving out the free oxygen from the copper, things of that nature. Perhaps he just has a very refined sense of irony and sarcasm. 😛 My guess we just witnessed a drive by shooting. Muzzleblast. Get it? 😳
LOL, yes... I've been a lurker for a while... but usually stay busy enough, I don't have much time for forums. It's like watching Trump and Kim Jong Un sparring...
I'm an engineer by profession... work in defense industry... while lots of instances where this matters, it isn't in consumer electronics between audio sources.
My system is based around klipsch k horns with Crites mods and crossovers and altec valencias driven by either a mac mc240 updated and modded by mufich audio, or with a fully restored citation 2 with all Jim mcshane updates, that I completely rebuilt, then tested at mufich.
I build my own preamps, but also have a mac mx110 for comparisons... I prefer tube over ss, but some ss products sound quite good. I like glow of tubes, but also how easy tube equipment is to mod and upgrade. I make my own signal ic cables, and build my own speaker cables. No snake oil needed, or used.
@muzzleblast, Without putting too fine a point on it, could you elaborate (without giving away state secrets) as to which applications do take wire directionality into consideration? (if that is what you implied, or was it I inferred?) 🤔
muzzleblast 2 posts LOL, yes... I've been a lurker for a while... but usually stay busy enough, I don't have much time for forums. It's like watching Trump and Kim Jong Un sparring...
I'm an engineer by profession... work in defense industry... while lots of instances where this matters, it isn't in consumer electronics between audio sources.
>>>>>Whoa, hey, small world.
I prefer tube over ss, but some ss products sound quite good. I like glow of tubes, but also how easy tube equipment is to mod and upgrade.
>>>>>Again, small world.
I make my own signal ic cables, and build my own speaker cables.
>>>>>Well, in that regard I might be ahead of you. I don't use IC cables, speaker cables. Or power cords, for that matter.
Sure, but as I alluded to, its not in the audio (more specifically analog vs digital) world. I wasn't trying to take subject matter beyond the interest in audio. However in the RF (now we are out realm of "wired" interests) world, where one is interested in "using" low power RF signals emitted in free-space, there are numerous instances where directionality is impacted by material construction (type of insulation; Teflon being but one good example), type of conductor (Silver plated copper, and in some instances pure silver- silver is a better conductor than copper), terminations, etc. and all are considered to reduce transmission losses (insertion losses), and maintain gain when you have exploited all that's possible from things like antenna gain, pattern coverage, etc. However, one is dealing with signals that are much lower in emitted power than normally seen in low-power level signals from your phono player, CD, Preamp, etc. Often one is also dealing with frequencies that are in the GHz bands, not KHz as with audio. However, none of this is fair nor applicable to the subject at hand. Frankly the benefits of such wiring just isn't cost effective with audio signals. However, that doesn't mean its not used to help sell lots of signal IC and speaker cables.
However, I'm sure that geoffkait can well appreciate some of this since he is totally wireless anyway. I'm still working on my wireless approach, but alas its limited to Blue Tooth and WiFi as well as 2.4 & 5.6 GHz home networking products. I'm still researching Nickola Tesla's work in wireless power transmission to see if I can build my own Wardenclyffe Tower, but my homeowners covenants prevent having one as tall as Tesla had.
Of course it was Marconi who had the first long distance radio transmission after much ado. In fact, it wasn’t until many years after he first embarked on his long range radio transmission mission that he realized he and just about everyone else had radio signals figured out all wrong. He was building taller and taller structures and pumping more and more power into the transmitters trying to achieve more and more distance, but misfiring and producing a few castastrophies along the way. Much to his chagrin, Marconi miscalculated that the wavelenths for long distance transmission had to be very long, whereas it turned out they had to be very short. So it wasn’t high power, long waves that was needed, but low power, short waves. Shazam!
My, a true renaissance man if there ever was one- good show!
We have much to appreciate in the modern world due to the contributions of fellows like Marconi and Tesla. Just think what it might be like w/o them. DC power and a power generation station at every major corner & intersection...
Cable directionality is as old as dirt. At least since Audioquest started marking their cables with arrows. And the debate is almost as old. Welcome to the party! Better late than never.
Even if one wishes to refer to current as the "signal," since current is alternating we only need to worry about the current (signal) when it’s traveling toward the component or, in the case of speaker cables, when the current is traveling toward the speakers. The other half of the time, when the current is traveling in the opposite direction, we can ignore the "signal" since its effects are inaudible. So, obviously fuses located where AC enters the component and where AC enters the speakers, could be directional. As could the cables. If directionality is real. To summarize, the argument that directionality can’t exist in an AC circuit is pure fabrication, a ploy, a nothing burger. 🍔
Geoffkait 8-13-2017 Even if one wishes to refer to current as the "signal," since current is alternating we only need to worry about the current (signal) when it’s traveling toward the component or, in the case of speaker cables, when the current is traveling toward the speakers.
The other half of the time, when the current is traveling in the
opposite direction, we can ignore the "signal" since its effects are
inaudible.
When "the current" is traveling away from the component in one of the two conductors it is traveling toward the component in the other of the two conductors.
And it is **always** traveling through the input circuit of the component in one direction or the other, aside from the brief instant during each cycle at which the applied voltage crosses zero, and the direction changes.
I would not press this explanation as being supportive of wire (or fuse) directionality.
almarg Geoffkait 8-13-2017 "Even if one wishes to refer to current as the "signal," since current is alternating we only need to worry about the current (signal) when it’s traveling toward the component or, in the case of speaker cables, when the current is traveling toward the speakers. The other half of the time, when the current is traveling in the opposite direction, we can ignore the "signal" since its effects are inaudible."
When "the current" is traveling away from the component in one of the two conductors it is traveling toward the component in the other of the two conductors.
And it is **always** traveling through the input circuit of the component in one direction or the other, aside from the brief instant during each cycle at which the applied voltage crosses zero, and the direction changes.
>>>>That’s precisely my point! That’s why - if wire is directional per se - the cable manufacturer must control the process to ensure that both wires are placed in the cable correctly. You know, since BOTH wires will exhibit directionality. Assuming directionality is real. Which is in fact what manufacturers do, control the process. Hel-loo! Fortunately once you have a process in place the rest is easy. For a fuse it’s even simpler to explain (one can only hope) since there’s only one wire. Thus, you cannot use the example of AC circuits per se to disprove wire or fuse directionality. Please note: I never said this explanation proved or supported wire directionality. What I’m saying is simple but quite different - you cannot use the tired old AC circuits argument to DISPROVE wire directionality. Capish?
What on God's earth makes anyone think that directionality in wire can even be heard in audio signals @ KHz frequencies? If its just pure copper wire- and uniform in make, thickness, etc. across a fixed length, its a conductor, and it will conduct both ways the same- assuming all things are equal in the wire and in the "inputs" (i.e. terminations) on each end of said wire.
Having said that, I have seen scientific evidence where in the Southern Hemisphere that electrons flow in the opposite direction than they flow in the Northern Hemisphere. Obviously, impacted by proximity to the magnetic poles of the earth. That said, directionality is possible in the farthest parts of the northern and southern hemispheres, and non-directionality is best observed nearest the equator. I live in Texas and closer to the equator than many in US, and likely this is the reason I don't see any hints of directionality in my stereo IC's and speaker wiring.
Maybe all the believers should move closer to the equator and all the naysayers should move closet to the poles and just be done with it.
We can then have an audio UN where disputes can be settled, to no ones satisfaction. 👍 But, at least, we would be content in knowing that in our particular neck of the woods, we'd be right.
@nonoise Very diplomatic of you! Just please let's not let the UN become involved in audio and screw that up too. We have a sufficient # of issues as it is.
What, nonoise, you are now suggesting I live in wrong part of the world? If I have to move, I'm moving to Demark or Sweden, where they have lots of good looking blondes and believe in full frontal nudity... I know which way my pole will orient there.
What does rotate in different directions depending on hemisphere are hurricanes and whirlpools due to the Coriolis Effect. More to the point and this might cause a little heartburn, electrons are not really flowing in wires. The audio signal is not electrons. Did somebody not get the memo?
We can describe a thing or effect or position but we don’t really know what an electron is. Whether it is a frameworks creating a pressure point in schism that gives the impression of an electron or that an electron is a thing..... these things are totally unknown.
Framing reality is hard. The only fact we know of that actually exists .....is that this is an impossible feat.
As for photons, well, there we go. Same scenario. Even Einstein directly admitted that he could have got the sign wrong on his famous equation.
The thing that does not know what it is talks of a thing that it cannot define whilst posited in a reality/information matrix it cannot explain or define. Ultimately we (whatever that is) don’t gots a handle on jack.... just a few bits of commonality that are minimally predictable (in gross context) and applicable to the matrix and it’s so-called denizens.
Arguing about it is, well,.....
all the great minds, including Einstein spoke of these sort of things.
that bible thumping your way into around or out of anything (explicit factualization) is quite
the fool's game.
I'd wager many hundreds of thousands of people have directly and personally witnessed wire Directionality.
When it comes to proofing, this data is not trivial. But it will bring the Quixotally inclined -to it ---like a spinning windmill.
"Even if one wishes to refer to current as the "signal," since current is alternating we only need to worry about the current (signal) when it’s traveling toward the component or, in the case of speaker cables, when the current is traveling toward the speakers. The other half of the time, when the current is traveling in the opposite direction, we can ignore the "signal" since its effects are inaudible."
Respectfully, no. Would you argue that the speaker diaphragm moving is only audible in one direction?
you guys have shattered my reality... I'm thinking I need to read Dianetics and see what the Church of Scientology has to say about laws of nature, physics, construct of atoms, electron clouds & movement. THEN maybe I can begin to understand wire directionality...
brucenewengland geoffkait: "Even if one wishes to refer to current as the "signal," since current is alternating we only need to worry about the current (signal) when it’s traveling toward the component or, in the case of speaker cables, when the current is traveling toward the speakers. The other half of the time, when the current is traveling in the opposite direction, we can ignore the "signal" since its effects are inaudible."
Respectfully, no. Would you argue that the speaker diaphragm moving is only audible in one direction?
>>>>>>You would like the backwards motion of the speaker diaphragm to be as efficient as the forward motion, no? The most efficient forward AND backward motion for the speaker diaphragm is achieved when both wires in the speaker cable are put in the correct direction, I.e., with the lowest voltage drop direction toward the speaker. Voltage is alternating just like the current.
Brucenewengland is totally calling you out and I’m not sure how the flaw in your thinking isn’t totally obvious. For energy to push a diaphragm forward or draw it back the energy through the conductors must flow equally well in both directions for both conductors. If one suddenly behaves in an aberrant way due to the reversal of energy, that aberration will will impinge the performance of the whole system. The suggestion that a cable can behave like a diode and that it be a good thing is ludicrous on it’s face.
>>>>> "If one (conductor) behaves in an aberrant way...the aberration will impinge (on) the performance of the whole system." I couldn’t have said it better myself. Exactly!
"The suggestion that a cable can behave like a diode and that it (can) be a good thing is ludicrous on the face of it."
>>>>I never suggested the cable can act like a diode OR that it’s a good thing. Nice Strawman argument!
It is next to impossible to follow your posts trying to figure out who said what in your posts.
Quote
See the little light grey box with 2 little black closed hooks just above the message box far left side? Enter in the message box where you want to enter the quoted message and then click on the little box with the two hooks. A light grey vertical line should appear on the left hand side of the message box. Next paste the message you want to quote to the right of the vertical line. It would also help if you mentioned the username of the person you are quoting.
jea48, let me help you out by summarizing the last couple weeks: I explain very patiently why AC electricity cannot explain away wire directionality while everyone else either doesn’t understand plain English or cannot follow simple logic or puts words in my mouth I didn't say. Remind me to repost the bit on pathological skepticism again sometime.
By the way, no matter what format one uses for posting someone will always complain, sure as shootin’.
@jea48 Thanks for posting that. Stupidly, I've always tried to type the quote after clicking on the "quote" icon and it only worked a few times. I could never get back to regular font. Copy and Paste seems quite normal to most but to a dinosaur like me....
@jea48 Thanks for posting that. Stupidly, I’ve always tried to type the quote after clicking on the "quote" icon and it only worked a few times. I could never get back to regular font. Copy and Paste seems quite normal to most but to a dinosaur like me....
All the best, Nonoise
I had trouble getting the thing to work using the old internet explorer. Sometimes I could get it to work while other times it would not. Then sometimes the damn thing would not leave a space below the grey vertical line for me to post a message. With Mozilla Firefox It seems to work fine. Though sometimes I have to click on it again to get it, the grey vertical line, to show in the message box. Practice makes perfect.
We’ll see if geoffkait takes the time to get it to work for him. You can lead a horse to water, .......
Something that has not been mentioned, I do not believe, is the dielectric insulator used to cover the IC and speaker cable wires. The type of insulation covering over the wire may influence cable direction. Especially if the cables were broken-in in one direction and then reversed for what ever reason and hooked back up in the opposite direction. Or maybe one was replaced in the same direction but the other one was reversed.
I would hope we all agree new ICs and speaker cables go through a break-in period.
Coaxial cable
Coaxial cable Poynting vector in a coaxial cable, shown in red.
For example, the Poynting vector within the dielectricinsulator of a coaxial cable is nearly parallel to the wire axis (assuming no fields outside the cable and a wavelength longer than the diameter of the cable, including DC). Electrical energy delivered to the load is flowing entirely through the dielectric between the conductors. Very little energy flows in the conductors themselves, since the electric field strength is nearly zero. The energy flowing in the conductors flows radially into the conductors and accounts for energy lost to resistive heating of the conductor. No energy flows outside the cable, either, since there the magnetic fields of inner and outer conductors cancel to zero.
Electrical energy delivered to the load is flowing entirely through the dielectric between the conductors. Very little energy flows in the conductors themselves, since the electric field strength is nearly zero.
There are many factors that make cable break-in necessary and many
reasons why the results vary. If you measure a new cable with a
voltmeter you will see a standing voltage because good dielectrics make
poor conductors. They hold a charge much like a rubbed cat’s fur on a
dry day. It takes a while for this charge to equalize in the cable.
Better cables often take longer to break-in. The best "air dielectric"
techniques, such as PFA tube construction, have large non-conductive
surfaces to hold charge, much like the cat on a dry day.
Cables that do not have time to settle, such as musical instrument and
microphone cables, often use conductive dielectrics like rubber or
carbonized cotton to get around the problem. This dramatically reduces
microphonics and settling time, but the other dielectric characteristics
of these insulators are poor and they do not qualify sonically for
high-end cables. Developing non-destructive techniques for reducing and
equalizing the charge in excellent dielectric is a challenge in high end
cables.
The high input impedance necessary in audio equipment makes uneven
dielectric charge a factor. One reason settling time takes so long is we
are linking the charge with mechanical stress/strain relationships. The
physical make up of a cable is changed slightly by the charge and visa
versa. It is like electrically charging the cat. The physical make up of
the cat is changed by the charge. It is "frizzed" and the charge makes
it's hair stand on end. "PFA Cats", cables and their dielectric, take longer to loose this charge and reach physical homeostasis.
The better the dielectric's insulation, the longer it takes to settle. A
charge can come from simply moving the cable (Piezoelectric effect and
simple friction), high voltage testing during manufacture, etc. Cable
that has a standing charge is measurably more microphonic and an uneven
distribution of the charge causes something akin to structural return
loss in a rising impedance system. When I took steps to eliminate these
problems, break-in time was reduced and the cable sounded generally
better. I know Bill Low at Audioquest has also taken steps to minimize this problem.
Mechanical stress is the root of a lot of the break-in phenomenon and it
is not just a factor with cables. As a rule, companies set up audition
rooms at high end audio shows a couple of days ahead of time to let them
break in. The first day the sound is usually bad and it is very
stressful. The last day sounds great. Mechanical stress in speaker
cables, speaker cabinets,
even the walls of the room, must be relaxed in order for the system to
sound its best. This is the same phenomenon we experience in musical
instruments. They sound much better after they have been played. Many
musicians leave their instruments in front of a stereo that is playing
to get them to warm up. This is very effective with a new guitar. Pianos
are a stress and strain nightmare. Any change, even in temperature or
humidity, will degrade their sound. A precisely tuned stereo system is
similar.
You never really get all the way there, you sort of keep halving the
distance to zero. Some charge is always retained. It is generally in the
MV range in a well settled cable. Triboelectric noise in a cable is a
function of stress and retained charge, which a good cable will release
with both time and use. How much time and use is dependent on the design
of the cable, materials used, treatment of the conductors during
manufacture, etc.
There are many small tricks and ways of dealing with the problem. Years
ago, I began using PFA tube "air dielectric" construction and the charge
on the surface of the tubes became a real issue. I developed a fluid that adds a very slight conductivity to the surface
of the dielectric. Treated cables actually have a better measured
dissipation factor and the sound of the cables improved substantially.
It had been observed in mid eighties that many cables could be improved
by wiping them with a anti-static cloth. Getting something to stick to
PFA was the real challenge. We now use an anti-static fluid in all our
cables and anti-static additives in the final jacketing material. This
attention to charge has reduced break-in time and in general made the
cable sound substantially better. This is due to the reduction of
overall charge in the cable and the equalization of the distributed
charge on the surface of conductor jacket.
It seems there are many infinitesimal factors that add up. Overtime you
find one leads down a path to another. In short, if a dielectric surface
in a cable has a high or uneven charge which dissipates with time or
use, triboelectric and other noise in the cable will also reduce with
time and use. This is the essence of break-in
A note
of caution. Moving a cable will, to some degree, traumatize it. The
amount of disturbance is relative to the materials used, the cable's
design and the amount of disturbance. Keeping a very low level signal in
the cable at all times helps. At a show, where time is short, you never
turn the system off. I also believe the use of degaussing sweeps, such
as on the Cardas Frequency Sweep and Burn-In Record (side 1, cut 2a)
helps.
A small amount of energy is retained in the stored mechanical stress of
the cable. As the cable relaxes, a certain amount of the charge is
released, like in an electroscope. This is the electromechanical
connection.
Many factors relating to a cable's break-in are found in the sonic
character or signature of a cable. If we look closely at dielectrics we
find a similar situation. The dielectric actually changes slightly as it
charges and its dissipation factor is linked to its hardness. In part
these changes are evidenced in the standing charge of the cable. A new
cable, out of the bag, will have a standing charge when uncoiled. It can
have as much as several hundred millivolts. If the cable is left at
rest it will soon drop to under one hundred, but it will takes days of
use in the system to fall to the teens and it never quite reaches zero.
These standing charges appear particularly significant in low level
interconnects to preamps with high impedance inputs.
The interaction of mechanical and electrical stress/strain variables in a
cable are integral with the break-in, as well as the resonance of the
cable. Many of the variables are lumped into a general category called
triboelectric noise. Noise is generated in a cable as a function of the
variations between the components of the cable. If a cable is flexed,
moved, charged, or changed in any way, it will be a while before it is
relaxed again. The symmetry of the cable's construction is a big factor
here. Very careful design and execution by the manufacturer helps a lot.
Very straight forward designs can be greatly improved with the careful
choice of materials and symmetrical construction. Audioquest has built a large and successful high-end cable company around these principals.
The basic rules for the interaction of mechanical and electrical
stress/strain variables holds true, regardless of scale or medium.
Cables, cats, pianos and rooms all need to relax in order to be at their
best. Constant attention to physical and environmental conditions,
frequent use and the degaussing of a system help it achieve and maintain
a relaxed state. Insights - Cable Break-in
Yeah, you basically did say they can behave like diodes. That’s the entire Crux of your argument. A cable embodies 3 passive characteristics; capacitance, inductance, and impedance. Those properties remain consistent regardless of the direction of energy flow. So saying a length of wire can magically become directional is the exact same thing as saying it behaves in some way like a diode. The formulas that describe the behavior of a diode are how you’d have to describe a directional wire. But since those properties have never been actually demonstrated through any measurement, we can rightly conclude that a length of wire transmitting audio bandwidth AC is not directional in the slightest. The same goes for fuses.
>>>>>>I never said wires or cables act like diodes. Don’t put words in my mouth. You’re the only one saying that. Unfortunately for your argument, resistance of wires and cables measure differently depending on direction. Which is one way to determine proper direction. Another way is to listen. If you had done your homework prior to getting involved here you would have known that. God gave you two ears and one mouth for a reason.
jea48, that’s fascinating, all that stuff on break-in you just posted, but what does that have to do with the price of spinach? Well, OK, maybe there is one thing. You say Audioquest has built a large and successful high end cable company by making cables symmetrical. Yet, gentle readers, we know from this very thread Audioquest is one of the biggest proponents of wire and cable directionality based - according to them - on the physical asymmetry of the wire. Which is why Audioquest has been marking their cables including - and more to the point! - their SPEAKER CABLES for direction since like forever. Therein lies a great big old contradiction. Raise your hand if you need help. Talk among yourselves. Smoke if ya got em.
anyone here a scientist? Raise your hand if you are a scientist.
BTW, an engineer is explicitly NOT a scientist.
The two receive fundamentally different educations, right from the get go and throughout their training.
A scientist is trained in theory.
The engineer is trained in LAWS.
Both bits are the same, except a scientist is wired to question the theory, where the engineer is taught that these concepts are scientific law and inviolate.
The scientist is the only one of the two that is correctly trained.
The engineer is literally ~purposely~ mistrained so they won’t try to engineer a solution that is based on guesses. They are specifically taught not to think that way. Trained to ’engineer solutions’, NOT to deal with unknowns....Specifically to not deal with unknowns. I hope that is clear. You should never build a giant bridge, skyscraper, or rocket.. based on guesses and theory. Please and thank you. However, this mentality can and does bite scientific exploration on the ass. Repeatedly. The engineer tends to not understand that they are mistrained, as it rarely creates issue in their lives and they (some of them) can generally bully their way past the seeming roadblocks.
This is why some choose the endeavor of engineering over that of science theory and exploration. A mental mindset orientation thing. Just like all areas of chosen endeavor.
If you think I’m tying to be mean or confuse the issue, please go and ask the head of your local physics department at your local university. Please. You’ll get the same answer all the way up through Harvard, MIT, Max Plank institute, all of them will tell you that there are no laws and there is only theory...and that everything, everything under the sun... is subject to change and modification, if observation and then attempts at correlation/proofing... provide the path. But, importantly, that an inability to prove via extant methodologies... does NOT provide for falsification of the observation, just that no path to yay or nay --yet exists. THAT is science.
Only engineers and technicians get taught the scientific law bit. Nobody else.
So when we get this issue of "not being possible", or "not being real"or "it has to be a bunch of bunk and no one here uses science", you can bet your bottom dollar it is coming from an engineer or a technician, or someone who has no real scientific training at all.
Actually that whole premise is not true. I am an Engineer, aerospace type, Univ. of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va, but my curriculum was almost all theoretical propulsion and theoretical fluid dynamics. Statistical Thermodynmics and Indeterminate Structures are also very theoretical as were many other courses. So, it’s not really true, at least in my case and obviously many other cases, that engineers are not trained in theory.
You are right Geoff, it is a oversimplification, and not 100% true. It is a generalization, at best, but it’s aura hangs over the whole engineer vs scientist scenario.
It certainly started the way I speak of, back in Bavaria, in the 1760’s.
But if you give them room for a few to slip through, 100% will take the cheat.
the Germans found a way to get more boots on the ground, when it comes to competence in the sciences, the kind that can build and make.
Not everyone could be a exploring Renaissance man. so they came up with "the law, don’t question it" technique of training, and then they could get good ’makers’ out there, by a factor of 10-50x vs that of the exploring theoretician.
The trick was to do things, make things... with all the science they had discovered. This was a way of achieving that.
Builders, qualified and capable builders and getting it done in a scholastic environment in a reasonable amount of time with a reasonable rate of success..required a revamp of the real scientific method.
The birth of scientific law was and is synonymous with the birth of the societal slot of ’engineer’. Both really came into being in ~1760’s in Bavaria. The rest of the western world witnessed the success of this technique... and copied it.
And the quandary of this forum, were observation is ruled scientifically violating(by some) and therefore invalid, was born from that gestation/change/split in Bavaria.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
