Equipment Break-in: Fact or Fiction

Thanks, Spluta
This link proves that electric and electronic components wear out within time and break-in time is infinitessimaly measurable.
The reliability issues have to be sought for different purpouses whether it's for aircraft, hospital, audio or any different type of electronics.

FACT: If equipment sounds like $HIT out from the box it will never sound like HONEY even after recommended 300 or N00 hours. Usually if you upgrade a component or a few it should sound better to YOUR ears no-matter if you get it NIB or used.

FICTION: Ear-drums in the mix with naive stereotypical human mind is driven by the talented advertisement in the audio magazines and making everybody believe that every equipment has to undergo N00...N000 break-in time.

Whatever undergoes "break-in" is the speaker voice coil that needs to be massaged especially for the speakers with large woofers, turntable parts, CD pickup but not for N00 hours. I would estimate it from 30min to 5hours.

Is there any other proof that burn-in break-in improves the components and/or cables other than voodoo or act-of-God kinda-stuff??
What is the physical internal proccess there that even dealers believe but don't understand realy what's going on?

here we go: we ain't talkin' here 'bout differences in cables or power cords. we're talking about burn-in or break-in which in reality more issue of mentality and adoptation rather than any physical proccess involved.
i read a commets about "residual polarization" and i do have an idea how to calculate the time of a residual polarization:
1. define a signal path lengh
2. divide a signal path lengh(meters) by speed of light(meters/second) and you get time in seconds of a "residual polarization" of a dielectric.
3. compare the result with the manufacturer suggested burn-in or break-in time he...he...
4. if you don't trust me just write a note to mail@vtl.com the vtl manufacturers to receive a tru-scientific answer from knowledgable personnel or even luke manley himself who realy deserves a respect and trust.

Redkiwi,
some people do understand it and some people don't and still believe that there is a break-in of electrical components and wires.
truly, nothing has to be scientific to prove that break-in crap.

Spluta, just for curiosity, Er is a force to be applied to distruct dielectric dipole?

Gents and Ladies,
This is the most interesting post here IMO ever that occured for the whole Audiogon existance and I do appreciate these controversal thoughts that came up here.

Man of science tend to deny or assume but the final result should be the number and/or equation.
Electronics do involve influence of chemistry and thermo-dynamics and even maybe in our discussed burn-in proccess in audio freequencies.

I however still hold my position towards believing that burn-in is more of a marketing and psychological issue rather than physical process, but there could be different long-term factors that I have no knowlege how to define or calculate them; therefore I only assume that influence of thermal adoptation along with other values of a chemical and physical proccesses can be neglected compared to the electrical.

Nowdays, as I believe I described my understadning of burn-in proccess as function depending on time by simple 7th grade physics formula by simply dividing the signal path over the speed of light for the peak of the equipment performance.

Also I greatly appreciate everyone along with author for bringing up different thoughts. Let them ALL be honored and not to be attacked whether it's from scientists or ordinary people.