Was the computer program glitch at a Subway, perchance?
Snake oil came first. By a likely ~ +50k years
The entire path re professionalism, in all possible ways... is rooted in the thing that came first ---- snake oil. Something that was in play the whole time....of predating ideas on professionalism -----for a likely 50,000 plus years.
To attack the very thing that bought about and formed -hell no, Defines- human intellect?
Study suggests shamans acted as the first professional class in human society
Could be an interesting discussion but I expect degeneration will set in quite soon.
To attack the very thing that bought about and formed -hell no, Defines- human intellect?
Study suggests shamans acted as the first professional class in human society
Could be an interesting discussion but I expect degeneration will set in quite soon.
Showing 18 responses by geoffkait
mapman15,539 posts12-13-2018 9:58pmStop living in the past and bragging about all the demerits and get back to current business, ie spewing nonsense repeatedly and non stop. >>>Take a happy pill and stop obsessing about me. ‘Tis the season to be jolly. 😃 |
Thanks, glugson, Semantics is the word I was looking for! n80 is playing a semantics game with me. We are on an audio forum and when asked to differentiate “hearing” from “perception” he gives me this whole vision perception spiel. For someone who fancies himself an expert on physiology he didn’t do a very good job with hearing and perception, as I already pointed out, and left himself wide open to attack. Plus n80 lost a golden opportunity to blow his placebo horn. 🎺 I’m guessing he thinks he’s still back on his photography forum. Let’s try to focus here. |
n80 First, obviously, hearing is a form of perception but all perception is not hearing. Duh? n80 But, generally speaking ’hearing’ is simply the ability to detect vibration while perception is considered the processing and interpretation of those vibrations in the central nervous system. >>>>You will forgive me for saying this but that is actually incorrect. Hearing cannot occur until the brain gets involved. Therefore, it’s probably best to use my interpretation - hearing is the same thing as perception of sound. A deaf man would not hear even though acoustic vibrations impinged on his ears. I should add that hearing/perception of sound is influenced by other factors than acoustic waves impinging in the ears. Including psychological factors, but other factors as well. I’m surprised you left psychological factors out. 😬 |
n80, of course I’m not saying that physics and electronics are the only fields of science. Give me a break.. What I am saying is for audio related devices and tweaks the most obvious fields of science that apply are physics and electronics. Duh" Unless you wish to represent yourself as having expertise in mind matter interaction, Thu, you actually don’t qualify as an expert in audio devices or tweaks or explanations thereof. The placebo effect might be your last hope of expertise for pharma but not so much for audio, sorry to disappoint. Knowledge is what’s left after you subtract all the stuff you forgot from school. glubson, if we require amateur help we’ll let you know. |
Whoa! Even Wikipedia gets involved. ControversiesEdit There is substantial controversy on the subject of audiophile components; many have asserted that the occasionally high cost produces no measurable improvement in audio reproduction.[20] For example, skeptic James Randi, through his foundation One Million Dollar Paranormal Challenge, has offered a prize of $1 million to anyone who can demonstrate that $7,250 audio cables "are any better than ordinary audio cables".[21] In 2008, audio reviewer Michael Fremer attempted to claim the prize, and said that Randi declined the challenge.[22]Randi said that the cable manufacturer Pear Cables was the one who withdrew.[23] Criticisms usually focus on claims around so-called "tweaks" and accessories beyond the core source, amplification, and speaker products. Examples of these accessories include speaker cables, component interconnects, stones, cones, CD markers, and power cables or conditioners.[24][25] There is disagreement on how equipment testing should be conducted and as to its utility. Audiophile publications frequently describe differences in quality which are not detected by standard audio system measurements and double blind testing, claiming that they perceive differences in audio quality which cannot be measured by current instrumentation,[26] and cannot be detected by listeners if listening conditions are controlled,[27] but without providing an explanation for those claims. |
n80895 posts12-11-2018 6:46pmA lot of shamanism and snake oil have no real physical science behind them whatsoever. But that has never meant that they do not lack effectiveness when applied at the right time to the right person. >>>>Gosh, that’s awful decent of ya. By the right person one assumes you mean a very gullible one or one very susceptible to the dreaded placebo effect. 😬 But seriously, can you give me an example of an audio device or tweak that doesn’t have science behind it? Assumed you looked for an explanation, which you probably didn’t. If a thing works it must obey science, no? Or do you mean no explanation can be found in a text book. You are not an engineer or physicist so maybe you’re not really a good candidate for finding a science explanation. Even the Teleportation Tweak has an explanation. Now, you personally might not know what the science is behind some outrageous audiophile tweak but that’s another issue. I did not create reality. We did not know what gravity was until Newton cane along. Even after he figured it out we didn’t know the whole story. The science community for new observations and new concepts can take a very long time to catch up. 🐛 “I looked for a scientific explanation but I couldn’t find one.” 😳 - Naysayer’s lament |