The molecular level explanation of "cable burn-in"


According to one cable seller

"The insulation (or dielectric) will absorb energy from the conductor when a current is flowing (i.e. when music is playing). This energy-absorption causes the dielectric's molecules to re-arrange themselves from a random order into a uniform order. When the molecules have been rearranged, the dielectric will absorb less energy & consequently cause less distortion."

So it’s the plastic polymer (as dielectric insulation) to undergo some sort of molecular rearrangements to minimize the distortion. Probably one of the greatest scientific discoveries ever!

“Many premium AC cords constrict or compress the audio transient as their characteristic impedance restricts the transient current.”

We all know impedance restricts current but how possibly “many” premium AC cords constrict/compress the audio transient (when not carrying audio signal)? Then again is it achieved by this molecular rearrangements of the cable insulation?

Unfortunately there are no measurement data or mathematical formulas to be found to back up this amazing scientific discovery. Simply “it happens”. So I came up with a formula for them.

∆E = P - SoT

∆E: energy absorbed by dielectric

P: energy (power) drawn from wall outlet

So : Smake Oile

T: Dielectric Transition Temperature

classicrockfan

@classicrockfan -

I would rather use "electric potential' than "voltage potential".

                                  Certainly understandable.

      My own nomenclature choices* are rather based on how our Prof expressed himself (regarding atomic charges), followed by decades of checking for, "electrical potential" differences, IN Volts, with voltmeters/oscilloscopes, between neutrals and grounds, over so many decades.

                                          *SEMANTICS

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/300934/what-is-the-difference-between-electric-potential-potential-difference-and-vol

                                                and:

https://www.quora.com/What-unit-is-represented-by-a-joule-per-coulomb

 "none of the above makes sense a good example of pseudo-science"

      Interesting that you seem to appreciate Tesla, his innovations and inventions, and yet: fail to recognize that virtually everything he did was based on the theories I've mentioned prior, in this thread and elsewhere on this site (ie: Field Theory, Wave Function, etc).

                                       "pseudo-science" ??

       Another rewind, based on some general observations and that should shed further light on the subject of modern (post 1800's) science/Electrical Theory and how we've benefitted from what you choose to call, "pseudo-science".

Cargo cult science is a pseudoscientific method of research that favors evidence that confirms an assumed hypothesis. In contrast with the scientific method, there is no vigorous effort to disprove or delimit the hypothesis.[1] The term cargo cult science was first used by physicist Richard Feynman during his 1974 commencement address at the California Institute of Technology.[1]

Cargo cults are religious practices that have appeared in many traditional tribal societies in the wake of interaction with technologically advanced cultures.

     Do a bit of research and you'll learn those primitives were limited in their understanding of what they saw with their eyes, based on their prior experience, education and BIASES.

                                                A rewind:

                 It isn't that the Denyin'tologists are ignorant.

               It's they're knowing* so much, that's WRONG.

                       *heart of the Dunning-Kruger Effect

                                              OR, two:

     The Church of the Naysayer Doctrine (like every other faith-based, religious cult) has as many dopes as it does Popes.   

     Bring up anything resembling SCIENCE/PHYSICS, dated later than the 1800’s and they become apoplectic, not having the formal education to comprehend the concepts, or- possible ramifications.    THAT would be hilarious, were it not so pathetic!        

           Gimme That Old Time Religion, Gimme That Old Time Religion, etc.

        At the very first mention of something as simple as Wave Function (a BASIC tenet of Quantum Mechanics), the Cargo Cult will label you a KOOK.

        But remember: they can only view/understand you, based on their limited experience, education and BIASES.

         They have overlooked the fact that, if not for the hypotheses/theories and experimentation, regarding Quantum Mechanics: a plethora of modern conveniences, medical devices and the gear they so love, would not exist.

          Had scientists, chemists and inventors shared the doctrines of the Cargo Cult (Denyin'tologists), there would be no semiconductors, computer chips, LASERs, or Magnetic Resonance Imaging devices (MRIs).

                                         Solid State amps?

                                     OOPS (back to tubes)!

                                        Your Smart Phone?

                                        FA'GET ABOUT IT!

                                         Your car's GPS?

                                                NOPE!

    Then too: some may be willfully ignorant and just enjoy being contentious.

                        Others: obtuse, uneducated*, misinformed?

      *Typically, from what's been exhibited here: H.S. STEM, if that, would be a safe inference.

      Either way: the result, when the Cult begins its rhetoric, is a classic demo of the Dunning- Kruger Effect.

                                          But, I digress: 

       Bring up those pesky details, regarding the likes of QED, Dielectric Absorption, Poynting's theorem and possible application/effects, relative to frequency, that our musical signals are carried via photon or wave, outside the conductor and you're a KOOK?

         Again: the Cargo Cult can only understand anyone with an actual background, experience and education in Physics/QED, based on their beliefs, education, experience and biases

                                      Remember this?.

     One anecdote  that some may find interesting: their walks in the woods and how Feynman's father would encourage him to look beyond the fact that something in nature exists, but into why and how.

     It saddened him that while attending college, during a visit home and one of their walks: his dad asked what he was learning in college.

     At that moment, he realized: if he tried to explain what he was learning, there was no way his dad could understand.                               

                            It wasn't an insult or condescension.

                                                Just reality.

                                    Oh well: let 'em go build a runway!

                                                    references:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applications_of_quantum_mechanics#:~:text=Examples%20include%20lasers%2C%20electron%20microscopes,systems%2C%20computer%20and%20telecommunication%20devices.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chadorzel/2015/08/13/what-has-quantum-mechanics-ever-done-for-us/?sh=37c459944046

https://uwaterloo.ca/institute-for-quantum-computing/quantum-101/quantum-applications-today

          But: I'm a kook, because I believe in the SCIENCE, from which all that sprang?

     https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/five-practical-uses-spooky-quantum-mechanics-180953494/

           Einstein got that last one wrong (Quantum Entanglement), BUT- I still wish he'd been alive, when the Hubble Telescope proved, what he considered his, "greatest blunder" (his inability to bring symmetry to his field equation, without lambda.

  https://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/200507/history.cfm#:~:text=Einstein's%20original%20equations%20had%20been,how%20the%20universe%20will%20end.                                            How about that?

Another example of a hypothesis/theory, with no way to MEASURE, what you're sure must be there, in some detectable way, or another.

                                               Just for fun:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/6-times-quantum-physics-blew-our-minds-in-2022/

                                            Happy listening!

Interesting story :

So when the first cable was laid under the Atlantic and people tried to make a transcontinental telephone call, the sound came out skewed in time, noisy and garbled. They checked the cable along the ocean floor and it was in perfect condition and insulated.

They consulted the best physicists out there, including one guy in England (forget his name) who was a student of Maxwell. He proposed that the cable insulation material, not the conductor, was the problem, which turned out to be true. The dielectric was distorting the sound. its the same reason high tension power lines have an air gap between them and the earth.

Most burn-in has to do with the changes that take place between the outer layers of the conductor and the dielectric, changing the speed which result in phase interferences that we hear as noise or resonance. this has been clear to real physicists since the first telephone cable... also, I saw CalTech guys talking about it on YouTube..they know, and have to know when doing ultra high end EE like semi-conductor stuff. There was even someone who talked about their elementary school class where they ran DC current into crystals and observed the changes that occurred over time, something like that.

Post removed 

Thanks

for the enlightened anecdote about Maxwell and cables...

 

 

It is why i proposed the simple experiment above which is way more instructive than raging discussion about electro-magnetic concepts theory ( quantum or not ) for most people😁 :

 

You put quartz on the connectors : Decompression of sound among other impressions ...

You put shungite on the connectors : it produce more a compressive impression ...

You put the two and the effect can be generally positive and more balanced...

 

But the effect will be perceived slightly differently function of each system synergy and each cable specs...

 

i believe in my experiments it is how i learned what i learned not by buying a hundred of gear upgrades...

And i am not an electrical engineer , only someone who spoke with someone who spoke with someone who spoke with someone who spoke with Prof. Feynman... 😉

 

 

Interesting story :

So when the first cable was laid under the Atlantic and people tried to make a transcontinental telephone call, the sound came out skewed in time, noisy and garbled. They checked the cable along the ocean floor and it was in perfect condition and insulated.

They consulted the best physicists out there, including one guy in England (forget his name) who was a student of Maxwell. He proposed that the cable insulation material, not the conductor, was the problem, which turned out to be true. The dielectric was distorting the sound. its the same reason high tension power lines have an air gap between them and the earth.

Most burn-in has to do with the changes that take place between the outer layers of the conductor and the dielectric, changing the speed which result in phase interferences that we hear as noise or resonance. this has been clear to real physicists since the first telephone cable... also, I saw CalTech guys talking about it on YouTube..they know, and have to know when doing ultra high end EE like semi-conductor stuff. There was even someone who talked about their elementary school class where they ran DC current into crystals and observed the changes that occurred over time, something like that.