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
- ...
- 124 posts total
It may have been the telegraph. regardless, theres a whole documentary on it that discusses the huge research that went into cables at the time when they designed the transatlantic one, including the papers written by the scientists (the Maxwell guys) trying to solve the distorted signal, photos from meetings they had, and how they discovered it was the material choice used for the insulation and not the conductor that caused the problem. The documentary dovetails into interviewing modern power grid engineers discussing how crucial the cable sheathing is and how they go about choosing it depending on applications for proper transmission. But im sure thats all snake oil because random people on the internet can’t hear a difference in their cables.
|
You seem to be very confused about transatlantic cables. Perhaps you should watch your documentary again.
That’s not even remotely true. Why are you trying to revise history? Here’s the Wikipedia entry on transatlantic cables. It looks historically accurate to me, and note it references reliable sources. |
cleeds Thank you. clustrocasual Did you get paid to write the story or what's the purpose? Bizarre... it seems you're desperate to prove 'cable burn-in' is real what for? What really grabbed my attention was " I saw CalTech guys talking about it on YouTube" I tried to find the youtube video but couldn't. Could you please share the video with me with us? Or you just wanted to destroy her reputation? I thought this school motto was corny I never paid attention until now "The truth shall make you free" I keep getting this question about me being negative and not contributing. Being truthful as an electrical engineer is how I contribute to this forum. audphile1 "What we’ve been discussing is molecular explanation of cable burn in" So cable burn-in not only induces molecular rearrangements of dielectric molecules but triggers molecular expansion to absorb less energy. Do you even know the transition temperature for plastic dielectric macromolecules to get transformed into rearrangements and expansion? Cables will burn out! Just more pseudo science nonsense because you don't really know.
|
- 124 posts total