atdavid
Responses from atdavid
| Has to be said Miller and GK arguing about physics ... I have to give the win on this one almost completely to GK, even his use of glass was suitable as this was how x-rays were discovered.Miller, You are correct bremsstrahlung is the predominant mechanism, but ... | |
| How Science Got Sound Wrong But mahgister, he does very clearly attack digital, and does it in a very specific way. He claims that the limitation on timing of a digitized system is limited to 1/(sample rate) which for 44.1KHz is about 23 microseconds.His expertise does not e... | |
| How Science Got Sound Wrong Mahgister,I think I get where you are coming from, but the author of the article was attacking digital audio at the signal level, not at the "sound getting to the ear" level. Sound is complex. Recorded signals ... not so much. | |
| How Science Got Sound Wrong No Mahgister you are trying to see things in this article that frankly are not there. I cannot support that point of view.The whole basis of the claim of the article is a misrepresentation of the timing aspects of digital audio. This is caused by... | |
| How Science Got Sound Wrong Can't agree with you Mahgister. Whole premise of the article was that digitized systems only have timing accuracy to a sampling rate level and hence miss micro-timing. That is a 100% false premise. Digitized systems with high SNR have very high ti... | |
| Pass Labs and Fuses A CdSe photocell (and other photocells) attentuator may require little power, but definitely not a passive device. It is an active device. It is a semiconductor. Light induces more available charge carriers. | |
| Has to be said Classically x-rays were products of excited accelerated electrons hitting targets. Got interrupted in my post. You hypothesis about penetration depth is based on one method of attentuation hence you make wrong assumptions about radio waves and wa... | |
| How Science Got Sound Wrong We can’t see 324 megapixels ... Not even close. We can see about 7 megapixels at most at a single time in our foveal vision. That 324 is an erroneous interpretation of if we scanned our eyes over a field of view but out brains do not really work t... | |
| Has to be said Virtual photons was referring to photons in conductors which in QM behave different from what we think of as EM photons. | |
| Has to be said Wrong again.May want to research penetration depth in water of radio waves. Longer waves penetrate further. They are the lowest energy.Classical x-rays are accelerated electrons. They are not em waves. They do penetrate higher at higher energies b... | |
| How Science Got Sound Wrong I proved the article wrong in my first few posts. The article is based on a gross technical inaccuracy. | |
| Has to be said Sometimes he is right, and sometimes wrong. You know when he is wrong when he fights the hardest and deflects the most, like now. Google search photon energy. Easily done. The equation I posted E = h*f is readily known, easily understood, and not... | |
| Has to be said Whether photons or waves is meaningless in your CD player example. The speed of light is also meaningless in the CD player example. It had 0 bearing on the claimed effect. You are just trying to justify your wrong statement about photon energy. | |
| How Science Got Sound Wrong So basically Cleeds you have no point at all? Thank you for clarifying that. | |
| Has to be said Your point was horribly misstated. The Schuman resonance is specific to the cavity size. The cavity of a CD player has no impact on the wavelength just makes more reflections. |