You are here

Log in or register to post comments
geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
But why 26?

And what happens if I write > really good, instead of the bland > O.K.?

The best I can do without proof is to say that 26 is used because it works.

If you wish, you can write the expression in the form,

Elk IS SUPERB AND > O.K.

or, Elk IS TERRIFIC AND > O.K.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: All my recent tweaks

KBK
KBK's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 30 2007 - 12:30pm
Re: All my recent tweaks

Got a good story (heard it today from the man involved) about a tweak from a friend who used to own the biggest shop in town, back in the day.

He was stuck in the ditch and a friend came along. Both turned out to be high. Gee... audio people high, that never happens.

He had no tow rope, but in the car was a $8k set of hose sized speaker cables.So they used them to tow the car out of the ditch. Worked just fine.

So keep your expensive speaker cables in the trunk. You never know when you are going to be high, crash the car, and then need to get towed out.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 28 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re: All my recent tweaks

Can I interject here, Geoff. ?

First of all Geoff, is the name ELK (which you have recommended) strong enough ? Elk is known as Elk on the Stereophile Forum but would not his actual name be the best for him to write ? YOU don't need to know what his actual name is publicly, just tell him to write his name in capital letters followed by > O.K.

Secondly I would query your suggestion of the word "TERRIFIC" !!! It COULD have a different interpretation than the beneficial one you had meant it to mean !! Words which could be ambiguous are best not used. The words "SUPERB", "EXCELLENT", "GOOD" are the best, unambiguous, all round (beneficial) words to use.

Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
Can I interject here, Geoff. ?

First of all Geoff, is the name ELK (which you have recommended) strong enough ? Elk is known as Elk on the Stereophile Forum but would not his actual name be the best for him to write ? YOU don't need to know what his actual name is publicly, just tell him to write his name in capital letters followed by > O.K.

Secondly I would query your suggestion of the word "TERRIFIC" !!! It COULD have a different interpretation than the beneficial one you had meant it to mean !! Words which could be ambiguous are best not used. The words "SUPERB", "EXCELLENT", "GOOD" are the best, unambiguous, all round (beneficial) words to use.

Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.

May, by all means! Thanks, I couldn't seem to shake him....

KBK
KBK's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 30 2007 - 12:30pm
Re: All my recent tweaks

Are you folks aware of the phenomena of 13.5 sidereal time?

In some circles and research areas it has been noted, that, through intensive testing and then correlating via database, that such activities are far more successful, specifically psychic experimentation that results in positives..to the tune of a 400% increase in said positives or accuracy..when such things are done at 13.5 sidereal time.

This ties directly to what I've been speaking on as of late,about Nickolai Kozyrev finding a 'cosmic carrier wave' that was passing through all materials and seemingly completely temporally invariant or it has NO temporal value or, it is not related to time and is outside of time, ie, instantaneous over ANY distance, be it a foot or 5000 light years or more.

Well, there are some aspects to those points which were JUST utilized by a MAJOR US government research group and incorporated into a device type which is in their very charter to design and execute at the highest level of physics.

They just completed a total change in their direction and utilized this information in their latest device and increased their accuracy from previous multi-million dollar attempts. The increase in their accuracy in these areas is a not small amount of ....40x. That's right, a SIMPLE change in materials and direction created an increase in accuracy of forty fold (compared to the 'standard').

The device type, the change in direction (of efforts and scientific basis), materials in use in the device, and the change in capacity for accuracy... ALL TOGETHER (as a set) show that they were and are -- specifically and directly acting on this exact information.

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/logicclock_020410.html

In those efforts, they accidentally created the basis for superluminal Gigahertz communications systems that pass through anything...but they don't know that yet. (two detectors arranged like a telescope, ie, in line mechanistically and then compared, and the other end arranged so it transmits via the same materials and methodology, and presto-chango, superluminal communication-use aluminum tubes for isolation and directing. I believe that Reich used the same materials in his work?-basically if you block or put such a structure as an aluminum tube in the stream of such energies (energies that are everywhere, like an ocean), you are GOING to get a resonant engine of sorts that has a energetic direction and polarization.)

Their prior most accurate attempt involved mercury, an interesting substance that is vital to Alchemical works, due to these associations and how it is connected to the universe.

Remember, if you've read my posts..that Kozyrev stated that aluminum is the ONLY thing he found in the table of elements that blocks this 'cosmic carrier wave' that he detected and experimented with.

This, if aluminum wave structures and their associated angular spin components (And connectivity) are immune to noise of sorts at this cosmic carrier wave level (think Brownian, etc), the increase in accuracy, when it is used as comparator (to another molecular structure or ionic consideration)..will be an almost or exact 50%, or a doubling of accuracy as one ionic emissive consideration (the aluminum in use)is actually immune to the backdrop.. .

Which was the NIST result, you may note.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 28 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re: All my recent tweaks

>>> "Are you folks aware of the phenomena of 13.5 sidereal time?" <<<

No, KBK, I personally was not aware of the phenomena you refer to. Peter and I have been working on and investigating the area of 'linkage' for quite a long time - i.e. Things which are identical are 'linked' - not only animate, behavioural patterns etc, but inanimate things such as words. The words we humans use now are merely more recent and more sophisticated methods of communication and communication (however primitive it was when it started) has been in Nature since the beginning of primitive life forms. So, communication is well established.

So many scientists, faced with the inexplicable, are now having to turn to the concept of "fields" - of things which are identical 'knowing the existence of each other'.

We have also Bohm's book "Thought as a system" saying, in effect - "The whole society sharing thoughts - it's all one process".

Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks

I struggled through Huw Price's Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point: New Directions for the Physics of Time several years ago or maybe it was 8 years ago. Kip Thorne's Black Holes and Time Warps, Einstein's Outrageous Legacy and Sheldrake's The Presence of the Past were more up my alley.

j_j
j_j's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 13 2009 - 4:22pm
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
I struggled through Huw Price's Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point: New Directions for the Physics of Time several years ago or maybe it was 8 years ago. Kip Thorne's Black Holes and Time Warps, Einstein's Outrageous Legacy and Sheldrake's The Presence of the Past were more up my alley.

One finger on the button,
One finger up his nose...

ncdrawl
ncdrawl's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 months ago
Joined: Oct 18 2008 - 9:18am
Re: All my recent tweaks

Keld, I neglected to mention that they do not sell RockWool in DK(essential for the DIY traps) or the Owens COrning stuff..

BUT an even better alternative is terraen bats. You can find it at BYGGMax or Woody, Bauhaus, etc. it works just as well if not better than the owens corning or "rockwool"

(going off memory, been a while since ive lived in Europe(well, few years anyway)

Teddy

damnit EDIT

mevbermind...drunk

KBK
KBK's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 30 2007 - 12:30pm
Re: All my recent tweaks

"We stimulated the proteins with femtosecond laser pulses to mimic the absorption of sunlight," explains Scholes. "This enabled us to monitor the subsequent processes, including the movement of energy between special molecules bound in the protein, against a stop-clock. We were astonished to find clear evidence of long-lived quantum mechanical states involved in moving the energy. Our result suggests that the energy of absorbed light resides in two places at once - a quantum superposition state, or coherence - and such a state lies at the heart of quantum mechanical theory."

A team of University of Toronto chemists have made a major contribution to the emerging field of quantum biology, observing quantum mechanics at work in photosynthesis in marine algae.

http://www.physorg.com/news184423418.html

The lesson?

If it lives, it's quantum, multi-dimensional, interconnected - holographic.

Further driving of the point:

"First, it means that quantum mechanical probability laws can prevail over the classical laws of kinetics in this complex biological system, even at normal temperatures."

Now, consider the comment of General Stubbledine, He was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, (I paraphrase),"The average man has no idea of the incredible and immense level of power available to, and actually within him".

Then David Hudson's work with ORME monatomics, with a few years of spectroscopic analysis, and finding that the monatomic dual state PMG's (a ph exposure and controlled 'regimin driven modification' of PMG metals into an oxidative state) that normal spectroscopic analysis techniques misses, this work of his shows that these actually 'very common' copper paired dual state superconductive elements are everywhere...gold, for example..will be seen as iron silicon and aluminum. (This, when the gold sample could not be measured as anything of the nature of gold at all, under a 30 second burn, which is the 'normal' spectroscopic burn. The gold was pounded to death with basic alchemical ph slamming tricks to turn it into the philosopher's stone. Then it will not measure as gold, but as only as a small residual of these three elements.)

Aluminum.

Kozyrev's Superluminal wave, that can only be shielded by aluminum, as the NIST recently discovered in a lopsided way, when building their super accurate atomic clock. So the bulwark and interference/inference point that the superluminal can 'break shore' upon, at the least. And in doing so, provide the basis point for establishing an energetic differential-it can be measured, if you finally know the question to ask.

And with the Soviet Academy of science's proper usage of the 300 second element sample burn (they know this well..) method via the emplacement of the sample in a neutral atmosphere, they find the 'orbitally rearranged' cooper-paired state PMG group at MUCH higher energy frequency states.

And then the US Naval Academy's Research Center report on the body's capacity to respond faster than the speed of light, ie, instant communication within each cell.

Then David Hudson's spectroscopic analysis of neural matter and correct foodstuffs, that showed the unrecognized orbitally re-arranged PMG throughout the best soils, throughout the human body, and throughout the entire nervous structures of all living creatures. The brain mass of a man or a pig, for example, might be as high as 5-10% of these elements.

This leads down interesting roads.

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: All my recent tweaks

Thanks NC

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks

QUOTE
Now, consider the comment of General Stubbledine (sic), He was the commanding general of the United States Army Intelligence and Security Command from 1981 to 1984, (I paraphrase),"The average man has no idea of the incredible and immense level of power available to, and actually within him".

-------------------

Gen. Stubblebine wouldn't be the first military officer to have an enormous ego, or to have made an outandlish statement. And what of the general's plans to develop a "super warrior?" - If they did exist, had been developed, I suspect they would have stormed through their latest endeavors with more, uh, ease.

Gen. Stubblebine's comments re pentagon on 9/11:

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:

Quote:
I struggled through Huw Price's Time's Arrow and Archimedes' Point: New Directions for the Physics of Time several years ago or maybe it was 8 years ago. Kip Thorne's Black Holes and Time Warps, Einstein's Outrageous Legacy and Sheldrake's The Presence of the Past were more up my alley.

One finger on the button,
One finger up his nose...

Uh, oh, an interloper pops up an audio tweaks thread. How unexpected.

KBK
KBK's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 30 2007 - 12:30pm
Re: All my recent tweaks

Geoff: If what Stubblebine says is crap -then there's no connectivity in anything you propose or sell, so why you want to shoot yourself straight in the ass like that, I've no idea.

Anyway, you are picking pieces of, presupposing, and coloring the argument to your desires, as you might (and do) accuse others of.

Do you want me to write 20 books worth of points of data and correlation in this thread? I'm not interested. The best one can do is make signs to follow and that's about it. Reality shows itself to those who put in the effort.

Why you want to push people away from such investigation is not something that is not clear to me, but I can see that it might be there, in what you attempt, ie, in how you present yourself.

Do you attempt to do what what was done with bringing in James Randi, to erect a strawman argument and situation (regarding the debunking of Geller and Puthoff's work, so Puthoff could continue his military work with the cloak of ridicule re-erected, as it was falling away) so that the thing can be dismissed easily by those who do not want to look (executed by those who do not want you to look). To create this strawman argument that is lopsided and off-kilter in a strange way so as to disarm the general public and push them against investigation of the thousands upon thousands of data points of that exact nature, that are out there?

So, what I see, in essence, is if anything heads toward the actual explanations of what you are doing or playing with, so you try to shoot it down, but manage somehow to maintain a mystery and ridicule about you?

I mean, what the fuck is your plan, here, Geoff? What are you doing? Is it your 'job' to interfere - or is it your ego that is interfering here?

So, in essence, are you a shill for maintenance of the status quo (you do strange looking things with no explanation but push away the real source info) via being an appointed pi

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
Geoff: If what Stubblebine says is crap -then there's no connectivity in anything you propose or sell, so why you want to shoot yourself straight in the ass like that, I've no idea.

Anyway, you are picking pieces of, presupposing, and coloring the argument to your desires, as you might (and do) accuse others of.

Do you want me to write 20 books worth of points of data and correlation in this thread? I'm not interested. The best one can do is make signs to follow and that's about it. Reality shows itself to those who put in the effort.

Why you want to push people away from such investigation is not something that is not clear to me, but I can see that it might be there, in what you attempt, ie, in how you present yourself.

Do you attempt to do what what was done with bringing in James Randi, to erect a strawman argument and situation (regarding the debunking of Geller and Puthoff's work, so Puthoff could continue his military work with the cloak of ridicule re-erected, as it was falling away) so that the thing can be dismissed easily by those who do not want to look (executed by those who do not want you to look). To create this strawman argument that is lopsided and off-kilter in a strange way so as to disarm the general public and push them against investigation of the thousands upon thousands of data points of that exact nature, that are out there?

So, what I see, in essence, is if anything heads toward the actual explanations of what you are doing or playing with, so you try to shoot it down, but manage somehow to maintain a mystery and ridicule about you?

I mean, what the fuck is your plan, here, Geoff? What are you doing? Is it your 'job' to interfere - or is it your ego that is interfering here?

So, in essence, are you a shill for maintenance of the status quo (you do strange looking things with no explanation but push away the real source info) via being an appointed pi

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
Words which could be ambiguous are best not used. The words "SUPERB", "EXCELLENT", "GOOD" are the best, unambiguous, all round (beneficial) words to use.

Hi, May

Actually my question was to the use of the phrase "O.K." as in:

John Smith > O.K.

This strikes me as bland. Thus, the question as to whether one can substitute "superb," "excellent," "good" or other stronger beneficial words for "O.K" and achieve a stronger effect.

And where did 26 come from? Trial and error? Inspiration? It just seems so out of the blue.

(However I can't play with photos. I do not have pictures of myself. I despise pictures. One of my many mis-wirings.)

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: All my recent tweaks

So, ladies & gentlemen... can we get back on topic, or just close the thread? Either way would suit me just fine.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 28 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re: All my recent tweaks

>>> "This strikes me as bland. Thus, the question as to whether one can substitute "superb," "excellent," "good" or other stronger beneficial words for "O.K" and achieve a stronger effect" <<<

You use BOTH, Elk. You say JOHN SMITH GOOD > O.K.

>>> "And where did 26 come from? Trial and error? Inspiration? It just seems so out of the blue." <<<

From experimentation. 26 was the strongest of all the numbers we tried.

In describing to others the technique we then established the chevron > followed by O.K.

This is then used on all beneficial messages whether you are signing your name or writing SONY GIVES SUPERB SOUND > O.K. - with a Red pen.

The more things (words) which are identical, the stronger the 'resonance'. That is why you use beneficial words which are in frequent usage and which are recognised as meaning the same whoever writes them !!

If you don't want to 'do' photographs, then why don't you write labels with similar wordings as the example given above and attach them to items of equipment ? But, obviously, instead of SONY write the brand name of your own equipment. After attaching the labels, listen for a period of time, then remove the labels and see if you can listen with the same pleasure !!

Carol Clark did an article on trying the experiment of writing 'beneficial' messages with a Red pen on Positive Feedback Online :-

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue1/beltpen.htm

What follows is a small selection from Carol's review.

"..........Yes, dear reader, the pen works, and works brilliantly ! Let me describe what I did, what I heard, and more importantly, what an unsuspecting outside party heard when I performed my experiments. As with any such phenomenon, hearing for yourself is believing. Do not discount what you are about to read unless you are ready to try it yourself..........."

and Carol Clark ends her review with the statement

".........So, we now have my pictures housed in the freezer, and pieces of the special film bearing the names of our components and "> O.K." attached to every piece of equipment we own. Crazy? As I stated in my previous article, these treatments cost nothing, or next to nothing, and they improve the listening experience substantially"

.................Carol Clark audioMUSINGS Issue 12

Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.

j_j
j_j's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 13 2009 - 4:22pm
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
So, ladies & gentlemen... can we get back on topic, or just close the thread? Either way would suit me just fine.

Sorry, once a given individual enters a thread, all semblance of reality departs.

Since I see no point in arguing with personal preference, or with the method any given individual uses to select their own equipment, so be it.

I am not so blase' to claims of "this cord made my mixer stir better, so this power cord is the best", of course, because that's not limited to personal preference.

KBK
KBK's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 30 2007 - 12:30pm
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:

Quote:
So, ladies & gentlemen... can we get back on topic, or just close the thread? Either way would suit me just fine.

Sorry, once a given individual enters a thread, all semblance of reality departs.

Since I see no point in arguing with personal preference, or with the method any given individual uses to select their own equipment, so be it.

I am not so blase' to claims of "this cord made my mixer stir better, so this power cord is the best", of course, because that's not limited to personal preference.

We can't close the thread now, JJ, the fruitcakes (I am apparently one of them) are fighting. It's just getting interesting.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: All my recent tweaks

It is a difficult topic, sometimes.

For instance, this pen and pic in the freezer. This tweak can travel through plastic, metal, insulation, through walls in your home, etc...and exert its effect.

It's no problem that what you've written with a Belt pen is then locked inside a freezer.

However...Art Dudley seems to have had full on exposure to Belt products in the home roaming freely outside a freezer with no effect.

Then...

A reviewer at Positive Feedback noticed that even a paper envelope could block the effect of a Belt device......

"...because at home the card had remained in a pile of unread mail after my mid-December return from a trip. I was listening to music one night when finally I opened it and, finding this handsome Christmas card from May Belt, set it aside for later perusal. But at the same time I noted an improvement in the system's sound and leaned back to enjoy, leaving the rest of the stack untouched. Only after the work concluded did I read the enclosed letter to learn that here was a bona fide Belt device! And that I had therefore not been (self-)conned into belief because I never knew it was there for a purpose...."

So, freezers are Belt-transparent, but, evidently, envelopes are not?

I know, "Blasphemer!" etc...But how else to raise the questions we naturally face with such disparate behaviors?

ncdrawl
ncdrawl's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 years 3 months ago
Joined: Oct 18 2008 - 9:18am
Re: All my recent tweaks

yall keep it up now. i love mutiny.

Keld, dont run away from it, embrace it.

KBK
KBK's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 30 2007 - 12:30pm
Re: All my recent tweaks

OK. Let us continue.

Reich's cloudbusting and Weather control via HAARP's ionzing radiations are validated in totality by solid science, in one sentence. The very last one.

Hang on to your hats:

http://www.physorg.com/news184834030.html

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:

Quote:
So, ladies & gentlemen... can we get back on topic, or just close the thread? Either way would suit me just fine.

Sorry, once a given individual enters a thread, all semblance of reality departs.

Since I see no point in arguing with personal preference, or with the method any given individual uses to select their own equipment, so be it.

I am not so blase' to claims of "this cord made my mixer stir better, so this power cord is the best", of course, because that's not limited to personal preference.

We appreciate your unbridled enthusiasm as well as your logical fallacies.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
You use BOTH, Elk. You say JOHN SMITH GOOD > O.K.

>>> "And where did 26 come from? Trial and error? Inspiration? It just seems so out of the blue." <<<

From experimentation. 26 was the strongest of all the numbers we tried.

Thanks, May. Makes sense now.

Freako, back to your first post, I find it endlessly fascinating that moving speakers by less than an inch can make a significant difference. Of course you need to really know the sound of your system at the original position.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 28 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re: All my recent tweaks

How interested are you Elk, in trying the experiment of writing a (beneficial) message ?

I ask because I had earlier been of the opinion that you were of quite an open mind about many things in audio (you had actually mentioned that you had heard improvement in the sound from fitting certain cables !!!!! - which is quite a start) but then I read one of your latest comments (quoted below) and you seem to be back with others - sharing a narrow look at audio.

Your quote :-
>>> "The transducers at the beginning of the recording chain and at the end of the playback chain have the largest impact on the sound we listen to in our homes.

The electronics and wires in between do relatively little in the overall scheme." <<<

On the face of it, these are "blinkered" sentences. If you are meaning that 'if one doesn't capture most of the information on the microphone in the first place, then it is pointless thinking that you could (somehow) correct (retrieve) things further along the system - electronics and wires', then I perfectly understand that viewpoint.
And, 'if the speakers themselves are not up to presenting the information correctly into the room then, again, what would be the point of changing items of electronic equipment and wiring earlier in the system', then I understand that interpretation. But, the electronics and the wires ARE an important part of the overall scheme - they are IN THE ROOM - in the room where people are actually doing their listening !!!!

But, if you ARE actually believing that "The electronics and wires in between do relatively little in the overall scheme.", then I am sure you would feel that there would be no point you trying the experiments of attaching 'beneficial' messages to things, would there ? And, therefore, with no experiments being carried out, discussions would end up being the usual run of endless 'arm chair/hot air' chit chat. Round and round like musical chairs.
I like the "practitioner" (hands on) version of 'scientists', they are much easier to discuss things with.

Your latest quote (given above) seems to contradict a much earlier exchange you had with KBK (copied below) where you give the impression of being far more 'open to exploration and observation' !!

Reply by KBK :-
>>> "OBSERVATION.. drives science." <<<

>>> "Reply by Elk :-
Exactly.

Observe!

Become curious.

Investigate.

Try to quantify.

Lather, Rinse, Repeat, until the explanation and the measurements correlate with the observations.

Some observations are even contradictory - photons are both waves and particulate. While hard to wrap one's mind around, this is just the way it is.

Additionally, we are still doing it and still learning! We do not know everything. We are not done in any field, including electrical circuits.

I am with you, KBK, in not understanding why this basic point is so difficult for many to comprehend." <<<

**************

Which quote of yours, Elk, is the closest to your actual belief structure ?

Regards,
May Belt,
P.W.B. Electronics.

May Belt
May Belt's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 28 min ago
Joined: May 8 2006 - 1:51am
Re: All my recent tweaks

>>> "It is a difficult topic, sometimes.

For instance, this pen and pic in the freezer. This tweak can travel through plastic, metal, insulation, through walls in your home, etc...and exert its effect." <<<

So can 'background radiation' but we can't see it !!! Does that mean that it is not there ? Does that mean that it is not happening ?

What you are looking at are our 'end' suggestions i.e. The 'end suggestions' from years of investigations - and you are looking at them as though we have 'plucked them out of the blue'. What you are not seeing are the original anomalies - things which happened with the sound which we had no explanation for - which prompted us to begin to search for some sort of understanding as to why those anomalies were happening !!

What emerged from our investigations was that things which were identical appeared to be 'linked' (somehow) and the best concept we found to work with was "linkage by morphic resonance". Many people know the story. By the early 1980s, we were already aware that colours, present in the environment, are significant - regarding sound - and we were already aware of this when we eventually bought a CD player and some CDs some 25 plus years ago. It was during 'treating' the colours (the printing) on the label side of CDs that we discovered (much to our surprise) that the area which responded best - to 'treatment' - was the CD Logo !!!! The CDs may have been one of a (say) identical 5,000 production run but the CD Logo was printed (at that time) on every CD produced - which amounted to millions and millions !!! The CD Logo was far more significant (as regards needing 'treatment') than the actual coloured art work on the CD label.

If the identical CD Logos were 'linked', then this 'linkage' was taking place "through plastic, metal, insulation, through walls in the home" !! In other words, it was THERE, happening.

From past history of 'things, there, happening, without people knowing', what comes to mind is the subject of white light. White light was just that, white light, for millions of years, until one day someone had it to go through a prism and, suddenly, there were the colours of the rainbow. But, the colours of the rainbow did not happen just at that moment. The colours of the rainbow had been there, in Nature, within the white light, for millions and millions of years. Then, to add to the story, later, after someone else had been shining all the colours of the rainbow, through a prism onto a wall, after moving the position of the colours away from that spot, when they felt the wall where the particular colour Red had been shining on, they found that the wall was warm in that area only !!! An anomaly. Why would that part of the wall be warm and not the other parts that the other colours had been shining on ?
The infra red part of the colour spectrum had been there, all the time, in the white light, for millions and millions of years, part of Nature, without people being aware of it !!

If the scientists are correct that the colour we see is the colour left when all the other colours have entered the object, then that is happening whether we are aware of it or not or whether we want it to happen or not, and even whether we can see it or not !!

If the scientists are correct and all the different colours of the rainbow are a different frequency, then that means that all the frequencies but the one we can see have entered the object !! And this is happening whether we are aware of it or not or whether we want it to happen or not !!

>>> "But how else to raise the questions we naturally face with such disparate behaviors?" <<<

Questions being raised I have no problems with !!! It is when some people have a definite agenda, which can then colour any investigative questioning, that I react against. An agenda such as yours, Buddha - which caused me to enter the Stereophile Forum in the first place, a few years back !!

Your posting back then, Buddha :-
>>> "The Peter Belts of this world are sly, like the serpent. They are driven off, but then always find ways to slither back into to hobby to suck the green life blood from the uninitiated

j_j
j_j's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 13 2009 - 4:22pm
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
So, ladies & gentlemen... can we get back on topic, or just close the thread? Either way would suit me just fine.

Sorry, once a given individual enters a thread, all semblance of reality departs.

Since I see no point in arguing with personal preference, or with the method any given individual uses to select their own equipment, so be it.

I am not so blase' to claims of "this cord made my mixer stir better, so this power cord is the best", of course, because that's not limited to personal preference.

We appreciate your unbridled enthusiasm as well as your logical fallacies.

I trust that you are able to take responsibility for your various defamatory statements here, and I further trust that you would never even think to suborn other defamatory statements from others, anywhere, any time.

Your capitulation is appreciated.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: All my recent tweaks

Hi, May...

1) "What is YOUR explanation for the effect on the sound you described by having certain 'crystals' in your listening room ?"

Call it a fishing expedition, if you will.

2) No, immunologists are not on the Sheldrake Train.

If people around the world started using medication X upon its release date, then it would come as no surprise that multiple areas would exhibit the emergence of similar resistances at similar times. (Did the Plague travel from the continent to England via rats on ships, or did morphic resonance create the same plague de novo across the Channel?)

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: All my recent tweaks

May,

Both statements accurately reflect my view of reproducing music.

Microphones and speakers are by far the greatest limitations on accurate sound reproduction. While electronics and other things matter, the relative impact other things have are small.

However, even given this, it is good to have an open mind and to explore what's possible.

For example, there are times a certain microphone positioning captures good sound even though it doesn't make sense based on past experience. If it works, I use it.

j_j
j_j's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 13 2009 - 4:22pm
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
Microphones and speakers are by far the greatest limitations on accurate sound reproduction.

Well, actually, the paucity of recording points and sources is what would seem to be the primary limit, eh? The whole game of playing with mic patterns, speaker radiation patterns, etc, is an attempt at getting back to something moderately like what sounded like the kinda-sorta-original.

KBK
KBK's picture
Offline
Last seen: Never ago
Joined: Sep 30 2007 - 12:30pm
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:

Quote:
Microphones and speakers are by far the greatest limitations on accurate sound reproduction.

Well, actually, the paucity of recording points and sources is what would seem to be the primary limit, eh? The whole game of playing with mic patterns, speaker radiation patterns, etc, is an attempt at getting back to something moderately like what sounded like the kinda-sorta-original.

It's not quite as bad as trying to build cars out of Krispy Kreme donuts, but acoustically speaking it's quite the difference from the real thing. It's only the ear-brain's adaptability that makes it work at all. Not disagreeing, just humorously adding to the descriptive.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
Well, actually, the paucity of recording points and sources is what would seem to be the primary limit, eh?

Indeed.

Even if mics themselves were completely accurate, trying to capture what is really going on is nigh impossible.

Even the best reproduction system has never fooled me into believing there is an actual instrument sitting there.

Yet it is incredibly easy to hear live instruments playing as real, even at a considerable distance and even while standing outside of the room in which they are playing.

j_j
j_j's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 13 2009 - 4:22pm
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:

It's not quite as bad as trying to build cars out of Krispy Kreme donuts, but acoustically speaking it's quite the difference from the real thing. It's only the ear-brain's adaptability that makes it work at all. Not disagreeing, just humorously adding to the descriptive.

I can accept the thought that:

Recorded is to real as krispy kreme is to dunkin' donuts.

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Microphones and speakers are by far the greatest limitations on accurate sound reproduction.

Well, actually, the paucity of recording points and sources is what would seem to be the primary limit, eh? The whole game of playing with mic patterns, speaker radiation patterns, etc, is an attempt at getting back to something moderately like what sounded like the kinda-sorta-original.

It's not quite as bad as trying to build cars out of Krispy Kreme donuts, but acoustically speaking it's quite the difference from the real thing. It's only the ear-brain's adaptability that makes it work at all. Not disagreeing, just humorously adding to the descriptive.

<snip>
To speak of the Universe "expanding into something" would mean that there was something bigger, which we should have called "the universe" in the first place. The easiest way to see what is meant by an expanding universe is to imagine life for two-dimensional Ants living on the surface of an expanding spherical balloon. The Ants can crawl around the surface but, being unable to fly or to penetrate the balloon's surface, they live in what is essentially a two-dimensional world. For the Ants -- provided nothing disturbs them from outside -- their Universe IS the Surface of the balloon -- that's all! Confined to the surface of the balloon, there's no way for the Ants to discover anything about up and down or to discover that the ballon is actually a sphere and not a two-dimensional plane surface. <snip>

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: All my recent tweaks

Wow, two dimensional ants, eh?

Yes, imagine that.

In your example, all they would see is horizontal lines representing other ants, as they would need three dimensions in order to be able to see each from above or below to see ant outlines.

They'd look like this to each other: ______ with maybe some color variation but that would be about all they could 'see.'

Now, if an astue ant observed other ants moving away from him even though they remain motionless, he could start making assumptions about an expanding universe.

Ants could also log their travels on this 'two dimensional' plane and note that if they walk in a straight line long enough, they will arrive at their starting point.

They could even measure the distance between two parallel lines and see the effect of expansion as the distance increases.

In an expaning universe, the ants would be able to recognize they they were appearing to be farther and farther away from each other at an increasing rate. Of course, in this universe, they'd all look red to each other.

The list goes on and on. Even a two dimensional ant could learn to figure out the third dimension.

Even "Flatland" missed some aspects of how a two dimesnional world would appear.

How about trying three dimensional ants on an even gianter baloon?

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: All my recent tweaks

Buddha wrote: They'd look like this to each other: ______

I can easily make an ant look just like that

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: All my recent tweaks

Buddha wrote: How about trying three dimensional ants on an even gianter baloon?

But wouldn't it make it harder for them to see the "horizon"?

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
Even a two dimensional ant could learn to figure out the third dimension.

Well, yeah. But they've gotten, uh, comfortable with two dimensions.

One ant to another, philosophically: "Do you believe ant can live forever?"

Anteater to self, just out of sight behind a rise, "Not in your lifetime."

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: All my recent tweaks

On this two dimensional ant-world, how would light travel?

In a curve along the surface of the baloon, or in a straight line that would be tangential to the baloon's surface?

With 'straight line light,' the fact that an ant could disappear from view over a horizon would imply the presence of the thrid dimension.

If the light travelled following the curve of the baloon, then all ants would see every other ant at all times - in multiples! It would look like a solid wall of ants at any given point.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
It would look like a solid wall of ants at any given point.

Eeeek!

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
To speak of the Universe "expanding into something" would mean that there was something bigger, which we should have called "the universe" in the first place.

Oh, boy. Further proof that science education is not what it should be.

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:

Quote:
To speak of the Universe "expanding into something" would mean that there was something bigger, which we should have called "the universe" in the first place.

Oh, boy. Further proof that science education is not what it should be.

The idea of the universe expanding is over my head. How can something that is considered (unmeasurable and) infinite expand, and into what? It's opposite equivalent would be nothing contracting into - what?

Same as some tweaks; I just don't fathom it

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks

[quote}The idea of the universe expanding is over my head. How can something that is considered (unmeasurable and) infinite expand, and into what?

But it's not considered unmeasurable or infinite. Whew! That was a close one.

Buddha
Buddha's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 9 months ago
Joined: Sep 8 2005 - 10:24am
Re: All my recent tweaks

I predict that Hubble XXVI will peer so deep into space...

...that it will see another "Universe" expanding toward us.

j_j
j_j's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 2 months ago
Joined: Mar 13 2009 - 4:22pm
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
I predict that Hubble XXVI will peer so deep into space...

...that it will see another "Universe" expanding toward us.

Look! Ma! It's the Firefly!

geoffkait
geoffkait's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 39 min ago
Joined: Apr 29 2008 - 5:10am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
I predict that Hubble XXVI will peer so deep into space...

...that it will see another "Universe" expanding toward us.

Either that or the start of the Big Crunch. Geez, we're so screwed.

Freako
Freako's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 5 days ago
Joined: Jan 17 2010 - 8:29am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:

Quote:
I predict that Hubble XXVI will peer so deep into space...

...that it will see another "Universe" expanding toward us.

Either that or the start of the Big Crunch. Geez, we're so screwed.

I believe in the big expansion... followed by the big contraction... followed by a big bang. Then it all starts over with some stupid species screwing it all up once again. Nothing new under the sun. Let's just hope for the best.

Elk
Elk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 months 2 weeks ago
Joined: Dec 26 2006 - 6:32am
Re: All my recent tweaks


Quote:
I predict that Hubble XXVI will peer so deep into space...

...that it will see another "Universe" expanding toward us.

Or are backsides as we peer forward.

Pages

  • X
    Enter your Stereophile.com username.
    Enter the password that accompanies your username.
    Loading