Home Isolation Ward

From ebony pucks to magic foil, mystical and controversial tweaks.

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Isolation Ward ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

A mathematical model for the Beltist phenomenon, as requested.

>>Einstein's paper, Lemaitre aside (didn't he work closely with some astronomer?), was a theory, remember? That observational and practical proof (Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and those tests in the SW) came much later shows that there was a basis for the mathematical model he created. While physical proof was not immediately available, that mathematical model provided the basis for experimentation and observation which were made later. The bending of light gravitationally was made observationally by, hell, you are the NASA optical engineer and you ought to be familiar with that.<<

Whereas you're the Beltist researcher, and you ought to be familiar with the fact that there is observational (and practical) proof of the phenomenon. My point in bringing Lemaitre into this, was to show that even the most brilliant scientists can dismiss mathematical models (Einstein said Lemaitre's calculations were "bad physics"). Just as on the other side of the coin, they dismiss observational and practical proof. While purely objectively measurable proof is not yet available (I'm not assuming it will ever be), Peter's hypothetical model can be the basis for experimentation and observation. Keep in mind, the story of Einstein is just one example of how science works; it's not the blueprint for the way all scientific acheivements are made. I don't think building a nuclear bomb is quite the same as improving your audio system....

>>So, by your position, I believe you can state something more definitive than than sometimes odd is better and sometimes even is? The example you picked is interesting because it was a model upon which further experimentation yielded predictable results. As a physics major, you know that, or at least, you should know that.<<

You're looking to Clark to understand Belt's odd/even rule better than me? Ohhhhkay. Unless you are willing to do the research, taking odd theoretical stabs in the dark at this is not going to bring you any closer to understanding it. It will more likely bring you further and further away, and it will also make Beltists laugh at you. What research have you done on the odd/even rule? It's not enough. You're going to have to do more research than Peter if you want to do more than pretend to understand this, because so far, -no one- can state anything more definitive than "sometimes odd is better and sometimes even is". (And you didn't get that from me, because I've never confirmed what favours even). Also, it hasn't even been officially stated that the odd/even rule applies to everything. You've got your work cut out.

>>Are the Beltist tweaks truly predictable well in advance and truly universal? I do not find that so, although admittedly I haven't tried all of their tweaks. Some have no effect in my experience, while some do, adding further confusion. <<

Not unlike other reports I've heard, where some hear the effects of some tweaks but not others, or some tweaks only when repeated x number of times. Myself, I would have to say all the Belt tweaks are truly predictable* and universal, because I've never had one not have any effect. *(Depending on what you mean by 'truly predictable'.... Sometimes a normally beneficial tweak doesn't produce the predicted beneficial effect, depending on what you apply where. This is usually corrected by reapplications elsewhere).

>>In addition, there are alternate explanations in my experience and measurable also.<<

You''ve been able to measure these tweaks? How so?

>>As a science major, I would have hoped that was ingrained upon you. Perhaps you do know more than you let on. A model of the Beltist theory would be a nice start, and while a mathematical basis would be greatly appreciated, even a general written model would certainly be very nice. Something which would have predictability and be universal would be extremely nice to have.<<

I really shouldn't do this.... especially since it isn't my work (Clark came up with it after many nights laboring over it, and I had to like -beg- him for it for days and agree to do his housecleaning for 3 weeks!). But it's all in the interest of advancing science, right? Here is what you are asking about, and I truly hope it is appreciated and will help you to further understand the mysteries of Beltism:

E = PB^2


"silence tells me secretly, everything..."

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Schiit Audio  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
FAQ

Post a Message!

 Forgot Password?
Moniker (Username):
Password (Optional):
  Remember my Moniker & Password  (What's this?)    Eat Me
E-Mail (Optional):
Subject:
Message:   (Posts are subject to Content Rules)
Optional Link URL:
Optional Link Title:
Optional Image URL:
Upload Image:
E-mail Replies:  Automagically notify you when someone responds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]