I ran across a link to something yesterday whilst noodling around on my local university's web-site that got me thinking. Since at my age that's pretty impressive I thought I'd pass it on...
"All scientific measurements must contend with some level of background noise or statistical fluctuation. But if the signal-to-noise ratio cannot be improved, even in principle, the effect is probably not real and the work is not science."*
It turns out that the author is (possibly was) sort of a professional skeptic and I don't much hold with that anymore than I do with "believers". However membership in either group does not automatically discredit their thoughts and experiences in my book, it merely taints them...
Having spent most of my life tinkering with electronic systems I know that the key to fixing or improving them is to "get a handle" on the problem. Usually this involves observing the "problem" while futzing with as many variables as possible to ferret out those that affect it. That process is a discrete filter which improves the S/N of our understanding of the problem. The key is to focus on what's wrong, not what's right because unless the system is really rummy it's already far more right than wrong so the errors get washed out by the 'noise' of the desired signal.
As audiophiles we want to optimize the various factors that go into our listening experience, but the battle ironically requires first improving the S/N of our ability to sense the problems to where we can understand and control them. Then maybe we can improve the S/N of the desired information...
I'd never considered being able to alter the S/N as a test for understanding, maybe even as a proof that there is something to understand, but I like it!
Rick
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Searching for truth? - rick_m 09:52:30 11/03/14 (29)
- Signal to Noise Ratio - geoffkait 05:03:58 08/16/23 (0)
- RE: Searching for truth? - sony6060 06:56:38 12/02/14 (10)
- RE: Searching for truth? - Tony Lauck 07:26:56 12/05/14 (8)
- RE: Searching for truth? - geoffkait 14:06:13 12/05/14 (7)
- that is proven true... IN a Closed system... bogus pomp since we live in an open system~nT - Cleantimestream 16:17:56 02/21/15 (5)
- In afraid you are pissing up a rope, sir. Nt - geoffkait 14:13:33 02/22/15 (4)
- The Universe IS an open system, you had your chance @ not exposing your ignorance, fail~nT - Cleantimestream 18:53:16 02/27/15 (3)
- RE: The Universe IS an open system, you had your chance @ not exposing your ignorance, fail~nT - geoffkait 10:43:06 02/28/15 (2)
- RE: The Universe IS an open system, you had your chance @ not exposing your ignorance, fail~nT - Cleantimestream 15:28:20 02/28/15 (1)
- RE: The Universe IS an open system, you had your chance @ not exposing your ignorance, fail~nT - geoffkait 13:18:20 03/01/15 (0)
- RE: Searching for truth? - rick_m 18:43:01 12/05/14 (0)
- So, let me ask, what's that got to do with the price of spinach? Nt - geoffkait 13:40:25 12/03/14 (0)
- RE: Searching for truth? - Dave_K 15:15:48 11/10/14 (1)
- RE: Searching for truth? - rick_m 21:49:18 11/10/14 (0)
- Yep - far as I know there is no truth when it comes to audio - Goober58 16:38:18 11/09/14 (0)
- RE: Searching for truth? - unclestu 20:21:18 11/04/14 (0)
- RE: Searching for truth? - Dryginger2 17:57:48 11/03/14 (2)
- RE: Searching for truth? - fas42 18:58:52 08/05/15 (0)
- RE: Searching for truth? - rick_m 19:30:18 11/03/14 (0)
- RE: Searching for truth? - geoffkait 16:34:37 11/03/14 (9)
- RE: Searching for truth? - mkuller 21:55:10 11/18/14 (1)
- RE: Searching for truth? - geoffkait 12:35:14 11/19/14 (0)
- RE: Searching for truth? - rick_m 19:07:54 11/03/14 (6)
- RE: Searching for truth? - rick_m 09:05:08 11/04/14 (3)
- RE: Searching for truth? - geoffkait 15:20:58 11/04/14 (2)
- RE: Searching for truth? - rick_m 18:19:02 11/04/14 (1)
- RE: Searching for truth? - geoffkait 03:08:57 11/05/14 (0)
- RE: Searching for truth? - geoffkait 05:37:22 11/04/14 (0)
- RE: Searching for truth? - geoffkait 02:42:20 11/04/14 (0)