Audio Asylum Thread Printer

Get a view of an entire thread on one page

FAQ / News / Events

Propeller Head Plaza

Re: Question:

71.252.93.10

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]

In Reply to: Take a look at the phony science discussions at Randi�s site posted by Caymus on June 24, 2006 at 14:05:53:

How much do you think the Randiites know about quantum mechanics, or audio for that matter?
Answer: Even less than you do ...if that's possible :-)

Follow Ups:

What do you think now, Geoff Kait? - real_jj 00:07:41 06/26/06 (14)
You, or a quantum physicist?
- Re: What do you think now, Geoff Kait? - geoffkait 07:17:23 06/26/06 (13)
  Me.
  Quantum physics isn't so bad once you get the hang of it.
  ~ Cheers
  - Do tell... - real_jj 21:14:24 06/26/06 (12)
    Bell's Theorem is, therefore? (10 pts)
    What does interference in a single-photon triple-slit experiment show?
    How much laser light leaks from an average consumer CD player in terms of photons/second?
    - Re: Good Points - geoffkait 07:36:26 06/27/06 (11)
      Answer to 3rd Question:
      Estimate the inside diameter of one unused RCA jack, then calculate area and multiply that area by number of unused RCA jacks. Next, estimate total area of all gaps in player chassis (through which light can also escape). (A small 2x2 piece of paper can usually be inserted into many of the seams around the chassis and especially around the CD tray assembly.)
      In addition, many players have holes drilled in the bottom of the chassis.
      Estimate total area through which light can escape player by adding total area of unused RCA jacks and total area of all gaps and holes in the chassis.
      Next, estimate photons/sec produced by the CD laser. This is commonly given as approx. 10 to the 17 photons per second.
      Next, estmate the percentage of total photons that escape player per second. For the sake of argument, let's say a *very conservative* percentage is 1%. Thus, approx. 10 to the 15 photons escape the player per second.
      - So, then, what's the flux? - real_jj 10:25:06 06/27/06 (10)
        
        In Reply to: Re: Good Points posted by geoffkait on June 27, 2006 at 07:36:26:
        
        Evidence. Evidence. Let's see the evidence.
        Go for it.
        
        Re: The flux - geoffkait 11:09:45 06/27/06 (9)
        
        In Reply to: So, then, what's the flux? posted by real_jj on June 27, 2006 at 10:25:06:
        
        is far superior inside the player (obviously), which is why I now recommend using the chip inside the player.
        Proof of the pudding is in the eating. :-)
        
        Proof of your mechanism is in the evidence... - real_jj 10:41:09 06/28/06 (8)
        
        In Reply to: Re: The flux posted by geoffkait on June 27, 2006 at 11:09:45:
        
        Show it.
        
        Re: Still not convinced? - geoffkait 12:58:28 06/28/06 (7)
        
        In Reply to: Proof of your mechanism is in the evidence... posted by real_jj on June 28, 2006 at 10:41:09:
        
        You're a tough customer. Must be all that JREF OJT :-)
        
        Where's your evidence? That's all it takes... - real_jj 14:16:14 06/28/06 (6)
        
        In Reply to: Re: Still not convinced? posted by geoffkait on June 28, 2006 at 12:58:28:
        
        You haven't shown any.
        Your explaination should start with "Once upon a time in a kingdom in a land far far away"...
        
        Re: Funny how you always... - geoffkait 17:28:19 06/28/06 (5)
        
        In Reply to: Where's your evidence? That's all it takes... posted by real_jj on June 28, 2006 at 14:16:14:
        
        misspell the word, "explanation." It's as if you've never written one.
        
        I spell "explanation" as well as you provide "evidence" - real_jj 21:31:47 06/28/06 (2)
        
        In Reply to: Re: Funny how you always... posted by geoffkait on June 28, 2006 at 17:28:19:
        
        But, of course, you would have to compare appearance to substance.
        Got any evidence?
        
        Re: If you refuse... - geoffkait 05:19:41 06/29/06 (1)
        
        In Reply to: I spell "explanation" as well as you provide "evidence" posted by real_jj on June 28, 2006 at 21:31:47:
        
        to accept the testimony of others' experience, won't accept a technical explanation and won't try it for yourself, you're just being cynical. Or perhaps just playing games. Just more JREF OJT in evidence.
        
        So, you have no evidence. - real_jj 09:48:00 06/29/06 (0)
        
        In Reply to: Re: If you refuse... posted by geoffkait on June 29, 2006 at 05:19:41:
        
        I've seen no testamony, ZERO testamony, that your proposed mechanism is correct.
        It figures that you change the subject because you have to.
        Yes, I've seen testamony that your IC works. I've also heard people argue the earth is flat.
        Is the earth flat?
        
        Even funnier how you don't provide evidence. (nt) - Pat D 19:07:01 06/28/06 (1)
        
        In Reply to: Re: Funny how you always... posted by geoffkait on June 28, 2006 at 17:28:19:
        
        .
        ____________________________________________________________
        "Nature loves to hide."
        ---Heraclitus of Ephesus (trans. Wheelwright)
        
        Re: Sock! Bam! Pow! - geoffkait 02:49:28 06/29/06 (0)
        
        In Reply to: Even funnier how you don't provide evidence. (nt) posted by Pat D on June 28, 2006 at 19:07:01:
        
        Ooooow! Now stop that!
Do you need to be an accountant to detect that Nigerian offer as fraud? - Caymus 17:19:16 06/24/06 (7)
Most frauds in any discipline have very similar tactics. Read Randi�s exposes of those sly phony science products. Sound familiar?
- Do we really NEED an objectivist to comment... - Wellfed 19:08:09 06/24/06 (6)
  ...on the wisdom of listening to caca tweaks before passing judgment?
  - Re: Do we really NEED an objectivist to comment... - Dan Banquer 07:41:52 06/26/06 (3)
    I would like to remind you that on the top of the page for Propeller Head Plaza it says "Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics." There is nothing wrong with objectivist comments in this forum. If you want a forum that does not require that and despises objectivist comments than I would recommend you take the discussion to Cable Asylum.
    d.b.
    - It appears you haven't noticed... - Wellfed 10:11:25 06/26/06 (2)
      the BULK of discussion taking place at this Asylum does not address "Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics."
      - Au Contraire.... I have noticed - Dan Banquer 10:17:29 06/26/06 (1)
        
        In Reply to: It appears you haven't noticed... posted by Wellfed on June 26, 2006 at 10:11:25:
        
        It speaks volumes about "High End Audio".
        d.b.
        
        Not to mention human nature. [nt] - Wellfed 10:19:15 06/26/06 (0)
        
        In Reply to: Au Contraire.... I have noticed posted by Dan Banquer on June 26, 2006 at 10:17:29:
        
        nt
  - Do you need to be ripped off by the Nigerians to detect fraud? - Caymus 19:39:30 06/24/06 (1)
    Can't your brain figure it before sending them your money?
    - Which fallacious argument are you trying to use here? [nt] - Wellfed 20:07:33 06/24/06 (0)
      nt
I'm not a moderator... - Wellfed 15:37:06 06/24/06 (0)
...but let's try to keep this on higher plain than has been the custom around here. It would be nice to see if we can have SOME productive discussion before the mayhem actually breaks loose. You're first sentence was really good BTW.
How much do I know about quantum mechanics, or audio for that matter?
Answer: I don't know squat; but I do know that it is better to trust my ears over the opinions of a bunch of knuckleheads. ;-)

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

You can not post to an archived thread.