Home Propeller Head Plaza

Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics.

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Propeller Head Plaza ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

It's simpler than that.

In any case, I now see very clearly the defect in your thinking. The challenge is to explain it in a simple way. You are presuming the existence of some energy field that 1. is generalin the sense that the nature of the "threat" doesn't matter, and 2. that this energy field can influence our minds via an unknown mechanism. Both parts of this proposal are dubious.

You like to invoke evolutionary explanations--but in evolutionary terms there's absolutely no reason that we would have developed sensitivity to, say, electromagnetic fields, since very few (and very weak) fields existed until a little more than a hundred years ago. I need not even mention how silly it is--in evolutionary or any other terms--that an electrical cable sitting on a carpet (neither of which--carpet or cable--existed during our evolutionary history) would be perceived as hostile. (Is it because it looks like a snake? why is a snake on cable risers less threatening?)

Your answer, it seems, is that we are intrinsically sensitive to "threats" of any sort. It's not an electromagnetism field but a "threat" field that we respond to. We haven't been selected, in the evolutionary sense, to respond to electromagnetic fields, but to "threat" fields.

But this logically preposterous. Going back, again, to your evolutionary picture: mutation and natural selection can give rise to adaptations in our genetic makeup, but this mechanism cannot alter our surroundings. The idea of a "threat" field is anthrocentric in the extreme: an energy field that exists in nature that warns us of danger? You will need a religious, rather than a scientific, explanation for the existence of such a field. It presumes that someone is looking out for us.

I could go on to point out that no such field has ever been detected,and that our ability to detect it has never been demonstrated scientifically, and so on. But it's not necessary. Your explanation makes no sense.

Best,
Jim

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

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ 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 ]