In Reply to: Logically you can only reject an hypothesis not get a positive result. posted by Norm on October 4, 2007 at 15:36:26:
This debate always drives me up the wall. It's not a question of "proving" things. In science you don't prove things, you accumulate evidence for theories. Sometimes a theory turns out to be just wrong, but much more often it turns out to be basically correct (otherwise it wouldn't have lasted long), but more complex or of more limited applicability than had been believed.
No one is saying that there is never any difference between cables. If you cut one with wire cutters you'll hear the difference. So no one is saying that - it's just not that simple. However many people believe that well-designed cables of reasonable lengths are very hard to distinguish by listening, particularly once you level match, and that much of what is said in the audiophile press about cables is nonsense fueled by expectation bias and the need to sell stuff.
That's a nuanced position, it's not black or white, and it will never be "proven" or "dis-proven". However it may come to be accepted as extremely probable because it is in accord with many long-lasting and well-supported theories (of psychoacoustics, electrical engineering, etc.), and because of a lack of evidence to the contrary.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Logically you can only reject an hypothesis not get a positive result. - truthseekerprime 16:36:19 10/04/07 (17)
- I am sorry it drives you up the war, but what I said is fundamental to the scientific method. - Norm 16:55:38 10/04/07 (13)
- And why do you think DBTs are "invalid"? - truthseekerprime 17:48:59 10/04/07 (12)
- RE: And why do you think DBTs are "invalid"? Yep - Norm 20:00:50 10/04/07 (11)
- "Since the hypothesis is that there are no differences" - how many times do I have to say that no one thinks that! - truthseekerprime 20:33:24 10/04/07 (10)
- So what is the hypothesis? What are you testing? nt - Norm 06:17:52 10/05/07 (9)
- Whether some difference is audible in some particular situation to some set of listeners. /nt - truthseekerprime 08:15:57 10/05/07 (8)
- This is no hypothesis. Audible to which listeners and under what situation. - Norm 11:22:03 10/05/07 (7)
- It's really not very complicated - truthseekerprime 14:59:47 10/05/07 (6)
- It is really easy but you have to know something about the scientific method and logic. - Norm 20:04:28 10/05/07 (5)
- RE: It is really easy but you have to know something about the scientific method and logic. - morricab 04:07:51 10/09/07 (0)
- Ummm... what? - truthseekerprime 06:03:30 10/06/07 (3)
- You concern me as a scientist in not seeing the distinction between null and real. - Norm 07:27:30 10/06/07 (2)
- My current hypothesis is that you have no idea what you're talking about, no evidence so far to reject. nt/ - truthseekerprime 08:01:52 10/06/07 (1)
- I am of the same opinion relative to you. As I said, there is no purpose in further discussion. nt - Norm 09:03:08 10/06/07 (0)
- Doing you just love this guy? - bjh 16:52:14 10/04/07 (2)
- One side does seem to wear the white hat and the other the black hat. Not good science. nt - Norm 17:21:50 10/04/07 (1)
- RE: One side does seem to wear the white hat and the other the black hat. Not good science. nt - bjh 19:17:12 10/04/07 (0)