 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
174.72.186.110
In Reply to: RE: Yes, our measurements these days... posted by mlsstl on March 18, 2024 at 14:52:53
"What makes you think we're done with finding new things to measures and ways to do it?"
"New things?" We're talking about air vibrations in our ears. What we hear is not *that* complicated. The "alleged" unmeasurable things we supposedly hear have been thoroughly addressed and explained. We don't need to look for alternate explanations unless we find some new evidence that suggests we do.
Ya got five fingers on each hand. How many times do you need to recount them to know it's five?
We don't need to looks for new physics to explain audiophiles who fail to accept psychoacoustics and insist there are unknown physics in play
Now finding other ways to measure things? Yeah that can happen. But there is no reason, no scientifically legitimate reason to think there are vibrations in the air that we can hear but can not measure. The fact that we can measure so many sounds that can not be heard should be a big indicator of the relative sensitivities of our ears vs our measurements.
"Plenty of examples in the history of science, engineering, medicine and the like that show there is always more to learn."
And plenty more examples of known science having things covered on particular topics. We are talking about sound, vibrations in the air with a specific frequency range and amplitude. Newtonian physics has the sound part covered.
Follow Ups:
> > ""New things?" We're talking about air vibrations in our ears. What we hear is not *that* complicated. The "alleged" unmeasurable things we supposedly hear have been thoroughly addressed and explained. We don't need to look for alternate explanations unless we find some new evidence that suggests we do. "
With that logic we knew everything we needed to know 60 or more years ago.
Guess we can agree to disagree.
When it comes to the nature of sound yeah pretty much. When it comes to measuring sound, no, we did not have the technology to measure sound as accurately or with the same detail as we do now.
We can measure every aspect of sound entering our ears to levels that exceed the thresholds of human hearing.
How we process and store sound in our brains is still very much an on going series of investigations. There seems to be this weird all or nothing logical fallacy that comes with the science on human thresholds of hearing. And measuring sound.
So -- we have nothing left to learn that we don't already know.
As noted, guess we agree to disagree.
You are disagreeing with a burning straw man.
The moderators feel that allowing this thread to continue, even though it may hold useful information, will wind up creating more trouble than it solves, and thereby detract from the purpose of this forum.This is not the appropriate venue for discussion of this matter, and we ask that those with an interest in the subject, take it elsewhere (e.g. private e-mail).
No further follow-ups will be considered.
Thank you for your support of the Asylum.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
