I don't want to beat a dead horse but I'm bugged.


I just can't clear my head of this. I don't want to start a measurements vs listening war and I'd appreciate it if you guys don't, but I bought a Rogue Sphinx V3 as some of you may remember and have been enjoying it quite a bit. So, I head over to AVS and read Amir's review and he just rips it apart. But that's OK, measurements are measurements, that is not what bugs me. I learned in the early 70s that distortion numbers, etc, may not be that important to me. Then I read that he didn't even bother listening to the darn thing. That is what really bugs me. If something measures so poorly, wouldn't you want to correlate the measurements with what you hear? Do people still buy gear on measurements alone? I learned that can be a big mistake. I just don't get it, never have. Can anybody provide some insight to why some people are stuck on audio measurements? Help me package that so I can at least understand what they are thinking without dismissing them completely as a bunch of mislead sheep. 

128x128russ69

A resume of the article matter:

«

We are not the first ones to talk about clocks in biology. For example, circadian rhythm was introduced by Franz Halberg in the 1960s, so rhythm exists in the living systems. We are clocks, and rhythms of life is a concept that haunted scientists for ages. But, no one knew or ever proposed how those clocks are connected. We know that our body clocks are in synchronisation with the motion of the planet or the galactic bodies. These kind of associations were studied exhaustively even to the single cellular scale. What our contribution was that we started from the millisecond clock of the neuron and we went inside to microsecond clocks in the giant protein complexes and when we went inside them we found nanosecond clocks in the singular protein scale, and inside them we found the picosecond clocks in the secondary structures, and inside them we found picosecond clocks in a group of atoms. So clock inside the clock inside the clock inside the clock inside the clock, which we humans created, we use it on our wrist, is out there in our body to keep time. Similar kinds of clocks are also there in the biological system but it does not end with a neuron pairing. So before people did noticed the clock, inquisitive scientists did much to understand our clocks and the mechanism, but did not go deep inside it. No one ever thought time could be connected in a geometric shape to process everything that we see, that we feel

 

In the writer word and concept, clock means frequencies, distributed in a fractal time fashion... Clock are music....He designed the first non Turing brain machine then  it is not speculation at all...

What is music?

What is sound?

Are these questions not interesting for us audiophiles?

 

Now look about the subject matter, especially the link between fractal time programming and music and sound...

It is amazing that a poster here , an alleged physicist, instead of discussing science want to put me with the audiophile subjectivist fetichist crowd, after i clearly demonstrated that i am not one...Is it because he is an objectivist zealot himself ? i dont know...

His image of a "dead horse" against my posting mean what?

Why not thanking me for an interesting post about the new meaning of "sound" in the brain and in the cosmos instead ?

If it take me minutes to undertstand the matter around Anirban Bandyopadhyay discovery, without being a physicist, why a patented physicist will be losing time in a so stupid alternative as O versus S ?

i dont understand...Enlighten me here please ...

Anyway look at the image here called " the last machine of mankind"...Where Non Turing programming is resumed in one image...

 

What is a "sound" now ? Think about that? What is music? No not only a vibration sorry, a time fractal crystal, not a spatial fractal, a time-like one...Remember we called music a sound who convey a MEANING for the ears/brain/body...

If you need a clue Anirban Bandyopadhyay articles will give you the story...

His work encompassed Karl Friston work, the last time i was amazed so much by a scientific research theory was years ago...

My job was teaching students how to read books by the way...Yes we must learn how to read like we must learn how to listen sound in a room...

My first rule teaching reading was to read a book about any field and another book about any other field and discover the relation between the two... What is the relation between prime numbers and music: read Alain Connes and Anirban Bandyopadhyay in the same day...

Ok i feel lonely since i retired , i miss the students...

None of the students i know will oppose so narrowingly, O and S , to understand sound experience...None....I dont speak with fetichist and with zealots...

I prefer to think....

And instead of argument i dont post like people on facebook a cartoon....

https://asynsis.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/amsterdam-16th-jan-lecture-debate1.pdf

 

 

 

 

 

I cannot resist to post this very deep and beautiful sentence:

 

«The topology of silence holds the actual information of biology and also in every complex system integrating the information of the universe.»

it is in the article i posted above...If you want to understand this sentence read the article...

A clue:

«We do it every day, it was not just part of science, how? For example, somebody asks you ‘What are you doing?’, you say ‘Nothing’ (peaceful tone), you could say ‘Nothing’ (furious tone) or you could say ‘Nothing’ (dreamy tone), so N-O-T-H-I-N-G, seven ‘ticks’ are there, but you change the time gap between the letters to give a completely different kind of meaning to another path. So your information is not hidden in the ‘tick’, it is hidden in the silence.»

Amazing mind!

Link all this to the non Turing programming described in the image above....

 

By the way, only this remark hold the key to the linguistic theory about the relation between phonetic and phonology....

I am interested by the musical origin of language hypothesis...

😁😊

 

«When we say clock inside the clock inside the clock inside the clock inside the clock, then we simply say that no event in the universe could be expressed as a sequence of simple events. It’s not possible. Because they are 3D geometric shapes, events are connected one inside another topologically, connections are undefined, you cannot make an equation. So if you want to convert it into a straight line, as events happening one after another, you will not be able to do so, because you are losing the topological information of the geometric structure. This is where we actually challenge the very foundation of the information theory existing for the last century.»