Take it on faith: A cease-and-desist letter to those who only believe in measurements


Faith is a firm belief in something for which there is no proof (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/faith). Faith is often considered to be distinct from and even contrary to science. I argue science is based on faith. Specifically, it is faith in the belief that measurements are always correct, and they alone can reveal the world around us. However, there is no evidence that this approach will always provide a correct and complete depiction of our environment.

I am not anti-science. In fact, I am all about science. I was a science major in college. I taught high school biology and chemistry. I employ science every day in my current career. I also use it to make decisions when it comes to audio, and I can point to a scientific basis behind my equipment decisions, speaker/listener locations and room treatment. I believe John Locke’s scientific method is a wonderful boon to mankind.  But although data may rule my life, I know that science has its limitations.

The scientific method is an empirical approach and relies on our eight senses or extensions thereof to measure phenomena, enabling us to better understand and control our environment. People who embrace this approach believe if something cannot be measured, it cannot exist. They have total faith in this approach and deny the credibility of others whose senses do not or cannot yield something in units. In essence, these disciples take it on faith that measurements are the only true way to make sense of the world. However, we just may not have developed the instrument that enables us to measure the event. Early digital is a good example of our senses superseding the limitations of our understanding of the technology and hence, our measurements. Other examples of this include our past beliefs that we could destroy mass, that the earth is flat, and the universe is not expanding. And cables and amplifiers all sound the same.

Others find their senses can reveal events that are not apparent to some and may not even be measurable. Some people can smell faint odors or feel a slight breeze that others cannot.  My wife can find a Petoskey stone on a beach out of thousands of rocks; I cannot see it even when I am standing over it. Different cables, fuses, amplifier topology, or cartridge design may or may not result in the same or even any data points and may or may not sound alike. But just because you cannot hear a difference nor measure a difference does not mean there is no difference. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, just as good sound may be in their ear.

Some of us have at least as much faith in our ears as we do in our REW software and associated hardware. I start room setup with acoustic theory and then confirm with measurements, but the final placement is always a result of what sounds most pleasing. I would not know how to determine speaker toe-in using a microphone.

While I will always have to trust my senses, I am not handicapped by relying solely on those that are associated with a number.

 “…not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.” William Bruce Cameron, 1963

tcutter

Out of all hominin species, the Human known as the species Homo Sapiens, has been insatiable in their refining design and being articulate at expressing themselves.

With this need to be innovative as a inherent trait that is at the forefront of the Homo Sapiens evolution through to the modern day. It is likely that all hominin used similar forms of tools and communication when their communities were present on the earth.

The Homo Sapiens took such designs and through innovation began to refine them, so yes the Hollow Log used as a Percussion Instrument or as a Loud Haler has through 1000's of years of innovative thinking, resulting in changes for a design, become one of many Percussion and Wind Instruments seen in use today.

Just a Wild Dog that would have been a very worrying threat to a community of Homo Sapiens. Is now a species with over 300 variants of the same Wild Dog species, fondly referred to as "Mans Best Friend". 

It again comes down to what is the local environmental stimulus, that created the emotion to motivate and generate change perceived as valuable to the Homo Sapiens.

How was the life experience going to be improved for being pleasant (able to control the use of fire,) or to remain unpleasant (not able to control the use of fire).          

Post removed 

I draw the line at telling people to go get expensive speaker cables and power cords that do nothing to the sound. Nothing. Trick your own brain by spending as much money on whatever you want, live and let live. But keep your snake oil salesman pitches to yourself.

@mahgister 

The people you reference in your latest post are operating on the fringes of physics. Their viewpoints are not yet settled, accepted physics.

Of course their ideas must be fleshed out and tested by experiment. Until we have satisfied through modeling and experimentation that their ideas are valid (or invalid), they must be treated as "interesting" concepts.

It is fun to read the writings of those on the outer edges of physics. Please be aware that they are seen as informed speculation needing conformation.

 

It is evident that orthodox teaching in physics cannot answer fundamental unsolved questions...

This does not means that Penrose a Nobel prize winner is  operating at the "fringe" of physics...( which is pejorative qualification) 

Its their theory  (ORCH model)  is speculative but the only one answering the consciousness question with a feet in neurology (microtubules) and the other feet in physics...

Anirban Bandyopadhy the first experimentalist to uncover the physics of microtubules and the first A.I. theorician to develop a non Turing  paradigm for A.I.  as not computational, which apply it as experimentalist designing the first artificial brain, does not appear to me as a "fringe" physicist at all ... Sorry...

 And Penrose theory already had some experiment confirmation beginnings other experiments  will be made...

Nothing is "fringe" here... On the contrary it is cutting edge research in a collaborative ways...

 

 And no it is not "fun" reading them, it is a deep and enlightening experience... Try it ...

I dont need fun...

I need to understand ....

i pick a Nobel Prize and an experimentalist and theoretical scientist....

No fun reading...

Transformative reading yes...

 

 

@mahgister 

The people you reference in your latest post are operating on the fringes of physics. Their viewpoints are not yet settled, accepted physics.

Of course their ideas must be fleshed out and tested by experiment. Until we have satisfied through modeling and experimentation that their ideas are valid (or invalid), they must be treated as "interesting" concepts.

It is fun to read the writings of those on the outer edges of physics. Please be aware that they are seen as informed speculation needing conformation.