How DOES the grounding boxes work?

[89reksal]

16 minutes ago, Fokus said:

 

Take a piece of dry paper. Or a plastic foil.

 

Put a 9V battery on top of it, and a 1.5V battery next to it.

Connect the batteries' + terminals with a wire.

 

Measure the potential at the wire.

 

Oh, wait ... potential compared to what?

 

(Credits to Roberta Flack.)

 

I may be displaying my ignorance here but wouldn't it be something like 7.5 V?

 

6 minutes ago, Fokus said:

I honestly hope you are not employed in any sector that remotely touches on electricity.

 

 

Thanks for the kind thoughts.

[Jud]

32 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

 What I took it to be referring to was the potential for issues because ground planes may not have the same voltage at every point within the ground plane. If that's the case, wouldn't it make sense that by eliminating or reducing those differences, however that's achieved, either by improved design or changing the voltage somehow (grounding box?) at a specific point within the ground plane that had a big enough voltage difference compared to other parts of the ground plane, then the potential for issues would be reduced or eliminated? And shouldn't it follow that there could be an audible result form that reduction?

 

Of course.  But it's all within the context of optimizing ground planes for *circuit* design.  There isn't anything in the article that talks about electrical charges moving around on their own without a *circuit*.

 

Of course ground planes aren't perfect - that's  being pointed out as a design idealization that engineers should not assume will  be perfectly translated into practice.  But you'll notice there's nothing here about "contrary to centuries of science in the electrical field," or anything like that, as there certainly would be if he'd found there could be current flow with no circuit.  One reason there isn't a perfect ground plane with perfectly equal potentials is exactly *because* there is no such current flow.

[mansr]

6 minutes ago, marce said:

As I said earlier electrons in the presence of an electric field travel at approx 0.002mm/s,

In a metal, yes. In a vacuum such as inside a CRT they certainly travel considerably faster.

6 minutes ago, marce said:

there fore it would take them, so in 20 hours they will travel 150mm (6 inch) so there are no electrons rushing about, so no electron pool effect.

They may be slow, but there are very, very many of them.

[Cornan]

11 minutes ago, marce said:

As I said earlier electrons in the presence of an electric field travel at approx 0.002mm/s, there fore it would take them, so in 20 hours they will travel 150mm (6 inch) so there are no electrons rushing about, so no electron pool effect. Discarding the way out stuff we come back to a wire connected at one end, which gives us an antenna. If you read the John Wu power-point linked above, we are probably looking at conducted noise picked up bt the wire connected at one end only.

 

Let's play with the idea that the wire works as an antenna. If the antenna drains positive ions to the tourmaline stones and gets stored there (due to equal amount of negative ions) inside the box. Is'nt that a good thing since the positive ions have no where else to go?

[Jud]

42 minutes ago, marce said:

Certain of what Jud, electron drift velocity, yes they don't move very fast when being jiggled by an electric field.

What has there momentum got to do with it?

 

 

Heh, no, I was joking about how you measure velocity when you can't be entirely certain of where a given electron is (Heisenberg).  So the uncertainty principle, position vs. momentum as conjugate variables....

 

Trying to make a funny, and not casting any doubt at all on the electron drift velocity figure.

[marce]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

In a metal, yes. In a vacuum such as inside a CRT they certainly travel considerably faster.

They may be slow, but there are very, very many of them.

Yes and in electron microscopes and valves, but we are discussing conventional current flow in wires or PCB traces so the so the speed of electrons in a vacuum is irrelevant. Also the voltages involved are a bit beyond your normal audio circuit (apart from valves). Anyway CRT tube, what is one of them... What I am trying to point out is that there is no electron pool effect as shown earlier

[marce]

3 minutes ago, Jud said:

 

Heh, no, I was joking about how you measure velocity when you can't be entirely certain of where a given electron is (Heisenberg).  So the uncertainty principle, position vs. momentum as conjugate variables....

 

Trying to make a funny, and not casting any doubt at all on the electron drift velocity figure.

Ha true, but like a lot of the quantum stuff, it tends to make my brain shrivel up these days. LOL

[89reksal]

25 minutes ago, Fokus said:

 

Take a piece of dry paper. Or a plastic foil.

 

Put a 9V battery on top of it, and a 1.5V battery next to it.

Connect the batteries' + terminals with a wire.

 

Measure the potential at the wire.

 

Oh, wait ... potential compared to what?

 

(Credits to Roberta Flack.)

 

This really made me think. I have to say I honestly don't know the answer.

 

Is that really an appropriate analogy for these ground boxes though? Isn't that what the box should be doing based on this theory of how it works? Eliminating any potential difference between itself and the connection point?

 

Please remember this was posted by me in response on a thread that asked for ideas on how these boxes work. This was only my idea based on what I understand. It's quite possible that I don't understand as much as I thought I did. I have no problem admitting that. I hope you'll notice that at no point have I said "this is how these boxes work". Unlike those that have posted "it's an antenna". I believe in having an open mind and part of that involves accepting that I am or may be wrong.

[Jud]

I'm just gonna get back to the light bulb.  Before you throw the switch and close the circuit, why doesn't the bulb light momentarily until the difference in potential between it and the power source is equalized?  And if the difference in potential is equalized, how does the power source continue to have power, so that when you do throw the switch, the light comes on?

[Fokus]

Seems like we are getting somewhere. Your understanding is lacking, because what you propose  ist nicht nur nicht richtig; es ist nicht einmal falsch!

 

Whereas the proponents of the antenna are people who have displayed a certain level of understanding before.

 

Kindly assuming, of course, that the rock boxes do anything at all, except causing a single-conductor cash flow.

[Jud]

Do we have a reliable attribution for "Not even wrong"?  I've seen Pauli, but I think I have seen it attributed to others as well.

[kumakuma]

9 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

 

This really made me think. I have to say I honestly don't know the answer.

 

Is that really an appropriate analogy for these ground boxes though? Isn't that what the box should be doing based on this theory of how it works? Eliminating any potential difference between itself and the connection point?

 

Please remember this was posted by me in response on a thread that asked for ideas on how these boxes work. This was only my idea based on what I understand. It's quite possible that I don't understand as much as I thought I did. I have no problem admitting that. I hope you'll notice that at no point have I said "this is how these boxes work". Unlike those that have posted "it's an antenna". I believe in having an open mind and part of that involves accepting that I am or may be wrong.

 

I'm interested in why you are rejecting the antenna theory. The measurements in the thread linked to yesterday clearly show that the noise level increases when the length of the wire increases.

 

http://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/entreq-signal-grounding-preliminary-measurements.476/

 

The only flaw I can find in this theory is that the OP believes his hearing is better than actual measurement devices.

[esldude]

12 minutes ago, Cornan said:

 

Let's play with the idea that the wire works as an antenna. If the antenna drains positive ions to the tourmaline stones and gets stored there (due to equal amount of negative ions) inside the box. Is'nt that a good thing since the positive ions have no where else to go?

You need to let this go.

 

You said earlier you would settle for any explanation scientific or not.  The by far most probable explanation I gave you in the third post on this thread, the second one I posted on this thread.

 

So you are left with trying to find an explanation that sort of kind of fits with what is known about electrical behaviour only with a little something added like how ions and tourmaline stones work.  That is not how things get straightened out. 

 

Now looking at your system in your signature you are the poster child for someone who believes these ideas peddled by people who make things like the Entreq.  They have some commonalities.  Their explanations don't really make sense, their product doesn't work according to the principles upon which all your real gear is made to function.  Their explanation pretends to offer up a possible explanation that seems like it could be so if you don't know electronics.  Measurements of their products turn up either nothing or something totally different than what they claim. 

 

So please I know this sounds mean and nasty and dismissive.  You have had ample discussion you haven't accepted and continue to search for 'an answer'.  The short answer is this doesn't work.  The longer answer is you know it works for reasons having to do with psychology.  You have fooled yourself with help from others.  You'll never find a technical explanation that explains why the Entreq works because it doesn't.  Its method of functioning is not based in physical reality.  It is based in the psychological make up of the human mind.

[Jud]

2 minutes ago, esldude said:

You need to let this go.

 

You said earlier you would settle for any explanation scientific or not.  The by far most probable explanation I gave you in the third post on this thread, the second one I posted on this thread.

 

So you are left with trying to find an explanation that sort of kind of fits with what is known about electrical behaviour only with a little something added like how ions and tourmaline stones work.  That is not how things get straightened out. 

 

Now looking at your system in your signature you are the poster child for someone who believes these ideas peddled by people who make things like the Entreq.  They have some commonalities.  Their explanations don't really make sense, their product doesn't work according to the principles upon which all your real gear is made to function.  Their explanation pretends to offer up a possible explanation that seems like it could be so if you don't know electronics.  Measurements of their products turn up either nothing or something totally different than what they claim. 

 

So please I know this sounds mean and nasty and dismissive.  You have had ample discussion you haven't accepted and continue to search for 'an answer'.  The short answer is this doesn't work.  The longer answer is you know it works for reasons having to do with psychology.  You have fooled yourself with help from others.  You'll never find a technical explanation that explains why the Entreq works because it doesn't.  Its method of functioning is not based in physical reality.  It is based in the psychological make up of the human mind.

 

Very possibly.  If he wants to do the experiment I suggested, it will let him know whether the wire and anything conductive to which the wire is connected in the box are acting as an antenna in his system (no stones necessary).

[89reksal]

8 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

I'm interested in why you are rejecting the antenna theory. The measurements in the thread linked to yesterday clearly show that the noise level increases when the length of the wire increases.

 

I'm not rejecting it at all. My thing is the antenna part is likely only a part of the whole. I can't and won't believe that the only reason these boxes work is because the cable is acting as an antenna and injecting noise back to the ground plane.

 

As I posted in my original post giving a possible explanation, maybe the noise produced by the antenna function is somehow what's activating the contents of the box, creating a voltage source.

 

Believe me, I wish I had never posted the idea in the first place but I think there could be some validity to it. So far it's the only idea I've seen posted other than the antenna one. But we're only on page 17 so there may be hope yet

 

 

[kumakuma]

Just now, lasker98 said:

I can't and won't believe that the only reason these boxes work is because the cable is acting as an antenna and injecting noise back to the ground plane.

 

Why do you believe there has to be something else at work here?

[89reksal]

 

9 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

Why do you believe there has to be something else at work here?

 

I'm working from the assumption that these boxes actually do "work". From there, it makes no sense to me to have the expensive box filled with whatever's inside, when all that's required if it is just an antenna, is some type of simple wire acting as an antenna. I know a lot here think it's all just part of the Entreq scam to get as much possible money from the consumer but I prefer to not think that way. I may be proven wrong and these boxes turn out to be a total scam but I would much prefer not starting from that assumption.

[kumakuma]

6 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

 

 

I'm working from the assumption that these boxes actually do "work". From there, it makes no sense to me to have the expensive box filled with whatever's inside, when all that's required if it is just an antenna, is some type of simple wire acting as an antenna. I know a lot here think it's all just part of the Entreq scam to get as much possible money from the consumer but I prefer to not think that way. I may be proven wrong and these boxes turn out to be a total scam but I would much prefer not starting from that assumption.

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

 

I don't believe that the boxes "work" as described on the company's web site but I do believe that it is likely that they do have an effect on SQ that some folks find pleasing, much in the same way that the extra noise involved with vinyl playback is often found to be euphonic. 

[Jud]

I would prefer not to start from any assumptions that the boxes work or do not.

 

So far we’ve got one plausible if slightly creative explanation that can actually be tested.  Perhaps Cornan or anyone else with such a box might try the test and see what happens.

[89reksal]

3 minutes ago, Jud said:

I would prefer not to start from any assumptions that the boxes work or do not.

 

I'd say that's at least as valid and may be closer to how I think. What I do have issue with and can't understand at all is the people that start from the assumption that this can't work and that's the end of it. At least you're approaching with an open mind as opposed to closed mind/mind already made up.

[Cornan]

3 minutes ago, Jud said:

Perhaps Cornan or anyone else with such a box might try the test and see what happens.

 

I will surely give it a go. However, it will not happen before Sunday in any case. I am leaving tomorrow morning and will be back Saturday night.

Atleast we can find out if there is any truth in the antenna theory that most disbeleivers seems to think or even know.

[NOMBEDES]

22 hours ago, wgscott said:

 

Owsley Stanley seemed to be able to do that (developing the monitor speaker, differential microphones, and the Wall of Sound) completely within the "ancient realm of 'electricity'.  He didn't use things like grounding boxes.

 

Damn fine LSD also.    (ref,  Kid Charlemane.  ~Steely Dan)

 

 

[NOMBEDES]

11 minutes ago, kumakuma said:

 

 

I don't believe that the boxes "work" as described on the company's web site but I do believe that it is likely that they do have an effect on SQ that some folks find pleasing, much in the same way that the extra noise involved with vinyl playback is often found to be euphonic. 

 

 

+1.  Good point.  

 

I believe that at a certain quality level nothing is better or worse and that there is no such thing as Sound Quality (SQ).  

 

The differences we hear are unique to the listener.  

 

Therefore:  If it sounds pleasing to the listener, no further debate is required.  

 

 

[AJ Soundfield]

44 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

I'm working from the assumption that these boxes actually do "work".

Yep and you're not alone.

 

Now that I know its literally a box of rocks, I can't help but think it's a prank. A rather funny one. 

[marce]

24 minutes ago, lasker98 said:

 

I'd say that's at least as valid and may be closer to how I think. What I do have issue with and can't understand at all is the people that start from the assumption that this can't work and that's the end of it. At least you're approaching with an open mind as opposed to closed mind/mind already made up.

They do not work as described, they will act as an antenna. Why am I so sure of this, 35+ years of trying to pass CONDUCTED IMMUNITY tests, including laying out the protection components properly, creating EMC moats etc. etc.