Popular Post wgscott Posted March 15, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted March 15, 2019 https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613092/a-quantum-experiment-suggests-theres-no-such-thing-as-objective-reality/ Quote A quantum experiment suggests there’s no such thing as objective reality See. They are right. This totally vindicates everything they claim. Or it doesn't. Depending on your point of view. Because if it is true, it must be both true and false, depending upon who is the observer. But as we all know (or don't, depending upon our point of view), quantum mechanics is directly relevant to audio signal processing. The advertisements say so, so it must be true. Or false. Or both. mansr, Solstice380, Hugo9000 and 5 others 1 1 1 5 Link to comment
Popular Post Ralf11 Posted March 15, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted March 15, 2019 Ha! I saw that article. Now, what is the P() that the entire universe disappears in a quantum event? And... does the existence of MQA increase that P()??? esldude and Miska 2 Link to comment
NOMBEDES Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 Now you take a cat....... Put the cat into a box...... Or, as the inkfish Dylan said in Gates of Eden: The kingdoms of experience, in the precious winds they rot While paupers change possessions, each one wishing for what the other has got And the princess and the prince discuss what's real and what is not It doesn't matter inside the gates of Eden Read more: Bob Dylan - Gates Of Eden Lyrics | MetroLyrics In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake ~ Sayre's Law Link to comment
crenca Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 It's turtles, all the way down.... Hey MQA, if it is not all $voodoo$, show us the math! Link to comment
Tintinabulum Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 Something tells me I didn't need to read the article... NOMBEDES 1 Link to comment
new_media Posted March 15, 2019 Share Posted March 15, 2019 2 hours ago, NOMBEDES said: Now you take a cat....... Put the cat into a box...... 2. Cut a hole in the box. Superdad 1 Link to comment
esldude Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 This might come in handy too. Sound waves have negative gravity particles. https://futurism.com/sound-waves-particles-negative-gravity/amp/ And always keep in mind: Cognitive biases, like seeing optical illusions are a sign of a normally functioning brain. We all have them, it’s nothing to be ashamed about, but it is something that affects our objective evaluation of reality. Link to comment
sandyk Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 9 minutes ago, esldude said: This might come in handy too. Sound waves have negative gravity particles. https://futurism.com/sound-waves-particles-negative-gravity/amp/ Does that mean that Bill's Class D amplifier wont be of any use on the International Space Station after all ? wgscott 1 How a Digital Audio file sounds, or a Digital Video file looks, is governed to a large extent by the Power Supply area. All that Identical Checksums gives is the possibility of REGENERATING the file to close to that of the original file. PROFILE UPDATED 13-11-2020 Link to comment
Jud Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 11 hours ago, wgscott said: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613092/a-quantum-experiment-suggests-theres-no-such-thing-as-objective-reality/ See. They are right. This totally vindicates everything they claim. Or it doesn't. Depending on your point of view. Because if it is true, it must be both true and false, depending upon who is the observer. But as we all know (or don't, depending upon our point of view), quantum mechanics is directly relevant to audio signal processing. The advertisements say so, so it must be true. Or false. Or both. But hasn't this been known to be the case since Special Relativity made "What time is it?" a fraught question? I'm tremendously wary these days of blaring headlines in press releases and popular science publications, where everything is a new astounding breakthrough. wgscott 1 One never knows, do one? - Fats Waller The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. - Einstein Computer, Audirvana -> optical Ethernet to Fitlet3 -> Fibbr Alpha Optical USB -> iFi NEO iDSD DAC -> Apollon Audio 1ET400A Mini (Purifi based) -> Vandersteen 3A Signature. Link to comment
Popular Post firedog Posted March 16, 2019 Popular Post Share Posted March 16, 2019 2 hours ago, Jud said: But hasn't this been known to be the case since Special Relativity made "What time is it?" a fraught question? I'm tremendously wary these days of blaring headlines in press releases and popular science publications, where everything is a new astounding breakthrough. IME, every headline in the popular press about the results of scientific research is incorrect/misleading. Click bait. Often the entire following article is the same, and when you actually read the research or an abstract, you find the actual research can even say the opposite of what was reported. I see 3 reasons for this: a) greed/yellow journalism; b) laziness by headline/article writers; c) simple ignorance lack of understanding and critical thinking by reporters writing about subjects they have little or no knowledge of. wgscott and GregWormald 1 1 Main listening (small home office): Main setup: Surge protectors +>Isol-8 Mini sub Axis Power Strip/Protection>QuietPC Low Noise Server>Roon (Audiolense DRC)>Stack Audio Link II>Kii Control>Kii Three BXT (on their own electric circuit) >GIK Room Treatments. Secondary Path: Server with Audiolense RC>RPi4 or analog>Cayin iDAC6 MKII (tube mode) (XLR)>Kii Three BXT Bedroom: SBTouch to Cambridge Soundworks Desktop Setup. Living Room/Kitchen: Ropieee (RPi3b+ with touchscreen) + Schiit Modi3E to a pair of Morel Hogtalare. All absolute statements about audio are false Link to comment
AnotherSpin Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 To know limitations of science through scientific methods sounds kind of... scientific. Teresa 1 Link to comment
Popular Post wgscott Posted March 16, 2019 Author Popular Post Share Posted March 16, 2019 I had some clown from Forbes phone me up about 10 years ago when we published something in Science. The guy was really pressing me for a quote (of his invention) that he could attribute to me, and I refused, so he pulled the article. He just couldn't grasp that gross mischaracterization wasn't favorable publicity, and I was being an asshole. Ajax, Ralf11 and Jud 1 1 1 Link to comment
pkane2001 Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 22 hours ago, wgscott said: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/613092/a-quantum-experiment-suggests-theres-no-such-thing-as-objective-reality/ See. They are right. This totally vindicates everything they claim. Or it doesn't. Depending on your point of view. Because if it is true, it must be both true and false, depending upon who is the observer. But as we all know (or don't, depending upon our point of view), quantum mechanics is directly relevant to audio signal processing. The advertisements say so, so it must be true. Or false. Or both. Scary. Good thing that in my objective reality this experiment failed to produce the same results as were reported in yours, so it doesn't apply to me. Jud 1 -Paul DeltaWave, DISTORT, Earful, PKHarmonic, new: Multitone Analyzer Link to comment
NOMBEDES Posted March 16, 2019 Share Posted March 16, 2019 Does anybody really know what time it is (I don't)Does anybody really care (care about time)If so I can't imagine why (no, no)We've all got time enough to cry metro lyrics In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake ~ Sayre's Law Link to comment
wgscott Posted March 16, 2019 Author Share Posted March 16, 2019 13 hours ago, AnotherSpin said: To know limitations of science through scientific methods sounds kind of... scientific. There is a publication ... just for you. Linkie pkane2001 1 Link to comment
AnotherSpin Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 8 hours ago, wgscott said: There is a publication ... just for you. Linkie Thank you. I have no idea why you believe I want to know more. This is a problem with scientists only. I am trying to remove any knowledge at all from my consciousness and keep it pure. kumakuma 1 Link to comment
wgscott Posted March 17, 2019 Author Share Posted March 17, 2019 13 hours ago, AnotherSpin said: Thank you. I have no idea why you believe I want to know more. This is a problem with scientists only. I am trying to remove any knowledge at all from my consciousness and keep it pure. You are off to a flying start. Ralf11 1 Link to comment
AnotherSpin Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 10 minutes ago, wgscott said: You are off to a flying start. I afraid I didn't get your joke, my English is very humble. Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 13 hours ago, AnotherSpin said: ..why you believe I want to know more. This is a problem with scientists only. ... well, you are certainly correct - knowing more simply leads to additional questions (so, it is really only for those who delight in questions, or in the answering of them) here is one for you: two different approaches have been taken to estimate the Hubble Constant, H_0 yet they do not agree and are at different times (or spatial scales), so WTF?? it has been deemed a Crisis in Cosmology and thus has attracted a lot of scientists to work on it but there is nothing wrong about pursuing a crisis in cosmetology either... Link to comment
AnotherSpin Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 1 minute ago, Ralf11 said: well, you are certainly correct - knowing more simply leads to additional questions (so, it is really only for those who delight in questions, or in the answering of them) here is one for you: two different approaches have been taken to estimate the Hubble Constant, H_0 yet they do not agree and are at different times (or spatial scales), so WTF?? it has been deemed a Crisis in Cosmology and thus has attracted a lot of scientists to work on it but there is nothing wrong about pursuing a crisis in cosmetology either... Please ask somebody more knowledgeable in cosmology. My serious interests gravitate more to Advaita Vedanta, but there is nothing scientific in Western sense of the word. It is beyond the words too. Link to comment
Ralf11 Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 Those who are more knowledgeable in cosmology do not know. They are however, busy thinking up hypotheses and ways to test them. and BTW, the molecular genetics foks recently had a nasty surprise for the right-wing Hindu groups... Link to comment
AnotherSpin Posted March 17, 2019 Share Posted March 17, 2019 1 hour ago, Ralf11 said: Those who are more knowledgeable in cosmology do not know. They are however, busy thinking up hypotheses and ways to test them. and BTW, the molecular genetics foks recently had a nasty surprise for the right-wing Hindu groups... ок Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now