Mains Blocks and Cables

[Anonymous]

While studiously wasting my lunchtime I came across an article on the alleged crime of the, err, universe lifetime by our astronomers who dared to look - and therefore shortened the life of the universe (doh!). It also noted that the universe has a believe mass of between 10^53 and 10^60 kg.

Why do I mention this no doubt interesting but disturbingly useless fact?

A common dilution in homeopathy is called X30 (more wasted time on Wikipedia, so it's probably lie), which equates to 1 part in 10^60. So if you were to take a bag of sugar, and mix it in with the entire rest of the universe in a bowl *, that's the level of concentration we're talking about for many homeopathic remedies.

* Ikea sell some nice big ones

 

[Anton90125]

[quote user="jimwall"]While studiously wasting my lunchtime I came across an article on the alleged crime of the, err, universe lifetime by our astronomers who dared to look - and therefore shortened the life of the universe (doh!). It also noted that the universe has a believe mass of between 10^53 and 10^60 kg.[/quote]

Actually I find this quite interesting! The reasoning behind this comes from Quantum Physics.

Its based on the principle that (on the very very small scale) when you look at an object you change it. Before you look at it the object has all possible properties. When you look at it, you impose boundaries on it and cause it to collapse to one measurement. This idea is the core of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. This only applies to the subatomic level

I can hear you say the universe is not sub atomic! Well if the big bang theory is true then at the very beginning of the universe, its size was subatomic and may have even come into existence as the result of a Quantum process. It also follows that it would be subject to the uncertainty principle. Now very early in the universes life it underwent a massive inflation period where it grew 10^-50 Meters to 1 meter in 10*10^-35 seconds! At the same time there was a change in its energy state (the energy bound up in space its self- this may have triggered the inflation).

Some physicists have suggested that there may be a further inflation period in the future. That there was still pent up energy in space ready to be released (ending the universe as we know it) . However the likelihood of this becomes smaller the longer (older) the universe gets. The universe is believed to be 13 billion years old.

This is where the uncertainty principle comes in again. The act of looking at the universe (or certain aspects of it) may have "reset" the clock. The likelihood of a second inflation may now of increased (similar to that of 13 billion years ago).

Other physicists have asked quite rightly -"what actually constitutes the act of watching". does it need to be a sentient being or world the act of one object feeling the gravitation attraction of another count? If its the latter then the universe is constantly watching (and resetting ) itself . There could be a second inflation at any time or for that matter -never

 

[Anonymous]

I think I'm with the "other physicists" on this one. But I'm keeping my eyes closed just in case...

 

[Thaiman]

have a pint or two tonight and chill out please both of you! I couldn't believe i just read all that....

 

[Anonymous]

You love it really!

And I just bought a few bottles of lovely cold Stella, and none of that Kronie rubbish

PS> Welcome back!

 

[Anonymous]

[quote user="Anton90125"]

Actually I find this quite interesting! The reasoning behind this comes from Quantum Physics.

[/quote]

By the way Anton, that was quite a nice explanation of it all, 'cause it is a bit mad.

I don't personally think we can have any affect on anything by observing it in these ways however. At the end of the day an electron (e.g) isn't a wave or a particle, it's an electron and we simply model it as a wave or a particle to get useful answers about its behaviour in appropriate circumstances. In Quantum field theory we model it as a probability field that describes its possible states, when we observe it we simply refine our understanding of that field. Just like in a horse race - you get odds for each horse before the race, and they change as the race progresses until finally they collapse into the final state at the end of the race, watching the race doesn't change the outcome, it just means you know who the winner was. Of course it's a long time ago that I studied this rubbish -) and I never really did get the hang of it even then, so I could be talking rot!

 

[Anton90125]

[quote user="jimwall"]Of course it's a long time ago that I studied this rubbish[/quote]

Its over 20 years since I studied it myself and did anything with the Schr”dinger wave equation

Partial differential equation was not one of my strong points. However thanks to Oldphrt I have re looked at my physics books (and maths books). Vibrations and Waves (A.P French) and Engineering Mathematics (K A Stroud) being two of my favourites.

I would not go as far as to call QM rubbish, it is very successful when used in the right context -semiconductors, latest generation of hard drives etc.. It also promises a revolution in computer processing power (which will make our current CPUs look like they come from the stone age)- quantum computing with their qubits (no only 1 an 0 but everything in between!).

Many physicist say that its the most successful theory so far- even more so then relativity (Despite Albert Einstein' s "God des not play with dice" statement). Even relativity's most cherished principle of the speed of light (C) being the cosmic speed limit is under attack. Entangled particle are predicted (so far experimentation has confirmed it) to effect each other instantaneously regardless of the distance. That is to say if you change the properties of one particle here and you have its entangled counterpart on the other side of the universe (13 billion light years ), a change in spin will instantaneously cause a change in spin there. A instantaneous signal being sent across the universe. However according to relativity any signal should take a minimum 13 billion years. Physicist who study relativity say it not the signal that is subject to the speed limit but that information is. The jury is out as to what actually constitutes information. I have also read that both explanation are correct and that the entangled link actually exist outside our universe. This also hints at the existence of other universes.

One thing is for certain, how we imagine events based on every day life and common sense actually bare little resemblance to reality- which in some ways brings us back to hifi.

 

[Thaiman]

Obviously 2 pints last night not quite enough! Morrison has offer on Gin, Vodka and whisky at the moment £10 per litre! should be enough to chill you guys out....

 

[Anton90125]

[quote user="Thaiman"]Obviously 2 pints last night not quite enough! Morrison has offer on Gin, Vodka and whisky at the moment £10 per litre! should be enough to chill you guys out....[/quote]

I prefer CAFFREYS. Lovely and smooth! Much like my hifi!

Talking about physics is fun! I remember many evenings (and into the small hours) at uni discussing cosmology. Great fun!

 

[Anonymous]

Just like to point out, I don't think it's rubbish. I think it's remarkable and beautiful. It is the absolute pinnacle of human understanding of the universe and in all but the most trivial manner well beyond my meager understanding. However I also think that it's very easy to get wrapped up in the theory and forget that there's a real world out there and even the greatest theory is just a model for it. The real world will do whatsoever it likes and we can just hope to glimpse once in a while the beauty and majesty of its inner workings.

That's a slightly worrying final sentence after only a couple of beers...

 

[Anton90125]

Totally agree with you! Until there is a Theory Of Everything (Possibly String?) its the best we've got.

 

[Anonymous]

I want to put forward my views here as i believe i have a different view point from others. I am an electronics technician by trade however do not claim to be an expert on anything (including spelling). I have never owned or heard a 'special' mains cable but do believe the theory behind it. Even if the mains supply to your plug socket is super clean your unsheilded cables will still pick up a lot of noise. They are in there simplest form monopole aerials. The amount of signals being transmitted these days are mind blowing! There is next to no bandwidth of the frequency spectrum left un touched. All these frequencys are present in your home. Your kit is designed for the input to be alternating at 50hz (pure sine wave). distortion will add harmonics which will alter this and also the amplitude. This means that your kit will have to work harder to combat this and as im sure your aware the less filtering that has to be done the better the sound. A simple example of the effects noise can have can be seen by switching on the vacum cleaner near your kit.

Another often over looked point in my view is unsheilded mains cables are probably radiating into interconnects and I think this will probably account for a lot. Try running a mains cable in parrallel with an unsheilded interconect of a sub for example. Can you hear a very quiet low frequency hum (around 50hz)?

That is my understanding and that is all. If this translates to an auidable difference i dont know. I do understand that their are massive variables and each set up will differ. I will be purchasing a mains cable soon and am very intrested to find out if i can hear the results.

 

[Anonymous]

Hi Keweller,

Thanks for that, the issue with the unshielded cable making a difference is that there's at least a few metres of the stuff already there on the way to the consumer unit, and probably a kilometer or so more to the local sub-station, and then a few hundred more before that too (although in the latter case the level of noise is probably negligible compared to the kilo-volts of transmission voltage). So the argument is - what extra difference does an extra metre make compared to all the rubbish that lies before it?

As for the laying cables next to each other - absolutely you are correct, but can't much of this be mitigated by simply re-routing the cables - possibly not in all circumstances, but surely in many.

 

[Anonymous]

I really should have mentioned that I was talking about having sheilded cables after a mains filter/conditioner thus keeping the good work that has been done free from noise. Yes there is a lot to be gained from routing cables cleverly and I always try and do this but always find it to be a bit of a pain in some cases.

I have just ordered a supra diy get from hifi cables and im keen to try it with my cd player. I will let you know if I can tell the difference.

 

[nads]

well well well, interesting reading and very topical for me.

i was wanting to put an anti surge protector in to protect the equipment and what i ended up with was a Supra MD06-EU/SP.

surge protection and a transient filter. Now that i have cleaned the electricity up a bit i thought well lets fit the supra Low rad 1.5 CS-EU cables. and....
.
.
.
well the sound does sound fresher.
and i hope i can fit one to the turntable when i get it.
and if i keep the CD player i may just have to rewire it.
No some of you may have noticed i do not have a TOP end set up, ok it ain't bad but is not in the league of some, but i could notice a difference.
to the knockers give it a try you may be surprised.