Re: Olson, Newton, Einstein and physics (long ramble).

Posted by Paul Eizik (A) on July 30, 2003 at 21:55:43

In Reply to: Olsen did what he did posted by Bill Fitzmaurice on July 30, 2003 at 13:34:26:

Hi Bill

The fact that exteneded high frequency response in horn loaded cone drivers is possible is certainly a given in my experience. My horn laoded EV 15B's can reach right up into the bottom of the tweeter territory, but it's a rocky road up there (the big 4" dust cap becomes a seperate sub system with it's own artifacts), and not really hi-fi IMHO, and with good midrange compression drivers available, why bother (just MHO again). Now there are ways around this of course, the phase plug comes to mind, but with those comp. drivers handy... Another way is with E.Q., which is currently out of fashion in hi-fi, but is still nearly a necessity in pro-sound. I remember as if it was yesterday the day I gave up graphic equalizers. Back in the late 80's a golden eared friend (opera singer) said "what's that distortion?" while listening to my rig. Removing the graphic eq. removed the distortion, and I never went back. All of this does not preclude a clever person getting all of this stuff to work (phase plug and or eq. to iron out the lumpiness), but it just has'nt for me, and I would be pleasantly surprised at anyone demonstrating a working hi-fi version that can match a good midrange comp. driver. But hey, stranger things have happened in audio.

Newton's physics work well enough for the everyday world we live in, but Einstein demonstrated that well enough is not good enough for describing the big (or very little) picture of the universe. The next step apparently came in the mid 90's when Edward Witten (of the Institute for Advanced Studies at Princeton, Einsteins's last employer) introduced M Theory, which tied together the then 5 disparate fragments of Super String Theory, and literlly hundreds of scientific papers by many physicists followed. M theory is apparently the end of the road for experimental physics as we know it, the energy levels needed to prove it would be on the level of the big bang itself, and entirely not likely in our lifetimes. So M Theory seems destined to be only a theory, but nontheless has mown down some of the big problems (theoretically at least) that Einstein could'nt. Interestingly for us here, M theory prestents a vibrational model of sub atomic reality.

Now the speed of light. While this is apparently a given speed limit of the universe for anything with mass, speed is figured with mass (and the energy needed to accelarated it) multiplied by space/time (
Einstein). While the maximum speed of light is apparently non negotiable, both space and time are entirely negotiable and quite rubbery acording to Einstein. Space and time, having no mass, can expand and contract much faster than the speed of light without breaking any of Einsteins's rules. Now gimme a big enough quantum shock wave and... BTW I like the original Zephraim Cochran played by Glenn Corbett rather than the hippie version from that last movie. He seemed like he could blow a hole in space/time.

Now those bees. I've heard this story many times since the 60's, and the conclusions were based on the assumptions that the motive power of the bees wings were similar to our muscles and therefore the bee did'nt have enough horse power to take off with it's wing size, as we could'nt become airborn with a proportional set of wings. It turned out after further studies that the mechanism powering the bees wings was not at all like our muscles, and involved a much more primative and efficient chemical reaction. The problem for the bees is that the chemical reaction does'nt work below about 60 degrees. It's still a good story illustrating the limits of our science though.

Paul

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Follow Ups Full Thread

Topic - Making a good 15" driver folded horn to do 65-650hz decade - doable in 10cu.ft.? - freddyi 18:23:21 07/26/03 (42)

You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz in a folded horn; i.e. mass roll off. (nt) - JLH 23:46:33 07/26/03 (41)

Piffel. Read the January 2003 issue of AudioXpress. - Bill Fitzmaurice 13:37:38 07/27/03 (29)

Re: Piffel. Read the January 2003 issue of AudioXpress. - Centauri 08:40:38 07/28/03 (24)

Horn Response uses math that is innaccurate. - Bill Fitzmaurice 11:45:23 07/28/03 (23)

On axis SPL -VS- acoustic power response - tomservo 13:38:14 07/28/03 (22)

Re: On axis SPL -VS- acoustic power response - Bill Fitzmaurice 15:06:03 07/28/03 (21)

Re: On axis SPL -VS- acoustic power response - tomservo 18:44:03 07/28/03 (12)

We're getting a bit off the question, Tom. - Bill Fitzmaurice 05:55:21 07/29/03 (1)

Re: We're getting a bit off the question, Tom. - tomservo 06:46:21 07/29/03 (0)

Thank you Tom, could have not said it better! - JLH 20:10:00 07/28/03 (9)

Re: Thank you Tom, could have not said it better! - Bill Fitzmaurice 06:19:52 07/29/03 (8)

Disagree - JLH 16:42:27 07/29/03 (7)

You've got it backwards. The opposite is true. - Bill Fitzmaurice 05:03:47 07/30/03 (0)

Bends - John Sheerin 21:06:12 07/29/03 (5)

Re: Bends - hancock 07:21:27 07/30/03 (4)

Re: Bends - John Sheerin 12:57:53 07/30/03 (3)

Very interesting - Bill Fitzmaurice 06:06:57 07/31/03 (2)

Re: Very interesting - John Sheerin 08:00:08 07/31/03 (1)

Re: Very interesting - Bill Fitzmaurice 08:39:34 07/31/03 (0)

Re: On axis SPL -VS- acoustic power response - John Sheerin 16:03:37 07/28/03 (7)

I use three rates of flair over the course of the horn. - Bill Fitzmaurice 16:54:31 07/28/03 (6)

Re: I use three rates of flair over the course of the horn. - John Sheerin 17:13:54 07/28/03 (5)

Olsen - Bill Fitzmaurice 05:29:40 07/29/03 (4)

Re: Olsen - JLH 19:32:07 07/29/03 (3)

Olsen did what he did - Bill Fitzmaurice 13:34:26 07/30/03 (2)

Re: Olson, Newton, Einstein and physics (long ramble). - Paul Eizik 07/30/0321:55:43 07/30/03 (1)

Hey Paul - Bill Fitzmaurice 05:41:04 07/31/03 (0)

Re: Piffel. Read the January 2003 issue of AudioXpress. - freddyi 16:47:11 07/27/03 (3)

102 dB at 80 Hz from a ten in DR250a - Bill Fitzmaurice 04:21:08 07/28/03 (2)

Re: 102 dB at 80 Hz from a ten in DR250a - freddyi 11:38:43 07/28/03 (1)

Can't help you on a direct radiator driver - Bill Fitzmaurice 11:47:51 07/28/03 (0)

Re: You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz in a folded horn; i.e. mass roll off. (nt) probably right - my 100Hz Edgarhorns - freddyi 08:33:55 07/27/03 (10)

Re: You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz in a folded horn; i.e. mass roll off. (nt) probably right - my 100Hz Edgarhorns - djk 09:32:25 07/27/03 (7)

Re: You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz in a folded horn; i.e. mass roll off. (nt) - Q-Q? - freddyi 10:32:07 07/27/03 (2)

Re: You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz in a folded horn; i.e. mass roll off. (nt) - Q-Q? - djk 17:31:52 07/27/03 (1)

Re: You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz in a folded horn; i.e. mass roll off. (nt) - Q-Q? - freddyi 17:50:06 07/27/03 (0)

Re: You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz in a folded horn; i.e. mass roll off. (nt) probably right - my 100Hz Edgarhorns - freddyi 09:52:33 07/27/03 (3)

Re: You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz in a folded horn; i.e. mass roll off. (nt) probably right - my 100Hz Edgarhorns - djk 17:59:19 07/27/03 (2)

Re: You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz in a folded horn; i.e. mass roll off. (nt) probably right - my 100Hz Edgarhorns - freddyi 18:37:56 07/27/03 (1)

RS440 vs R2 - djk 23:25:34 07/27/03 (0)

Re: You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz in a folded horn; i.e. mass roll off. (nt) probably right - my 100Hz Edgarhorns - Lightning 09:25:10 07/27/03 (1)

Re: You'll never get a 15" to 650Hz - doors and PWK - freddyi 09:33:06 07/27/03 (0)

Follow Ups

Re: Olson, Newton, Einstein and physics (long ramble). - Paul Eizik 07/30/0321:55:43 07/30/03 (1)

Hey Paul - Bill Fitzmaurice 05:41:04 07/31/03 (0)

You can not post to an archived thread.