The problem is that the medical.scientific community hide behind a technology screen that only reacts to a priori inputs. ie: Someone has to postulate the mechanism and prove the effects co- incident with it, If these are multiple effects and reactions the job becomes near impossible due to cross pollution, Theory is limited by the unknown technologies that are being developed all the time, but measurement of the end result is high on the list -even though the human ear is hyper sensitive and makes the job harder. Agreed, it's fumbling in the dark- but that is not necessarily a bad way to go, under the circumstances.
On Nov 25, 12:19 pm, Will Godson <[email protected]> wrote: > The 'measure' of this noise is the human suffering it causes. This is > all that is needed. If you could record it all you would be able to > show would be a waveform on a screen. In no way would that explain the > effect or the cause. Einstein did not need to know the speed of light > to formulate general relativity. A solid theory is able to explain and > (yes) predict. Measurement is engineering not science. If a proper > theory were to emerge then the engineers would know what to measure. > As it is they are fumbling in the dark. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hum Sufferers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/hum-sufferers?hl=en.
