New Article by May Belt - Positive Feedback Online

Dear All,
There is an interesting (if I do say it myself) article just published in
the March 2007 issue of Positive Feedback Online.

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue30/belt.htm

In the 3rd paragraph of the article there is a link available to a section
of the Stereophile Hi Fi magazine's on line Forum (copy below).

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/s...fpart=1&vc= 1

This particular section in the Stereophile Forum is very long (spread over
quite a few months) but I would recommend that people try to read it all
because I have written much background information regarding some of the
discoveries by P.W.B. Electronics.

I would be interested in any feedback from my article - either posted to the
P.W.B. Forum or directly to myself.

Kind Regards,

May Belt.




*
* P.W.B. Electronics
* 18 Pasture Crescent, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS7 4QS, England
*
* http://www.belt.demon.co.uk http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PWB
*

"P.W.B. Electronics" wrote in message
...
New Article by May Belt - Positive Feedback Online

Dear All,
There is an interesting (if I do say it myself) article just published in
the March 2007 issue of Positive Feedback Online.

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue30/belt.htm

In the 3rd paragraph of the article there is a link available to a section
of the Stereophile Hi Fi magazine's on line Forum (copy below).

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/s...fpart=1&vc= 1

This particular section in the Stereophile Forum is very long (spread over
quite a few months) but I would recommend that people try to read it all
because I have written much background information regarding some of the
discoveries by P.W.B. Electronics.

I would be interested in any feedback from my article - either posted to
the
P.W.B. Forum or directly to myself.

Kind Regards,

May Belt.




*
* P.W.B. Electronics
* 18 Pasture Crescent, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS7 4QS, England
*
* http://www.belt.demon.co.uk http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PWB
*


Mrs Belt writes reasonably and gently, but can't get away from the fact that
PWB's "improvements" do not have rational, measurable and repeatable reasons
for their effectiveness. I would be happy if PWB would propose some
rational, measurable and repeatable reasons, so that others could replicate
his work and carry out proper double-blind tests. Anything less, and the
suspicion of "snake oil" remains.

If something works, then the effect *must* be measurable. It is, of course,
possible that others have been measuring the wrong things, but then this
leaves an obligation on PWB to propose the right measurements that others
can perform.

S.

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 16:23:05 -0000, "Serge Auckland"
wrote:


"P.W.B. Electronics" wrote in message
...
New Article by May Belt - Positive Feedback Online

Dear All,
There is an interesting (if I do say it myself) article just published in
the March 2007 issue of Positive Feedback Online.

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue30/belt.htm

In the 3rd paragraph of the article there is a link available to a section
of the Stereophile Hi Fi magazine's on line Forum (copy below).

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/s...fpart=1&vc= 1

This particular section in the Stereophile Forum is very long (spread over
quite a few months) but I would recommend that people try to read it all
because I have written much background information regarding some of the
discoveries by P.W.B. Electronics.

I would be interested in any feedback from my article - either posted to
the
P.W.B. Forum or directly to myself.

Kind Regards,

May Belt.




*
* P.W.B. Electronics
* 18 Pasture Crescent, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS7 4QS, England
*
* http://www.belt.demon.co.uk http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PWB
*


Mrs Belt writes reasonably and gently, but can't get away from the fact that
PWB's "improvements" do not have rational, measurable and repeatable reasons
for their effectiveness. I would be happy if PWB would propose some
rational, measurable and repeatable reasons, so that others could replicate
his work and carry out proper double-blind tests. Anything less, and the
suspicion of "snake oil" remains.

If something works, then the effect *must* be measurable. It is, of course,
possible that others have been measuring the wrong things, but then this
leaves an obligation on PWB to propose the right measurements that others
can perform.

S.


Serge have you been smoking too much wacky baccy and gone all nice and
mellow? The sale of snake oil is the entire and only reason for the
existence of PWB.

At the back of their Bunco Booth they have a sign reading "This way to
the Egress".

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 16:23:05 -0000, "Serge Auckland"
wrote:


"P.W.B. Electronics" wrote in message
...
New Article by May Belt - Positive Feedback Online

Dear All,
There is an interesting (if I do say it myself) article just published
in
the March 2007 issue of Positive Feedback Online.

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue30/belt.htm

In the 3rd paragraph of the article there is a link available to a
section
of the Stereophile Hi Fi magazine's on line Forum (copy below).

http://forum.stereophile.com/forum/s...fpart=1&vc= 1

This particular section in the Stereophile Forum is very long (spread
over
quite a few months) but I would recommend that people try to read it all
because I have written much background information regarding some of the
discoveries by P.W.B. Electronics.

I would be interested in any feedback from my article - either posted to
the
P.W.B. Forum or directly to myself.

Kind Regards,

May Belt.




*
* P.W.B. Electronics
* 18 Pasture Crescent, Leeds, West Yorkshire, LS7 4QS, England
*
* http://www.belt.demon.co.uk http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PWB
*


Mrs Belt writes reasonably and gently, but can't get away from the fact
that
PWB's "improvements" do not have rational, measurable and repeatable
reasons
for their effectiveness. I would be happy if PWB would propose some
rational, measurable and repeatable reasons, so that others could
replicate
his work and carry out proper double-blind tests. Anything less, and the
suspicion of "snake oil" remains.

If something works, then the effect *must* be measurable. It is, of
course,
possible that others have been measuring the wrong things, but then this
leaves an obligation on PWB to propose the right measurements that others
can perform.

S.


Serge have you been smoking too much wacky baccy and gone all nice and
mellow? The sale of snake oil is the entire and only reason for the
existence of PWB.

At the back of their Bunco Booth they have a sign reading "This way to
the Egress".

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

I suspect you may be right, but I mustn't let my prejudice in favour of the
Scientific Method cloud my objectivity. If you accept the premises of
Quantum Physics, nothing is actually impossible, just very very
unlikely...like PWB's products working?

S.

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 17:16:10 -0000, "Serge Auckland"
wrote:

Serge have you been smoking too much wacky baccy and gone all nice and
mellow? The sale of snake oil is the entire and only reason for the
existence of PWB.

At the back of their Bunco Booth they have a sign reading "This way to
the Egress".

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

I suspect you may be right, but I mustn't let my prejudice in favour of the
Scientific Method cloud my objectivity. If you accept the premises of
Quantum Physics, nothing is actually impossible, just very very
unlikely...like PWB's products working?

S.


My advice? Be no more objective than the opposition. It really,
seriously irritates me when I see intelligent people - even scientists
- trying to argue rationally with Christians. You can't win an
argument with somebody who stands dribbling down his chin at you, and
you shouldn't try.

This applies equally to PWB and his ilk. Be offensive. Be as offensive
as it is possible to be.

Note to self - decaf for the rest of the day.

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

In article ,
(Don Pearce) wrote:

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 17:16:10 -0000, "Serge Auckland"
wrote:

Serge have you been smoking too much wacky baccy and gone all nice and
mellow? The sale of snake oil is the entire and only reason for the
existence of PWB.

At the back of their Bunco Booth they have a sign reading "This way to
the Egress".

d

--
Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

I suspect you may be right, but I mustn't let my prejudice in favour of the
Scientific Method cloud my objectivity. If you accept the premises of
Quantum Physics, nothing is actually impossible, just very very
unlikely...like PWB's products working?

S.


My advice? Be no more objective than the opposition. It really,
seriously irritates me when I see intelligent people - even scientists
- trying to argue rationally with Christians. You can't win an
argument with somebody who stands dribbling down his chin at you, and
you shouldn't try.

This applies equally to PWB and his ilk. Be offensive. Be as offensive
as it is possible to be.

Note to self - decaf for the rest of the day.

At last, a subject to unite the so-called subjectivists and objectivists.

Stephen

P.W.B. Electronics wrote:
New Article by May Belt - Positive Feedback Online

* P.W.B. Electronics

T
*

Crap and waste of money comes to mind

"Special Black Cream"

Anyone daft enough to buy the stuff might be brain dead ?

Who knows better of buying a couple of records or new cd
of some different valves if your a valve person

but for ****s sake who does buy this stuff ?

also as a matter of interest you say.........

Peter Belt's background is 45 years in the audio industry, the first 30
years as a conventional engineer designing and manufacturing moving coil
loudspeakers, electrostatic loudspeakers

did they go into production and sell ? (enough to make a profit)

which companies did you work for ?

Allotments can be fun

"Dave xxxx" wrote in message
. uk...
P.W.B. Electronics wrote:
New Article by May Belt - Positive Feedback Online

* P.W.B. Electronics

T
*

Crap and waste of money comes to mind

"Special Black Cream"

Anyone daft enough to buy the stuff might be brain dead ?

Who knows better of buying a couple of records or new cd
of some different valves if your a valve person

but for ****s sake who does buy this stuff ?

also as a matter of interest you say.........

Peter Belt's background is 45 years in the audio industry, the first 30
years as a conventional engineer designing and manufacturing moving coil
loudspeakers, electrostatic loudspeakers

did they go into production and sell ? (enough to make a profit)

which companies did you work for ?

In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:



I suspect you may be right, but I mustn't let my prejudice in favour of
the Scientific Method cloud my objectivity.

The Scientific Method is based upon being sceptical of any claim which is
made without backing by suitable, assessible, evidence. In this case that
would mean some mix of theoretical explanation which tied in with
established physics, measurements, or listening tests carried out in a way
that can be used to determine the reliabilty of the results.

In the absence of the above, any claim may simply be reagarded as what
academics call "tosh". Sorry for the use of such technical jargon. :-)

If you accept the premises of Quantum Physics, nothing is actually
impossible, just very very unlikely...like PWB's products working?

I doubt that the above interpretation of QM has much to do with this...
:-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

Jim Lesurf wrote:
In article , Serge Auckland
wrote:



I suspect you may be right, but I mustn't let my prejudice in favour of
the Scientific Method cloud my objectivity.

The Scientific Method is based upon being sceptical of any claim which is
made without backing by suitable, assessible, evidence. In this case that
would mean some mix of theoretical explanation which tied in with
established physics, measurements, or listening tests carried out in a way
that can be used to determine the reliabilty of the results.

So you keep saying :-)

Don't you think there's something uncritical (unscientific even?!) about
the requirement that new hypotheses comply with accepted theories and
verified measurements?

In the absence of the above, any claim may simply be reagarded as what
academics call "tosh". Sorry for the use of such technical jargon. :-)


I suppose 'academic' is in my job description somewhere - buggered if I
could say 'it's tosh' with any certainty. 'Weird' would be my first port
of call :-)

If you accept the premises of Quantum Physics, nothing is actually
impossible, just very very unlikely...like PWB's products working?

I doubt that the above interpretation of QM has much to do with this...
:-)


You just never do know now ...

Rob