It's really pretty simple. Science is about what we presently now know about the natural world around us. We can change it later when we learn something new but it's what we know for now. It also allows us to design things and have them work in predictable ways. Granted that there can be arguments between scientists about interpretation. What might or might not be discovered is, however, not science, it is the presently unknowable. It could be supernatural, spiritual, metaphysical, but it isn't science. Science can neither prove nor disprove the possibilities that have been raised here. Engineers , designers, and fact-based critics can only operate in the realm of reality and what is known--that is to say that they can only use the best available science. Until there is evidence the possibilties are mere idle speculation--granted it is speculation that sells a lot of high end equipment. As I have noted before, a well designed doubleblind test can ferret out real from imaged effects. The fact remains that some gear sounds better than others and we don't have a good quantitave handle on explaining that. I agree with some of the thoughts here to the extent that some gear sounds good and others don't even with similar specs. But I would strongly encourage all to keep to the facts and the cold engineering science. Decisions made on what could be will almost invariably be worse than those based on fact. That is the underlying strength of western rationalism that has underpinned our society since the Renaissance. It's not that science is always right or that it can explain everything, it's simply the best way we have of understanding natural phenomena and is more likley to be right than any other form of explanation or understanding. In recent years our society has lost our respect for the scientific method, for fact, for truth and a lot more. Can we at least be rational about our audio gear? Of course not! Why should that be any different? I think I'll go buy some expensive wires....ooppps I meant "interconnects."