#3DS stars
>> Why is this? And if it's a subjective thing, why is it unanimous?
A few years back I attended a one year program to learn how to do
scientific data evaluation, setting up statistical arrays and such.
It was for marine science but the principals apply universally. I
later became an instructor in this program. Many times when I hear
reports (results) such as yours the first thing I question is the
test methods that were in place because it is just about impossible
to get unanimous results in a truly scientificly conducted test no
matter how ridiculously obvious the comparison is. How many
placebos? What were the controls? How many samples were done? How
many trials per sample? A simple test like this is generally
objective if the test was done with test instruments monitoring
certain attributes of the two signals against a measured scale. If no
scale was used then it was probably subjective. If it was subjective
then how were the opinions suaded? Were the individuals isolated from
each other so as not to allow peer persuasion? Were the individuals
allowed to know what they were looking at? ie which monitor was LVR
and which was D1 at the time of decision. I assume the program was
identical on each and the monitors were identical or the same with a
switch. The point I'm trying to make is that a true test is really
difficult to set up properly and if no attempt was made to do so the
results are meaningless. Finally, outside of what I learned in this
program, if something is just plain obvious then unanimous results
would be possible, but I doubt the difference in LVR and D1 is that
obvious. Many times we see what we want and hope to see.