All wire the Same? Maybe not in future.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

NASA is funding a new type of wire that can transmit power 10 times
better than normal wire. Will this make a difference in Audio?

http://www.wired.com/news/space/0,2697,67350,00.html
--
I.Care
Address fake
until the SPAM goes away

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 11:03:21 -0700, I.Care <icare@whocares.com> wrote:

>NASA is funding a new type of wire that can transmit power 10 times
>better than normal wire. Will this make a difference in Audio?
>
>http://www.wired.com/news/space/0,2697,67350,00.html


Of course. It will enable a whole new breed of incredibly expensive
audiophile cables.

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In <MPG.1cdac5489cccc0b89896a1@newsgroups.comcast.net>, on 04/28/05
at 11:03 AM, I.Care <icare@whocares.com> said:

>NASA is funding a new type of wire that can transmit power 10 times
>better than normal wire. Will this make a difference in Audio?

>http://www.wired.com/news/space/0,2697,67350,00.html

At $11 Million for the first meter, finally, we will be encouraged to
locate amplifiers near their speaker.

We are still working through the environmental impact/safety of
nanotubes.

What will happen to the pet that chews the new $peaker wire?


-------------------------------------------------------
spam: uce@ftc.gov
wordgame:123(abc):<14 9 20 5 2 9 18 4 at 22 15 9 3 5 14 5 20 dot 3 15
13> (Barry Mann)
[sorry about the puzzle, spammers are ruining my mailbox]
-----------------------------------------------------------

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:33r471pnvj958c4sq0an81a11tnbdf7dgj@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:14:11 GMT, Ben Bradley
> <ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 11:03:21 -0700, I.Care <icare@whocares.com> wrote:
>>
>>>NASA is funding a new type of wire that can transmit power 10 times
>>>better than normal wire. Will this make a difference in Audio?
>>>
>>>http://www.wired.com/news/space/0,2697,67350,00.html
>>
>> Presuming that means a resistivity 1/10th that of copper, it would
>>make a substantial difference in speaker voice coils.
>
> However, those who can read English will note the sole claim that
> carbon nanotubes *may* *theoretically* 'conduct electricity ten times
> better than copper'. If they mean that carbon nanotubes definitely
> have a resistivity ten times lower than copper, why don't they say so?
>
> If they can't say so, let's just wait and see..................
> --


What does "theoretically" mean to you?

Archived from groups: rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 17:21:17 +0000, Stewart Pinkerton wrote:

> On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:14:11 GMT, Ben Bradley
> <ben_nospam_bradley@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 11:03:21 -0700, I.Care <icare@whocares.com> wrote:
>>
>>>NASA is funding a new type of wire that can transmit power 10 times
>>>better than normal wire. Will this make a difference in Audio?
>>>
>>>http://www.wired.com/news/space/0,2697,67350,00.html
>>
>> Presuming that means a resistivity 1/10th that of copper, it would
>>make a substantial difference in speaker voice coils.
>
> However, those who can read English will note the sole claim that
> carbon nanotubes *may* *theoretically* 'conduct electricity ten times
> better than copper'. If they mean that carbon nanotubes definitely
> have a resistivity ten times lower than copper, why don't they say so?
>
> If they can't say so, let's just wait and see..................

Resistivity in metals is a simple thing - there is no consideration of
direction, there is no issue with magnetic fields (until they get *really*
big), there is no issue with electric fields or voltages (again, until
they are very big), there is no issue with current limits other than the
effect of heating the wire - which gives a nice predictable change in the
resistivity. And the speed of the signal is directly dependant on the
resistance.

Non-metalic conductors are a completely different case, and all sorts of
effects must be considered. Is a conductor "ten times better than copper"
if it has a tenth of the resistivity for low current densities, but has an
absolute limit to its current density? Is it still "better" if magnetic
fields affect its resistivity? Is it still "better" if you can't make
"wires" longer than a few centimeters?

That's why the say "theoretically", and why we must, as you say, just wait
and see.