For the purposes of conducting strict double blind, controlled testing, of course.
Of course, and I hope I really do get the real stuff as I need to lose weight, and my car’s clear coat needs some help.
I don’t know how they replicated the effect, I guess they did some form of cryo treatment, that’s why I put the question mark.
The first time I read about the treatment was on some old book, many years ago. Then I re-read it on a magazine a couple of years ago and recently on this website: http://www.research-racing.de/bmwturbo.htm
Neither in the book, nor in the magazine was any more info than those mentioned in the quote above. Now that I come to think of it, it has all the indications of an urban legend.
It does make some sense assuming that cryogenic treatment is resulting in the thermodynamic minimum energy state. The same way you can cool water below its freezing point without getting ice, a metal may exist in a higher energy crystal state until you trigger it to transition. Crygenic treatment might trigger the phase transition to get it into it’s themodynamic minimum state.
On the other hand, if the resulting state is the thermodynamic minimum, then getting to that state is like rolling a ball down hill. Another way to get your supercooled water to freeze is to shake it or even add heat. Heating the metal might give just enough energy for the atoms to move to their “favorite” place in the crystal. This could result in the exact same structure as is produced by cryogenic treatment.
You guys are not even close to why it works. It is obvious from all your questions that you know nothing about metallurgical crystal structure. You have also inulted the only metallurgist in this discussion with your inane and silly idea that if YOU cannot concieve of why something works it obviously is a lie.
Here’s how Newton put it in Principia Mathematica: “I here design to give the mathematical notion of these forces [like gravity], without considering their physical causes and seats.” In his Opticks, he wrote that science gives us “the general laws of nature,” even “though their Causes be not yet discover’d.” He wrote of the need to propose “Principles of Motion” and “leave their causes to be found out.”
Actually he was following the revolution Galileo started in science. No slouch either, G. wrote in his Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences that the purpose of science is “to investigate and to demonstrate . . . the properties [of things] like accelerated motion,”(or for us, cryogenically treated material), but “it is not really worthwhile” to “obtain a proper solution to the problem discussed by philosophers, namely, what causes the acceleration”–or improved sound.
Discoveries should be reported to spur research.
I’m checking in occasionally for amusement. I will still process CD’s if presented with an experimental plan that no one opposes. Here is another question for you philosophers to think (if you can call what you do thinking) about. Most metallurgists will tell you that cryogenics will not work on cast iron brake rotors. The microstructure is pearlitic, there is no retained austenite to martensite. Why then do rotors last up to four times longer when treated. By the way, these are rotors subjected to industry standard tests, SAE 2707 JUL 2004 METHOD B, done by independent test labs?
I need to get back to working on the Cryogenic Society of America’s project to put the research papers on cryo processing on the web.
Have fun
**Rick **has already done so.
Jay Leno has a demonstration on Controlled Thermal Processing:
Of course Jay Leno is a comedian, and not really any type of expert. For example, when he talkes about cold making the molecules get closer and tighter he fails to realize that unless the molecules have gone through a phase change, the molecules will go back to exactly where they were in the first place when the metal is brought back to room temperature. It is a very necesary point to make, and even the company guys aren’t making it.
I want to make clear that I’m not saying cryogenic treatment of parts is complete hoakum. I certainly think that if NASCAR is using it as regularly as they say, NASCAR has enough experience with wearing out parts to get more than an anecdotal set of data points.
Also, the people in the video suggest that cryogenic treatment prior to machining is best. Once again this points to a thermodynamic minimum phase. As a thermodynamic minimum, there are going to be other ways to acheive the same phase. Certain types of parts may be better with other treatments.
I still don’t have to go out on much of a limb to say that cryogenic treatment of CD’s is a crock. Digital information doesn’t care what medium its on. There is no such thing as better ones and zeroes.
Well, it is necessary to make a distinction here. Cryogenic treatment might make CDs last longer, might make an unreadable CD readable, etc., etc… But making a CD “sound better”? Not unless the guy doing the treatment is a graduate of Hogwarts!
Cryogenic treating of pants**
No, thank you. :eek:
I dispute this. CD-audio like CD-ROM, as you correctly state later, have built in redundancy in the raw recorded data so that later the initial data can be recovered without any loss. A CD-audio or CD-ROM with enough errors in the raw datastream would yield corrupted data but this is a malfunction and not within specs. In any normally functioning CD-Audio or CD-ROM data is going to be recovered without any loss so you just could not tell the difference by ear. There is no loss to hear or detect. There is just no way you can detect any loss by ear for the simple reason that there is NO loss to be detected.
If y’all can pounce on CD claims, I can pounce on this. Jay Leno is FAR from 'just a comedian and not really any kind of expert where cars are concerned. you would be hard pressed to find any other single person that’s contributed to the hobby like he has.
Cites:
Heck, just let me google that for you 
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Jay+Leno+vehicle+collection
The mere fact that Jay had no issue producing a video on the technology means his reputation would be affected if it were blinker fluid, muffler bearings, or magnetic fuel aligners.
So, can we steer this to whether or not Jay is qualified to talk about cars?
No, because it’s not about cars, its about materials. Most importantly, he clearly misses the point of what the cryogenic treatment has to do in order to change the behavior of the material at room temperature and above. He fails to demonstrate even basic materials knowledge in the clip you linked. I’m not even certain that his statement about the molecules getting closer when they are cold qualifies as significant. While almost certainly these materials do contract under liquid nitrogen, I’m guessing they don’t change their dimensions much more than a few percent. More significantly, the atoms settle down and quit vibrating as much. This settling down can cause atoms to reorder.
I have no doubt that Jay Leno knows a lot about cars. I’d have to let the automobile people determine if he is an expert on cars. I wouldn’t be suprised if he had advisors for these clips, and I hear he’s pretty good at reading a script.
Nevertheless, if NASCAR is using this stuff regularly, it is a very strong indicator of success. We have seen at least one peer reviewed paper that found moderate success. I would be more interested in the data NASCAR has on it.
I can’t speak to whether Jay is an expert on materials, but he sure as heck is an expert on cars. He writes a regular article in Popular Mechanics about cars. Mostly he talks about older cars (ones made before there were production models, and early production model cars) but he also talks about newer technology.
He rebuilds car engines by hand.
Again, this doesn’t make him a materials expert, but it does make him a hands-on expert and a consulted expert.
“Metal” and “molecule” in the same sentence is a problem in itself. On the other hand, you don’t need to be a quantum chemist to know that ice floats in water.
I’m stunned that the article about cryogenics didn’t discuss superconductors-- the ability of electronic devices to run with less resistance (and faster) while their temperatures are lowered.
It’s been a long-standing practice for PC hobbyists, for example, to radically reduce the temperatures of PC video cards and motherboards to increase their speeds significantly. These folks typically use liquid nitrogen.
Stuff and nonsense. Liquid nitrogen isn’t remotely cold enough for superconductivity. This is just ordinary cooling, no different in principle from the fans in a PC or the water chilling used in high-end IBM mainframes since 1968.
There has been research in superconductive computing, but, the last I heard, it hasn’t come close to producing usable results.
I thought it was going to be body parts. I came here to mention that I once froze a banana in liquid nitrogen and got it stuck to my tongue, but I guess I won’t.
OK, I’m combining two loosely related topics.
Superconducting is the science of radically reducing materials to near-absolute-zero temperatures at which some materials display near-zero electrical “resistance”.
Reducing the temperature of PC parts by the use of liquid nitrogen isn’t going to produce near-absolute-temperatures, but it sure does increase their ability to run fast (“overclock”).
However, the use of liquid nitrogen differs significantly from fans, heat-sink radiators, and water chilling for the simple reason that liquid nitrogen brings the PC parts’ temperatures significantly below room temperature, whereas the best those other methods can hope for is to keep the parts at temperatures slightly warmer than the surrounding room.
sethness said:
Why are you stunned? The original question was about one aspect of cryogenics - applying really cold temperatures to physical items as a one-off treatment prior to their use in a normal (ambient) environment.
See? Nothing about maintaining that cryo environment during operations, it’s all about a 1 time treatment to enhance the physical properties. So that is what the column addressed.