I was sure that there was a discussion of this before; I know it’s been touched on. I looked here…
and I looked here…
And HERE…
Found this @Torq quote
These cables still feature:
- Proprietary dual-interleaved, quad-helix, geometry.
- Ultra-low resistance** and capacitance.
- High purity, oxygen-free, pure-copper wiring.
- High-density, plated copper-matrix shielding.
- Electron-beam irradiation (EBI) - for improved flexibility and reduced microphonics.
- Cryogenic treatment - because … “Why not?”
- Reflective and Glow-in-the-Dark cable sheathing.
And, of course, they’re reassuringly expensive .
But no direct answer.
Let’s see what everyone thinks. Here’s a MULTIPLE RESPONSE Poll.
- Cable temperature makes no difference at any time, unless it is so hot it melts.
- Cold treatment may make a difference, but only while the cable is cold - until we get room temperature superconductors
- Of course cryogenic treatment can make a difference - I just don’t know if I can hear it
- Treatment with cold is something materials science people have done for years. Look at Damascus steel, or quenching any steel.
- Cold treatment makes a difference - to the manufacturer’s bottom line.
- "What you talkin’ bout, Willis?
0
voters
And I should note that I’ve heard responsible materials scientists say that there is no directionality in piece of wire. But I don’t think I’ve heard a clear discussion of cryogenic treatment. Anyone who can reply with serious pointers please do. I’m personally of the I’ll believe it if it’s superconductive school.