impedance and empericism

[Richard Moody]

>but it didn't strike me as a
> good enough rationalization to shoot down "impedance" without at least
> sticking in a better word or concept (possibly one in a uniform, and with
a
> mustache), to replace it. True, we couldn't put numbers to the concept to
> the fourteenth decimal, but I don't see how that negates the concept.
>
> Ron N

OK numbers to the nearest whole place then.
As the son of an electrical engineer, I have always wondered what concept
"impedance" was supposed to convey when used as "soundboard impedance".  He
tried his best to show me how electrical impedance was measured and used in
formulas. So you can see why I have always been expecting formulas for sound
board impedance.   So not even knowing what the concept is, How can I  think
of a better term.
      There is that school of science that says in effect, if it can't be
measured, you don't know what you are talking about.   I think they really
say if it can't be measured it can't be defined, which is the same as
existance for them.  This I think came out of the arguments for and against
the concept of "the ether", the hypothetical medium for electromatic
radiation like air is for sound.
So a perfect problem for the "emperical" (measuring) scientists would be,
"does humidity affect frequency of tones, or any part of the frequency of
tones?"
---ric