Heats, solutions, carbides etc... I am back and stirring the pot

I don't need poison. I am my own poison... LOL :D


Truer words never spoken, Tai - for myself, as well! I need to get a little of you rubbed off onto me... I need to learn how not to think, a bit.
 
Thanks to everyone posting on these topics, and especially to Kevin Cashen for sharing his research with us.

I just read Verhoeven's "Metallurgy of Steel for Bladesmiths & Others Who Heat Treat and Forge Steel." What a revelation! I whole-heartedly recommend this to anyone who is interested in what is going on in their steel.
 
Truer words never spoken, Tai - for myself, as well! I need to get a little of you rubbed off onto me... I need to learn how not to think, a bit.

LOL

I think I'm going to get some carnauba,... wax my philosophy for a while and take a nap,... Before I hurt myself... :D
 
Kevin, another problem you seem to have is with your "concept of intuition". Intuition doesn’t just come out of thin air. It is an instantaneous "mathematical calculation", that draws on every recourse we have available to us, which comes to us through the 5 senses, and is able to deal with an amazing amount information. It enables us to predict the outcome of an event before it happens. It’s a real human capability, and mechanism. There is nothing magical or mystical about it.

Tai, this is why I love talking with you, but find debating with you a waste of my time, it is like trying to pick up air in your hands. You feel the safest when dealing with the entirely subjective, thus nobody can pin you down or prove you wrong, your feelings are yours and who can say otherwise? But your feelings have absolutely no meaning to me. You can make up your own meaning for any concept you want and redefine anything to comfortably suit your sensibilities. But if you wish to communicate it to other human beings there must be a common reference point. That is why we invented language and all the technical terms that drive folks like you crazy.

Webster’s defines intuition firstly as “Immediate apprehension or cognition”, it mentions nothing about sensory perception or mathematics as that would be “reasoning” which the other definitions listed precludes. Now you could say “oh, there you go again Kevin just regurgitating literal facts”, but then I would say that perhaps my definition of intuition is- “foot, hailstorm jeet, jeet hoopy and the sound of purple” as nonsensical as it is, perhaps that is what I feel when I hear it, it is my “intuition” and every bit as legitimate as yours! Unfortunately it is completely meaningless to anybody not inside my skull. But is very safe isn’t it?

I deal with set concepts with concise points of reference, there is much more risk of getting things wrong, but I think it is worth it to communicate things in a quantifiable way to other people. Unless the good people of this forum have an emotional investment in me and want to hear about my “feelings” I would prefer not to burden them with such irrelevant pointlessness, I can talk to myself to get in touch with such things. Relativism does have a warm and fuzzy feel when nothing is right or wrong and everybody’s feelings are equally valid. But the universe has a nasty habit of not giving a tinkers cuss about our feelings.:(

Kevin the only “truth” you or I will ever know is subjective, because our interpretation of the facts and conclusions are subjective,… or from within ourselves. You try and use metallurgy as your base for authority. Your facts are fine, but your interpretation and application of the facts and your conclusions are subjective, which often leads to error. It’s like looking at a situation and saying , I see what the problem is,… it’s “2+2=“, so the answer is “4“. I must be correct. However, if the problem wasn’t factored correctly, but instead the problem was really, “1+2+3=”, then the correct answer is really “6”, not “4”,… and you were in error.

"I am not interested in telling people how to make their knives, my goal is to uncover the truth about what happens when they do." Kevin

How would you know what people do when they make knives, unless you stood there and watched each time? I think you make too many assumptions, which lead to continual error on your part. In essence you become your own worse enemy, and contribute to the nonsense with which you yourself hate. ..

I do not hold, claim nor want any authority, but you find the information I present threatening for some reason so you project onto to me the mantle of an authority figure against which you can rebel. This often results in ad hominem attacks for most folks, so am at least grateful for the restraint you have shown.:thumbup:

I see you did pick up on the subtle fact that I used the word “truth” instead of “facts” in my signature line. Yes, that was intentional in order not to oversimplify things. You are spot on that I cannot determine any hard facts about somebody else’s procedure or products, but I can scrutinize the claims made and seek to see how truthful they may be.

Which takes us to “continual error” ; continual? Wow that is a pretty big absolute for a guy who doesn’t like them. But then one can never be in error if our existence is merely subjective and intuitive. Error can only occur in the presence of definitive contrary facts- there is hope for you after all Tai.:D Facts in error can easily be defeated with opposing facts, if what I present here about soak times and penetrative vs. scratch hardness is false simply sweep it aside with better facts. But then facts will have trumped “intuition” , or perhaps these facts are merely my intuition, but then they could not be in error since they are mine.;)

But look at it this way, I like you enough that I just allowed you to consume almost 10 minutes of my day with this nonsense, that does give you some importance to me and this conversation. I will be starting a new thread for Larrin dealing with other factors of heat and I would like to focus on the facts there. It seems every thread as of late has turned to a philosophical debate involving science, religion, the nature of man and his social politics… this is the “Bladesmithing Forum” isn’t it?:confused:

I doubt I am alone in thinking it would be nice to just talk about what the carbon does inside the blade without worrying of it fits into our psychology of the universal scheme of things. This metallurgy junk is on web sites all over the net, it doesn’t seem to be a threat or insult there, that is probably because if you don’t like it you just don’t go to those sites. I would suggest that if folks find it impractical, irrelevant or intimidating here they just ignore it and go on doing things the way they always have. For years that approach has worked well for quite a few, why change now?
 
My head is still trying to wrap itself around basic metallurgy and I am still having a hard time at it. Can anybody recommend some books as a starting point? It's always good to have some pages to thumb through, set down when your brain gets overloaded, and come back to later to hopefully absorb the info. :D
 
My head is still trying to wrap itself around basic metallurgy and I am still having a hard time at it. Can anybody recommend some books as a starting point? It's always good to have some pages to thumb through, set down when your brain gets overloaded, and come back to later to hopefully absorb the info. :D


Try here:

Metallurgy-Fundamentals-Daniel-Brandt

It is an excellent introductory text that gives you a solid understanding of the basics in a simple to read fashion.
 
Kevin,
I alway have appreciated everything you present.
It has helped me tremendously cut through the mystical b.s. surrounding bladesmithing.
It has also helped me understand the necssary steps to properly anneal, termper and harden a piece of steel.
Sam
 
Tai, this is why I love talking with you, but find debating with you a waste of my time, it is like trying to pick up air in your hands. You feel the safest when dealing with the entirely subjective, thus nobody can pin you down or prove you wrong, your feelings are yours and who can say otherwise? But your feelings have absolutely no meaning to me. You can make up your own meaning for any concept you want and redefine anything to comfortably suit your sensibilities. But if you wish to communicate it to other human beings there must be a common reference point. That is why we invented language and all the technical terms that drive folks like you crazy.

Webster’s defines intuition firstly as “Immediate apprehension or cognition”, it mentions nothing about sensory perception or mathematics as that would be “reasoning” which the other definitions listed precludes. Now you could say “oh, there you go again Kevin just regurgitating literal facts”, but then I would say that perhaps my definition of intuition is- “foot, hailstorm jeet, jeet hoopy and the sound of purple” as nonsensical as it is, perhaps that is what I feel when I hear it, it is my “intuition” and every bit as legitimate as yours! Unfortunately it is completely meaningless to anybody not inside my skull. But is very safe isn’t it?

I deal with set concepts with concise points of reference, there is much more risk of getting things wrong, but I think it is worth it to communicate things in a quantifiable way to other people. Unless the good people of this forum have an emotional investment in me and want to hear about my “feelings” I would prefer not to burden them with such irrelevant pointlessness, I can talk to myself to get in touch with such things. Relativism does have a warm and fuzzy feel when nothing is right or wrong and everybody’s feelings are equally valid. But the universe has a nasty habit of not giving a tinkers cuss about our feelings.:(



I do not hold, claim nor want any authority, but you find the information I present threatening for some reason so you project onto to me the mantle of an authority figure against which you can rebel. This often results in ad hominem attacks for most folks, so am at least grateful for the restraint you have shown.:thumbup:

I see you did pick up on the subtle fact that I used the word “truth” instead of “facts” in my signature line. Yes, that was intentional in order not to oversimplify things. You are spot on that I cannot determine any hard facts about somebody else’s procedure or products, but I can scrutinize the claims made and seek to see how truthful they may be.

Which takes us to “continual error” ; continual? Wow that is a pretty big absolute for a guy who doesn’t like them. But then one can never be in error if our existence is merely subjective and intuitive. Error can only occur in the presence of definitive contrary facts- there is hope for you after all Tai.:D Facts in error can easily be defeated with opposing facts, if what I present here about soak times and penetrative vs. scratch hardness is false simply sweep it aside with better facts. But then facts will have trumped “intuition” , or perhaps these facts are merely my intuition, but then they could not be in error since they are mine.;)

But look at it this way, I like you enough that I just allowed you to consume almost 10 minutes of my day with this nonsense, that does give you some importance to me and this conversation. I will be starting a new thread for Larrin dealing with other factors of heat and I would like to focus on the facts there. It seems every thread as of late has turned to a philosophical debate involving science, religion, the nature of man and his social politics… this is the “Bladesmithing Forum” isn’t it?:confused:

I doubt I am alone in thinking it would be nice to just talk about what the carbon does inside the blade without worrying of it fits into our psychology of the universal scheme of things. This metallurgy junk is on web sites all over the net, it doesn’t seem to be a threat or insult there, that is probably because if you don’t like it you just don’t go to those sites. I would suggest that if folks find it impractical, irrelevant or intimidating here they just ignore it and go on doing things the way they always have. For years that approach has worked well for quite a few, why change now?

WOW!

Now, if you could just put all that natural intellect and energy of yours towards hardness testing steel with a file,... just imagine the things you could do?
 
I doubt I am alone in thinking it would be nice to just talk about what the carbon does inside the blade without worrying of it fits into our psychology of the universal scheme of things.

I'm in... and I promise I won't be such a pest next time. Next thread, please...:)
 
Hmmm. So there is a specific, manufacturer supplied recipe for heat treatment of steel? Absolute heresy I must say! And to make it doubly worse, this gets in the way of art!!! Really, how in the world can anyone use a proper heat treat if it does not include a lemmings piss or the skin of a frog aged a lunar month?

Art and science in no way conflict. Art can do things science and reality cannot. Look at impressionism and various abstract works. It can do this because it is only in imagination and perception, and in no way tied to reality. In the same way, science is limited because it must be based in reality. Any product is a series of compromises. That is the reason custom knives are so special. The strong points and compromises a person wishes to accept are all brought into a single tool. If this was not the case, chopping tools could be lightweight, thin, and short, and still be highly effective. Obviously, a series of compromises must be made, because that tool must function in reality. As far as art goes, a picture could be made of a tool that could have no compromises, and in some peoples perception, it could work well. In fact, a tool could be made with no compromises, and as long as it was never used, or had to work in reality, the perception could be that it was perfect in every way.

While art is hugely important, when it must deal w/ reality, some sort of science must be employed.
 
I doubt I am alone in thinking it would be nice to just talk about what the carbon does inside the blade without worrying of it fits into our psychology of the universal scheme of things.

I think it would be great if YOU could do that. The way your information is laced with pet peeves and assumptions about they way other people make knives, makes it hard to figure out what you are really trying to say and/or accomplish.

Facts + pet peeves + assumptions = nonsense.
 
I think it would be great if YOU could do that. The way your information is laced with pet peeves and assumptions about they way other people make knives, makes it hard to figure out what you are really trying to say and/or accomplish.

Facts + pet peeves + assumptions = nonsense.


Come on, now Tai... methinks you're being sticky for sticky's sake. Both of you go to opposite sides of the playground now, and come back when you're ready to play nice.
I find posts by the two of you incredibly educating (and fun!) but not when it denigrates to the tone of the last several posts...
 
I think it would be great if YOU could do that. The way your information is laced with pet peeves and assumptions about they way other people make knives, makes it hard to figure out what you are really trying to say and/or accomplish.

Facts + pet peeves + assumptions = nonsense.

Tai it is very simple- if you don't like it, don't read it! Right now there are two threads going in this forum- one about the technical aspects of where carbon rests in annealing, the other about philisophical chocolates, neither are interfering with the other. I have only so many hours in a day, so when I come to the "BladeSmith Questions and Answers" forum I simply pick and choose which threads to bother with, it is simple it doesn't even take intuition :jerkit: And if I don't give a rip about a thread topic it is also only common courtesy for me not to waste the peoples time who do.
 
Come on, now Tai... methinks you're being sticky for sticky's sake. Both of you go to opposite sides of the playground now, and come back when you're ready to play nice.
I find posts by the two of you incredibly educating (and fun!) but not when it denigrates to the tone of the last several posts...

O.K.

It's a big enough world for us both. :)

Kevin has a great wealth of knowledge to share, makes great knives, has a good sense of humor and is a very nice guy.

I’m just seeking the “truth”, same as he is. Two perspectives are better than one. :)
 
Tai it is very simple- if you don't like it, don't read it! Right now there are two threads going in this forum- one about the technical aspects of where carbon rests in annealing, the other about philisophical chocolates, neither are interfering with the other. I have only so many hours in a day, so when I come to the "BladeSmith Questions and Answers" forum I simply pick and choose which threads to bother with, it is simple it doesn't even take intuition :jerkit: And if I don't give a rip about a thread topic it is also only common courtesy for me not to waste the peoples time who do.

O.K. Kevin,... but I thought you wanted to "stir the pot". ???
 
As Matt pointed out, stirring is fun, carelessly slinging and splattering is pointless.

I have often taken some big names to task in public, but I think any of them will tell you that I did it in a respectful and civil manner and I always respect my opponent enough to question him with sound, logical and objective arguments. It is an election year, one of the biggest points that I judge a politician on is his estimation of me with his lies. A guy who respects my intelligence enough to put some effort into making his B.S. convincing will get my vote, a guy who comes to believe his constituency is so beneath him that he doesn't even need to bother won't get the time of day from me.
 
Back
Top