Super Steels vs Regular Steels

[shinyedges]

And I'll also add to this that the onus for proving your scientific theory is on the one making the claim. Then, a peer review process is conducted to look at the methods and conclusions. The problem here is the method is not clear.

And the funding is on the person doing the initial hypothesis. In the real world this is usually accomplished through grants or corporate backing, gathered by the one with the hypothesis. Some the claims. In this thread made by S1 show that he truly doesn't know how science works, just like bluntcut.

Add to that, the process must be recreated by others and verified before it is accepted.

 

[Natlek]

And the funding is on the person doing the initial hypothesis. In the real world this is usually accomplished through grants or corporate backing, gathered by the one with the hypothesis. Some the claims. In this thread made by S1 show that he truly doesn't know how science works, just like bluntcut.

At the end of a day .......why should Bluntcut bother to explain ,why he need to know how science work ? He make something extraordinary and many here claim that ? Why should I as a customer care HOW he do it if I get best performance blade ? Now , SCIENCE SHOULD be interested in his work and can future research bluntcut work...... if they are not jealous on uneducated man
Funny , he has a perfect product with imperfect theory of how he make it

 

[Danke42]

At the end of a day .......why should Bluntcut bother to explain ,why he need to know how science work ? He make something extraordinary and many here claim that ? Why should I as a customer care HOW he do it if I get best performance blade ? Now , SCIENCE SHOULD be interested in his work and can future research bluntcut work...... if they are not jealous on uneducated man
Funny , he has a perfect product with imperfect theory of how he make it

He doesn't need to explain anything for sure.

But if his "fans" who are currently joining up here and commenting in various unrelated threads to bemoan the lack of respect proof wish for that to cease then proof is required.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. A few YouTube commentators saying he made a knife they like is not even close. As for "Science" being interested in his work that's unlikely given his mumbo jumbo. Same reason "Science" won't debate the moon is made of cheese. If you make ludicrous assertations you'll be regarded as a joke and not granted the courtesy of a debate.

There is a sucker born every minute so at least he wont' run out of customers.

 

[Twindog]

One hundred years ago, Albert Einstein published his hypothesis of the existence of gravitational waves. His hypothesis could not be proven because we didn't have the technology to measure gravitational waves. But his hypothesis was still science.

And now, with extremely sensitive sensors in Louisiana and Washington state, scientists believe that they have proven or about to prove the existence of gravitational waves.

Science isn't as neat as some people think. Hypotheses are created all the time. Some are proven correct and become part of a scientific theory. Others are proven wrong. Others remain in limbo until they can be tested.

Even theories are not considered perfect representations of reality. Evolution, for example, is a well-established scientific theory, but it is constantly undergoing small corrections as our knowledge advances.

Only when you get to a scientific law -- which is usually a mathematical formula -- do we say it is 100 percent true.

Bluntcut developed a heat treat that has proven itself in real world testing by many people. Luong was generous and open in sharing his heat treat and in letting others test the results. His hypothesis may or may not be correct, but he has proven to be a generous and decent human being. He deserves our respect.

 

[rodriguez7]

Agreed.
Some of his HRC readings are crazy high.
Maybe he is a steel wizard and we have yet to understand.
But it's likely hes just baffling us with BS.

CPM S30V at 65+HRC seems completely insane. As well as some other steels and hardness readings. Hopefully someday a better explanation will be brough to light, and some actual science can be done.

He’s one of the only ones on this forum, that has taken the time to help me on my heat treating! He really has an idea of what he’s doing! I have a lot of respect for the guy! My results have been great!

 

[rodriguez7]

But what IS his CWF HT protocol?
I see a lot of explanations about what he believes is happening, but no step by step process that would allow replication for peer review, testing and evaluation.[/QUO.

He doesn’t really need to. I don’t remember busse ever giving their step by step process! But everyone buys into their magic! Apparently bluntcut is getting good results with what he’s doing!

 

[Quiet]

All exclamation points! All the time!

 

[shinyedges]

Having used Nathans blades and met and spoke with Nathan in person, I believe Nathan if he says bluntcuts knife performed well and is worth a real look.

I don't think bluntcuts ridiculous wording helped his acceptance here. He worded his explanations in such a manner that appeared (to me anyway) as if he was trying to make himself look smarter. Explaining things in a simple manner without out all the mumbo jumbo and smoke and mirrors would help his situation.


I don't believe science has figured everything out, my personal belief is we haven't even scratched the surface, that said, there is a way to go about presenting new ideas and processes.

 

[Ajack60]

Our different uses, preferred knives, sharpening methods, edge geometries, etc. all certainly change our perception of what steel is better than another.

That statement reminded me of when I go fishing. I look at the fishing reports, get info on the latest hot lures that’s catching fish, I might even buy some of them, but none of that really matters because I use the baits that I have the most confidence in that has proven to catch fish. Maybe that’s why I have a butt load of lures in my boat that doesn’t get used. I can probably say that about the knives I own also.

 

[Larrin]

Perhaps the positive thing is that this gave us a chance to discuss some about how science works, what pseudoscience is, and how our own biases affect how we process information. Of course, we have only scratched the surface. There are other books, podcasts, articles, etc. that go into all the details. It's a bit difficult in a thread like this to cover all of the background for any given argument. It's also difficult to argue a point without looking like a jerk on the internet. Sometimes it is better to just ignore things rather than trying to argue a coherent point. But then nothing is ever discussed. A lot of things are lose/lose on internet forums.

 

[danbot]

He doesn’t really need to. I don’t remember busse ever giving their step by step process! But everyone buys into their magic! Apparently bluntcut is getting good results with what he’s doing!

Hahaha! Yep, no shortage of those who just want to believe!

 

[craytab]

Add to that, the process must be recreated by others and verified before it is accepted.

Yup. And we aren't talking about just testing the knives. The whole process must be repeatable to claim science.

 

[cbrstar]

Observation alone can never establish proper scientific proof.

Real, indisputable knowledge, can only be gleaned from the decisive refutation of incorrect claims.

Well observation can change the outcome of an experiment. But without observation there is no scientific evidence which is empirical evidence interpreted through scientific method.

It's a logical fallacy to assume something is completely correct because one part is correct. But IMHO it's also a logical fallacy to simply dismiss results because one part is wrong.
Its like if a athlete wins a gold medal at the Olympics and someone asks what's the secret? And the athlete says "Because I ate my wheaties everyday" well you can call BS on the method and there's a much better explanation how the athlete won thier gold. But it doesn't diminish their achievement.

I feel like a simular situation is happening here with bc. He's managed to get a high hardness rating which has been tested by maybe not a scientist but by some well respected members here.

Even if Larrin tested it and found validity in the makers claims. I highly doubt it would change your guys perception that the guy is some kind of charlatan.

 

[marcinek]

Perhaps the positive thing is that this gave us a chance to discuss some about how science works, what pseudoscience is, and how our own biases affect how we process information. Of course, we have only scratched the surface. There are other books, podcasts, articles, etc. that go into all the details. It's a bit difficult in a thread like this to cover all of the background for any given argument. It's also difficult to argue a point without looking like a jerk on the internet. Sometimes it is better to just ignore things rather than trying to argue a coherent point. But then nothing is ever discussed. A lot of things are lose/lose on internet forums.

Indeed.

Does bluntcut's method work? People think so.
Is he a nice, generous guy? People think so.

But none of that matters when "scientific proof" is brought into it. If one doesn't care about scientific proof...fine.

But where we all lose here is when "proof" and "science" are misunderstood. Its like much of the "testing" and "graphs" that folks toss out "proving" what "the best steel" is or what steel has the best edge retention.

SO often they are not even close to controlled experiments and would have failed the Sixth Grade Science Fair.

If a person has no need for science or mathematics when it comes to their knives, that's fine. If you don't have that need, leave "proof" and "experiment" and "science" and "mathematics" out of it and don't get all pissy at the ones of us who have a need for science and mathematics when it comes to knives.

 

[craytab]

He doesn’t really need to. I don’t remember busse ever giving their step by step process! But everyone buys into their magic! Apparently bluntcut is getting good results with what he’s doing!

Hahaha! Yep, no shortage of those who just want to believe!

Busse doesn't sell his stuff based on revolutionary scientific mumbo jumbo. Big difference.

 

[SpySmasher]

If a person has no need for science or mathematics when it comes to their knives, that's fine. If you don't have that need, leave "proof" and "experiment" and "science" and "mathematics" out of it and don't get all pissy at the ones of us who have a need for science and mathematics when it comes to knives.

More of this, please.

10,000% more.

 

[Danke42]

Well observation can change the outcome of an experiment. But without observation there is no scientific evidence which is empirical evidence interpreted through scientific method.

It's a logical fallacy to assume something is completely correct because one part is correct. But IMHO it's also a logical fallacy to simply dismiss results because one part is wrong.
Its like if a athlete wins a gold medal at the Olympics and someone asks what's the secret? And the athlete says "Because I ate my wheaties everyday" well you can call BS on the method and there's a much better explanation how the athlete won thier gold. But it doesn't diminish their achievement.

I feel like a simular situation is happening here with bc. He's managed to get a high hardness rating which has been tested by maybe not a scientist but by some well respected members here.

Even if Larrin tested it and found validity in the makers claims. I highly doubt it would change your guys perception that the guy is some kind of charlatan.

If reliable sources are able to duplicate his results then the claims are a step further to being declared legitimate.

If instead the claimant is going to take the stance of "Can't win won't try". Then the claims continue to exist under a cloud of doubt.

Word of mouth anecdotes are merely viral advertising. There are hundreds of small to medium to large makers in the world that make nice sharp knives. If he's happy with that then that's fine.

And as a side note crucible steels like wootz/damascus have been duplicated and the performance exceeded. They were the super steels of their day and at the time the performance was mythical but now they've been eclipsed by modern materials. That's why no one has reintroduced them. By the current benchmarks set by current super steels they'd be merely pedestrian.

 

[Pilsner]

Indeed.

Does bluntcut's method work? People think so.
Is he a nice, generous guy? People think so.

But none of that matters when "scientific proof" is brought into it. If one doesn't care about scientific proof...fine.

But where we all lose here is when "proof" and "science" are misunderstood. Its like much of the "testing" and "graphs" that folks toss out "proving" what "the best steel" is or what steel has the best edge retention.

SO often they are not even close to controlled experiments and would have failed the Sixth Grade Science Fair.

If a person has no need for science or mathematics when it comes to their knives, that's fine. If you don't have that need, leave "proof" and "experiment" and "science" and "mathematics" out of it and don't get all pissy at the ones of us who have a need for science and mathematics when it comes to knives.

Indeed. Some commenting here seem to regard ‘science’ as being some sort of cult or faith based entity: I think it stems from residual resentment from the argument over evolution vs creationism. Whatever the reason, there is no arguing with ignorance. I enjoy Larrin’s posts here, which are informative and interesting. Sad that it has been derailed with such ludicrous nonsense.

I couldn’t give a flying... ‘fig’ whether BC achieves a great HRC. It doesn’t matter in the context of this thread, and dragging in his nonsensical ‘theories’ is ridiculous; constantly pushing them in the face of patient reasoning is frankly insulting. Some people need to go back to school.

 

[DeadboxHero]

He’s one of the only ones on this forum, that has taken the time to help me on my heat treating! He really has an idea of what he’s doing! I have a lot of respect for the guy! My results have been great!

Same here, he had helped me when I was very new to knife making with heat treating 52100 when all I had was very, very basic tools.

I'll never forget that.

Luong La is a great guy. He's not out to bamboozle people. He is good natured. I like how differently he looks at things. I believe he is more interested in the physics of the metals and how things move around in the steel rather then the pure metallurgy side which gives him a very different point of view.

I don't understand the CWF stuff, it doesn't follow anything I've read or learned from reading or doing. I'm skeptical, but I'm skeptical about everything.

I know Luong is busy with school and family or he'd be here.

I Hope he is doing well.

I've always wanted to come down and visit with him throw back some cold ones and try out those killer choppers he makes.

 

[marcinek]

Indeed. Some commenting here seem to regard ‘science’ as being some sort of cult or faith based entity: ...

I've been down this same rabbit hole here enough times to where I really try to avoid it. Edge retention "experiments," the geometry of convex edges, best overall steel bar graphs, etc etc etc.

I know better than anybody that many people hate science and math. I do not believe it is out of philosophical/religious resentment or anything...its just that they didn't like it in school, got out out school, and wanted nothing to do with it anymore.

That's fine. I understand.

But then you can't try and use it (and use it badly, usually), when one feels like it.

If this crystal whatever method seems to work for you...great. Say that. Don't get "scientific" about it.

I feel vanilla ice cream is better than chocolate. I'm not going to come in here with some cockamamie graph, nonsense experiment, handwaving "science," or misguided understanding of mathematics to prove it.

But I still have strong convictions that it is better.