Thread: Interesting Blog about Edge Development.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I have one question...

Do you believe that the edge would look the same under an SEM between a New SR user that was honing for the first time as compared to somebody that had been honing hundreds of different SR's for many years ????

Same Hone Same razor would you see a difference ?????

Posed and answered, and objectively proved at nearly every SR meet,,, the edges don't even look the same under loupes and cheap Chinese USB's

I'll ask again, what conclusions has he come to that you disagree with?

His bevel seems to be set. I don't know that it would be any different if he had set a bevel many times. I don't know that he hasn't set quite a few bevels.

Is this his first time? What is it about his pictures that you are objecting to?

I haven't studied the article in great detail. I think he said something along the lines that the 1K does the sharpening and that after the 4k it's just about the polishing.

That's repeated daily on this forum isn't it?

Originally Posted by gcbryan

I'll ask again, what conclusions has he come to that you disagree with?

His bevel seems to be set. I don't know that it would be any different if he had set a bevel many times. I don't know that he hasn't set quite a few bevels.

Is this his first time? What is it about his pictures that you are objecting to?

I haven't studied the article in great detail. I think he said something along the lines that the 1K does the sharpening and that after the 4k it's just about the polishing.

That's repeated daily on this forum isn't it?

Ahhhhhh and there is the catch

See I never said I disagreed with any of it, in fact much of it I agree with

BUT


That does not make the conclusions correct, any conclusions are suspect whether you agree or not

Observe

Same piece of Chalk
Same piece of concrete
Different pressure


Newbie Honer Heavy hands



Experienced honer understanding pressure and torque



Get it now ???

Just because they are great pics and you might agree with the conclusions does not make it correct

The scratches in his pictures should be smaller than 1/10 grit particle size?


Edit: that was a serious question. Scratch size/depth seems to be one of the things you disagree with that blog about, so I'd like to know your opinion. Just innocent curiosity.
I get that you question his ability/expertise. I don't know the guy so I haven't formed any opinion on that. I'm genuinely interested in any problems/contradictions/inaccuracies you may have noticed if you'd care to explain why a given thought path or conclusion is incorrect. The ultimate goal in my opinion is being able to learn something from any given situation so I'm all ears. After you've finished cleaning all that yellow chalk off your garage floor, of course.

Originally Posted by KenWeir

The scratches in his pictures should be smaller than 1/10 grit particle size?


Edit: that was a serious question. Scratch size/depth seems to be one of the things you disagree with that blog about, so I'd like to know your opinion. Just innocent curiosity.
I get that you question his ability/expertise. I don't know the guy so I haven't formed any opinion on that. I'm genuinely interested in any problems/contradictions/inaccuracies you may have noticed if you'd care to explain why a given thought path or conclusion is incorrect. The ultimate goal in my opinion is being able to learn something from any given situation so I'm all ears. After you've finished cleaning all that yellow chalk off your garage floor, of course.

You miss the point also
I does not matter whether I agree or disagree,,, the data is suspect therefore any conclusions are also suspect even if I agree 100%

Originally Posted by gssixgun

You miss the point also
I does not matter whether I agree or disagree,,, the data is suspect therefore any conclusions are also suspect even if I agree 100%

That's the part I was asking about.

I'm not trying to be obstinate Glenn. I may have worded my questions poorly. If I understood correctly then you suggested some of his methods for coming to those conclusions were questionable. I'm curious how you would have done it differently.

Glenn, I just received notification from YouTube that your videos have been pulled and are being reviewed for statistical accuracy.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Ahhhhhh and there is the catch

See I never said I disagreed with any of it, in fact much of it I agree with

BUT


That does not make the conclusions correct, any conclusions are suspect whether you agree or not

Observe

Same piece of Chalk
Same piece of concrete
Different pressure


Newbie Honer Heavy hands



Experienced honer understanding pressure and torque



Get it now ???

Just because they are great pics and you might agree with the conclusions does not make it correct

Haha...you are a tough audience. I don't think this was intended to be a scientific, peer reviewed paper was it? It was a blog, much like this forum. If someone went to that much effort and went into that degree of detail the bottom of that page would be lit up with "likes" and "Thank Yous" and you would probably be one of them, no?

Anyway, do we know that this guy just started honing the day he decided to do this test?

Originally Posted by gcbryan

Haha...you are a tough audience. I don't think this was intended to be a scientific, peer reviewed paper was it? It was a blog, much like this forum. If someone went to that much effort and went into that degree of detail the bottom of that page would be lit up with "likes" and "Thank Yous" and you would probably be one of them, no?

Anyway, do we know that this guy just started honing the day he decided to do this test?

He has stated that he wants to publish, and he has also admitted that has no experience honing.
This is where the issue is. Lots of new folks that do not uite understand honing, and visuals stumble upon this blog, and see nice pics and "oh cool pics, done with an SEM, the guy must know what he is talking about". Except no one has an idea what a properly finished edge looks like at that level of magnification. So how can one make any conclusions that are of any reasonable value knowing the facts as we know them? We know, from experience, that honing a few razors, does not make one proficient in making razors really shave ready. We also can ask quite a few questions about how controlled all the set up and the process of preparation of the edge was to ask for some sort of statistical confirmation of the results. We can ask a lot of question about the scientific method used for the investigation. I can tell you that there were non and the conclusions are basically theoricrafting.

I am going to state from memory a part of a scentence on the Jnat slurry test "red kiita slurry" that right there is one single enxample of the level of knowledge of the OP.

This whole blog essentially is a logical fallacy, because there is no proof contrary to the statements made.
Here is an example:

Description of Burden of Proof

Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. Another version occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B. A common name for this is an Appeal to Ignorance. This sort of reasoning typically has the following form:

Claim X is presented by side A and the burden of proof actually rests on side B.
Side B claims that X is false because there is no proof for X.
In many situations, one side has the burden of proof resting on it. This side is obligated to provide evidence for its position. The claim of the other side, the one that does not bear the burden of proof, is assumed to be true unless proven otherwise. The difficulty in such cases is determining which side, if any, the burden of proof rests on. In many cases, settling this issue can be a matter of significant debate. In some cases the burden of proof is set by the situation. For example, in American law a person is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty (hence the burden of proof is on the prosecution). As another example, in debate the burden of proof is placed on the affirmative team. As a final example, in most cases the burden of proof rests on those who claim something exists (such as Bigfoot, psychic powers, universals, and sense data).

Examples of Burden of Proof

Bill: "I think that we should invest more money in expanding the interstate system."
Jill: "I think that would be a bad idea, considering the state of the treasury."
Bill: "How can anyone be against highway improvements?"
Bill: "I think that some people have psychic powers."
Jill: "What is your proof?"
Bill: "No one has been able to prove that people do not have psychic powers."
"You cannot prove that God does not exist, so He does."

I wouldn't argue with any of that and for that matter I generally ignore any test or thought process that tried to prove the non-existence of something. I would say this, however, and I feel like these are fairly safe assumptions regarding the images taken.

If we assume his honing skill is average or below average then that razor when properly honed on those stones;
would probably have scratches not deeper than those shown, relative to the grit stone used
would probably have a less pronounced sawtooth edge than that shown
and would probably end with an apex width the same or narrower than that shown.

Those are the only conclusions I've drawn & they're still only probabilities.

Nothing is absolute of course, but I'd be amazed if an expert honemeister with decades of experience would pay for access to an sem and spend weeks studying a hundred different razors at every stage on multiple stone combinations and publish a detailed study, which still may or may not be considered authoritative and definitive.