Newton 2nd Law and Shannon sampling theorem...

TLDR:

There are endless discussion / debate on the topic of Hi-Res audio vs CD-quality audio.

To me, it is pointless in such discussion as the answer is a no brainer. Why people are still arguing which one is better?

CD-quality audio (44.1kHz , 16-bit) is by definition inferior to Hi-Res audio (e.g. 192kHz, 24-bit).

In terms of audio quality, there is no way CD-quality audio can be better than Hi-Res. It is a given fact.

CD-quality audio is good enough?

Some hard-core CD-quality audio supporters would argue that it is good enough for audio reproduction. One of their reasons is that Shannon sampling theorem proves that 44.1kHz is good enough to cover the audio signal with frequency range up to 22kHz.

If you attempt to argue with them that Hi-Res is better (even if you really do hear that), those CD-quality audio supporters would say you are tricked by marketing, your brain, confirmation bias effect, etc..... as the science prove that CD-quality sounds the same as Hi-Res.

I bet the above situation may sound familiar to you if you read any thread regarding Hi-Res vs CD-quality discussion thread on any "audio science" forum.

You may ask, "Is Science really telling us that CD-quality audio sounds the same as Hi-Res?"

Newton's Second Law

Think about this: I bet most of us learned the Newton's second law of motion (i.e. F=ma) in high school Physics. 

There is no doubt that Netwon is one of the greatest scientists. Probably you would believe that F=ma can describle the motion of an object perfectly as many of us has done some experiences during our Physics lab that shows its correctness too. Right?

In my eyes, those people who support CD-quality audio sounds the same as Hi-Res are similar to those people who truely believe in F=ma. Why?

Newton and Shannon

F=ma is correct but it has some limitations. It is same for the Shannon sampling theorem. It is correct but it has some limtiaitons too. 

Without considering (or fully understand) the limitations when applying the corresponding law/theorem, you would end up with wrong result/conclusion.

Some pseudo science claims would take advantage of such ignornace in the limitations and come up with the conclusion (that claimed to be based on science) to support their view points (i.e. pseudo science claims).

Don't be tricked

To be precise, if a person using Shannon sampling theorem to show that CD-quality audio sounds the same as Hi-Res, then you can tell for sure that either that person has limited understanding of the Shannon sampling theorem or he has a hidden agenda and he would like to leverage the shannon sampling theorem to draw a twisted conclusion to support his hidden agenda.

Appendix

Limitations of Newton's second law:

Limitations of Shannon Sampling Theorem: