Neutral electronics are a farce...

Geoff, note the reference to a point source in the quote Ralph (Atmasphere) provided just above. The reason the amplitude of electromagnetic waves goes down in free space as distance increases is that they "spread out" to some degree. If they are emitted by a point source, and therefore are radiated essentially equally in all directions, the energy received at any given point will decrease in proportion to the square of the distance, since (as stated in the reference Ralph provided) "the surface area of a sphere increases with the square of the radius."

That is the same reason, btw, that the SPL produced by a relatively small box-type speaker (which from the perspective of a listener seated some distance in front of the speaker can be considered as roughly approximating a point source) drops off at 6 db per doubling of distance (putting aside the effects of room reflections). Planar speakers and line sources of course behave differently, and SPL falls off more slowly in those cases, as distance increases.

What makes communications with satellites and inter-planetary probes possible is that the antennas are designed to focus the RF energy much more sharply than a point source, so that the energy "spreads out" as little as possible as distance increases.

Consider the example of a flashlight being shined against a wall, in comparison to a laser pointer being shined against the wall. As distance increases, the diameter of the spot that is illuminated by the flashlight will INCREASE much more than in the case of the laser pointer. While the brightness of any given point within the spot that is illuminated by the flashlight will DECREASE much more, as distance increases, than in the case of the laser pointer.

Regards,
-- Al

What does all that have to do with the price of spinach? The shielding in cables protects the cables from external radio frequencies but does nothing to protect the audio signal from the induced magnetic field. And the reason is because the induced magnetic field is a different issue and requires a different solution. It's name is high permeability.  But I repeat myself. You guys can’t seem to see the forest for the trees. And for transformers the (induced) magnetic field is an even bigger issue. And manufacturers apparently do precious little about it from what I can see. It's almost like they're oblivious. The electron tubes are usually sitting right out in front on those big old transformers. Like sitting ducks.

Incorrect statements have a lot to do with credibility.  Credibility has to do with most everything.  It's not rocket science.  

What does all that have to do with the price of spinach?

Geoff, in case it wasn't clear my last post was in direct response to your contention that:

Radio waves do not follow the inverse square law like magnetic fields. If they did we would be unable to talk to astronauts on the moon or to send transmissions out into the galaxy you know SETI and all that. Radio waves don’t attenuate in vacuum of space and the only reason they attenuate in free space of Earth’s atmosphere is because of losses due to absorption and scattering....

If what you [Atmasphere] are attempting to claim was actually true they would need repeaters every twenty feet as opposed to every 25 miles or whatever. When transmitting to a satellite at 23K miles there are no repeaters! Hel-loo!

I did not and do not express any opinion about the effectiveness of shielding with respect to magnetic fields.  I don't feel I can comment on that question in a knowledgeable manner without devoting more time to studying it than I care to devote.

Regards,
-- Al