There are two ways of looking at this, the spiritual (believing without seeing) way, and the scientific (proven) way. Based on science, we know sound waves exist. However, sound is the end result of transmission and receiving.

So in the end, the sound waves exist, because the tree exists, and because this is not some magic tree, the sound waves are a proven result of a tree hitting the ground.

However, the sound does not exist, as there is the transmission of sound waves, but being no one there to hear them, then the sound does not exist because no one has experienced this question.

And so, the age-old question's answer:

Sound waves exist.
Sound does not exist.

The tree, does not make a sound.

I found an interesting article that may help clear up a few things:

"Berkeley made the radical claim that there is no 'out there', or, more precisely, there is no matter. Berkeley's position, which is called 'idealism', can be summed up in his famous phrase 'esse is percipi': to be is to be perceived. What we call 'bodies', or physical objects, are simply stable collections of perceptions to which we give names such as 'apples', 'trees', and so on. These collections of perceptions have no existence apart from a perceiving mind. The answer to the famous conundrum 'If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound?' is that if no one is perceiving it, it not only does not make a sound, the tree does not even exist!

Does this mean that trees go out of existence when no one is left in the forest to perceive them and that they come back into existence when someone enters the forest to perceive them again? It would seem that Berkeley must accept this odd conclusion were it not for one important point: God never leaves the forest and God is always perceiving the trees. By always holding all collections of perceptions in the divine mind, God ensures their continued existence and the perceived regularity in what we call 'nature'."

Source: http://www.whitworth.edu/Academic/Departme...ata/d_berke.htm

I find it extremely fascinating that Berkeley's views almost parallel those mentioned in the following topic:
http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...showtopic=90086

And here I was thinking that I was the only crazy nut trying to claim that there is no such thing as matter! What a hoot!

A: The tree does not make a sound.

But you're all missing the point, the answer I have given is based on the information given, there is no speak of 'magic trees' or any specific details of the situation and therefore it is an average situation which is given an average answer.

Ya I fully agree with Berkely here. Reality is just a product of the mind and cannot be proven to have any other existence.

God heard it!

A person who believes in God could say that the sound was perceived in the divine mind of the Creator, and therefore existed in nature. But a person who doesn't believe in such things could say that there is no sound, and depending on their point-of-view, both persons would be right. Right?

I ask this not just because Berkeley believed in God, but because Adam didn't "perceive" the sun and his own naked body until after being expelled from the Garden of Eden. It's as if God had said: "Here, take these blue pills... and welcome to the illusionary world of matter."

Would you also say that Truethat answered the question correctly?

I ask this not just because Berkeley believed in God, but because Adam didn't "perceive" the sun and his own naked body until after being expelled from the Garden of Eden. It's as if God had said: "Here, take these blue pills... and welcome to the illusionary world of matter."

A person who believes in God could say that the sound was perceived in the divine mind of the Creator, and therefore existed in nature.

But a person who doesn't believe in such things could say that there is no sound, and depending on their point-of-view, both persons would be right. Right?

That our ears translate this energy into something we call 'sound' does not mean that 'sound' is not what all other matter experiences when this energy interacts with it. To assume it is only 'sound' because we are conscious of it is rather egocentric.

Can the world be proven to exist outside the mind?

Can I get a dolar for everytime you use the word proven or exist in your reply? :-)

If God is omnipresent then the sound must exist, I would think. Disbelief in God would not necessarily lead to your second assumption however. Sound could be thought of as energy - after all 'sound' is just a word no matter how this word is defined. That our ears translate this energy into something we call 'sound' does not mean that 'sound' is not what all other matter experiences when this energy interacts with it. To assume it is only 'sound' because we are conscious of it is rather egocentric.

Going a bit off-topic here and I hope the OP doesn't mind. Adam perceived his nakedness before being expelled from Eden. Before eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil Adam and Eve perceived their nakedness as 'good'. After eating the fruit they perceived their nakedness as 'bad' (they were ashamed and covered themselves). This would seem to imply that it was knowledge itself that exposed the lie of their nakedness (it was 'bad' but they did not recognise that fact) and so Eden was in fact illusory, until knowledge was gained to dispel the illusion. Adam and Eve were evicted because they came to see the lie and had lost their innocence.

The alternative to this is that the Knowledge granted by eating the fruit is an illusion and this Tree of Illusionary Knowledge was a test for Adam and Eve. I don't subscribe to this interpretation myself as there is no indication God wanted to test his creation.

Show me her answer

Or that God is also the sound.

God is all possibility, including a universe without God. So Both would be right. There is no fixed state of reference of reality.

Define an "average" situation?

Post #12, as follows:[indent][/indent]
True

The fixed state could be the God state. Otherwise, reality is like a dictionary, where all words relate only to other words with no one word or words being the absolute.

Because the only information given states that the object brought into existence, is a tree, then all it is considered is a tree. By being the typical, average tree, it would have the typical, average properties of the tree. And so, because it is an average tree, this limits it from having super-powers or some sort of physical or spiritual anomaly. It is just a tree, no other information is given otherwise.

No, we call it sound waves. You call french fries french fries, but does that mean they have a French nationality. You need a bit more work on your literacy.

Oh burn! I call French fries, fries. Practicing pedant are we? - or rather a case of asperger syndrome because your social skills are seriously lacking.

You need a little work in deduction so you may arrive at a suitable conclusion based on the given premise. It was a joke.

We can call sound waves a pressure wave, a mechanical wave, and a longitudinal wave and we can call your condescending attitude and subsequent remark, the hewa wave.

I have given the answer, please consult one of my previous posts to know it.

Sorry about that, at the time I was frustrated after complaining in another thread. But just so you know, sound waves can be called pressure, mechanical, and longitudinal but they aren't specific in identifying that this wave is used to create sound, and that's why it is called a sound wave.

It's already been answered long before you arrived, know that.

Really? Can you get me the post? I'm a little lazy.

if e tree falls in the woods and there's no one around to hear it, does it make a sound? i'll say what i think, then if you guys dissagree, please explain your theory. i think that if a tree falls in the woods and there's no one around to hear it, id does NOT make a sound. sound is defined as vibrations traveling through air, water, or some other medium, especially those within the range of frequencies that can be perceived by the human ear. the simple answer is that sound is something that can be heard. if no one hears it there is no sound. until someone hears them, those vibrations traveling through the air cannot be called sound. so i think that if a tree falls in the woods and there's no one around to hear it, it emits certain vibration with the potential to become a sound, if there was somebody there to hear it. does anyone have a different point of view?

if something is not heard, it is not sound, .

if e tree falls in the woods and there's no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?

Thanks god, in a few years time the question will be obsolete, as there won't be any woods left for any trees to fall in...

If a tree falls in the woods and there is no one around to hear it there is no "sound". In fact there is no "tree", no "woods" and nothing "falls", because it is the human mind that gives meaning to these concepts. The conscious mind gives meaning to the world, remove the observer and you have only darkness.

Not even darkness because darkness too is a concept of the human mind. You wouldnt even have nothing because nothing is something and nothing also is a concept of the human mind.

Yes it does, but if there is no one around to hear the sound it is irrelevant so it may as well not have made a sound at all.

I'm with Leo. Sound is generated whether someone is there to hear it or not. But I think we are also basically arguing about the definition of a word, is the word sound only properly used when referring to those vibrations which actually reach the human ear, or is it proper to use it for any vibrations which have the potential to be perceived by the human ear?

If a tree fell in the woods, and you were not around of course it would make a sound!
Just because someone is not in range to hear it does not mean it fell without a sound.

If you arnt there to hear it then how can you be sure?? It is an act of faith to believe so.

Alright, look at it this way! Say someone told you a tree fell in the woods, but you say their is no way
because, I wasn't there to witness it. Then you go and see for yourself that a tree actually did fall.

So are you still going to say the tree that fell in the woods didn't make a sound just becuase you
were not there to witness it?

Yes because I wasnt there to hear it. Though I may through an act of faith believe it made a sound.

Has anyone ever looked at a sub system that plays so low, that you don't hear anything; but you see the subwoofer move like crazy! I think it's a good example for this. Just because the human ear might not be able to hear it, doesn't mean it isn't there.

If the tree falls and no one hears it, the tree hitting the ground creates vibrations which are technically sound waves passing through the ground. You can always feel it!

Has anyone ever looked at a sub system that plays so low, that you don't hear anything; but you see the subwoofer move like crazy! I think it's a good example for this. Just because the human ear might not be able to hear it, doesn't mean it isn't there.
If the tree falls and no one hears it, the tree hitting the ground creates vibrations which are technically sound waves passing through the ground. You can always feel it!

Alright, look at it this way! Say someone told you a tree fell in the woods, but you say their is no way
because, I wasn't there to witness it. Then you go and see for yourself that a tree actually did fall.

So are you still going to say the tree that fell in the woods didn't make a sound just becuase you
were not there to witness it?