Swandancer
Mar 10 2007, 03:02 AM
QUOTE(Smeagol1 @ Mar 9 2007, 06:16 PM) [snapback]1575788[/snapback]
thats a dumb question. of course there will be.
I have mentioned this
Online Course in Consciousness from the University of Virginia before on some of these threads, and would like to do so again. Not only that, but the movie "What the Bleep Do We Know", especially the newer 6-hour version.
We are so very accustomed to believing everything science tells us is true, but all they are able to observe is their own reality which they are manifesting, and they won't be able to go further than that until they allow true Metaphysics into the mix.
Here is a very small excerpt from the Online Course which may help to explain what I said in my post:
Professor Sobottka states in the Preface:
We shall see that, from a sound, scientific point of view, not only is it impossible to understand the material world without considering the consciousness of its observer, but, in fact, it is Consciousness which manifests the world. However, it cannot be the individual consciousness of the observer that does this, but it must be nonlocal, universal Consciousness.This is from Preface to Part 1:
The assumption of an external reality is the assumption that there is a real world that is external to our mind and senses, and that it exists whether or not we as observers exist, and whether or not we are observing it. This assumption cannot be proved because all of our perceptions, without exception, are mental images, and we have no means to go beyond our mental images. It is one we all commonly make without even thinking about it. We assume the office and the computer in it are there after we leave work at the end of the day and will be there when we arrive at work in the morning. When we head home at the end of the day, we assume that our house or apartment will be there when we arrive, and that it continued to be there in our absence after we left in the morning. We assume that our friends, relatives, and acquaintances are there whether we can see and talk to them or not, and whether or not we are thinking about them. We assume that our parents existed before we were born, and that many of the people we know will be alive after we die. So many of our everyday experiences repeatedly confirm this assumption that most of us hardly question it. It is an assumption that has enormous survival value: we know that a speeding car can kill us while we are crossing the street absorbed in our thoughts and unaware, that a stray bullet can instantly obliterate our consciousness without warning, or that we can die from an external agent such as a virus, bacterium, or poison.The assumption of external reality is necessary for science to function and to flourish. For the most part, science is the discovering and explaining of the external world. Without this assumption, there would be only the thoughts and images of our own mind (which would be the only existing mind) and there would be no need of science, or anything else.In addition to the assumption of an external reality, we also make the assumption that this reality is objective. This is repeatedly confirmed by our daily experience as well as by scientific observations. Objectivity means that observations, experiments, or measurements by one person can be made by another person, who will obtain the same or similar results. The second person will be able to confirm that the results are the same or similar by consultation with the first person. Hence, communication is essential to objectivity. In fact, an observation that is not communicated and agreed upon is not generally accepted as a valid observation of objective reality. Because agreement is required, objective reality is sometimes called consensus reality.
cladking
Mar 10 2007, 03:15 AM
QUOTE(Swandancer @ Mar 9 2007, 09:02 PM) [snapback]1575853[/snapback]
We are so very accustomed to believing everything science tells us is true, but all they are able to observe is their own reality which they are manifesting, and they won't be able to go further than that until they allow true Metaphysics into the mix.
And herein is exactly why language should be composed of well defined
units; if everything is in one's mind then language is unimportant. If the
rest of the world exists then they need to know what you're thinking. If
a person is so foolish as to accept that everything must be as it appears
then it's his loss. If a person doesn't accept anything but his conscious-
ness then it will be the world's loss when he steps in front of a car (assu-
ming "he" is wrong of course).
magickaldan
Mar 10 2007, 03:45 AM
This is kinda like Schrodinger's Cat. But if you didn't hear the tree fall, then how did you know it fell at all. If you knew it fell, then you could conclude yes it made sound. If you didn't hear/see/sense the tree fall, then the tree didn't fall.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger's_cat
cladking
Mar 10 2007, 05:04 AM
QUOTE(magickaldan @ Mar 9 2007, 09:45 PM) [snapback]1575902[/snapback]
This is kinda like Schrodinger's Cat. But if you didn't hear the tree fall, then how did you know it fell at all. If you knew it fell, then you could conclude yes it made sound. If you didn't hear/see/sense the tree fall, then the tree didn't fall.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger's_catThat the tree fell is a given in the question.
There are many ways to know a tree fell without being there to hear it.
St Q
Mar 10 2007, 12:51 PM
This sounds like a good question for Dr. Robert Lanza.
Biocentric ProposalHe would probably answer by saying something like: "Reality only exists in the mind of the observer."
"If a tree falls" implies a hypothetical situation. We have no proof that the tree actually fell unless we are there to observe it. Therefore, we have no proof that a sound was actually made. Hypothetically speaking, all falling trees make noise. Relatively speaking, no falling tree makes a sound where no one exists. You're mixing apples with oranges. The question is flawed.
AsträlShaman
Mar 11 2007, 03:18 AM
That sounds right.
cladking
Mar 11 2007, 04:00 AM
QUOTE(St Q @ Mar 10 2007, 06:51 AM) [snapback]1576361[/snapback]
This sounds like a good question for Dr. Robert Lanza.
Biocentric ProposalHe would probably answer by saying something like: "Reality only exists in the mind of the observer."
"If a tree falls" implies a hypothetical situation. We have no proof that the tree actually fell unless we are there to observe it. Therefore, we have no proof that a sound was actually made. Hypothetically speaking, all falling trees make noise. Relatively speaking, no falling tree makes a sound where no one exists. You're mixing apples with oranges. The question is flawed.
I would have to point out that without a real tree the question has no meaning.
If a tree doesn't fall then it will make no falling tree noise whether there is no
one there to hear it or not (or even not there to not hear it or not).
I agree the question is flawed. Perhaps it should read, "When a tree..."
That reality exists only in the mind of the observer is evident. That the characters
in my dream won't talk to me unless I use a common language is also evident. So
long as "we" use a common language, why not use common definitions and grammar?
Why muddy up language with hypotheticals and imponderables?
Trees exist. Falling trees make noise. Noise is sound.
I notice no answered my question about observers in diminished states.
ethereal scout
Mar 12 2007, 02:26 AM
QUOTE
if e tree falls in the woods and there's no one around to hear it, does it make a sound?
does it matter?
cheo_vl
Mar 12 2007, 05:41 PM
QUOTE(ethereal scout @ Mar 12 2007, 02:26 AM) [snapback]1578397[/snapback]
does it matter?
this is one of the most ignorant comments i've ever heard, of course it matters. everything matters. you should try to understand everything around you even if it can't seem to be explained. you are a human, you are the only creature alive in this planet that can understand what's going on around you so start acting like it(i sound like an old grumpy guy but that's how i understand it). everything matters.
Xenojjin
Mar 12 2007, 06:20 PM
QUOTE
this is one of the most ignorant comments i've ever heard, of course it matters. everything matters. you should try to understand everything around you even if it can't seem to be explained. you are a human, you are the only creature alive in this planet that can understand what's going on around you so start acting like it(i sound like an old grumpy guy but that's how i understand it). everything matters.
Oh the irony.
cladking
Mar 12 2007, 06:37 PM
QUOTE(Xenojjin @ Mar 12 2007, 12:20 PM) [snapback]1579239[/snapback]
Oh the irony.
Indeed. ...on many levels.
We simply aren't that much more intelligent than animals. An elephant's
understanding of its enviroment is very much different than a physicist's or
an electrician's but it's no less accurate. It is certainly very meaningful to
the individual elephant. Who is more adapted to lead this life?
St Q
Mar 13 2007, 06:55 PM
Stephen Hawking once said, "When I hear of Schrödinger's cat, I reach for my gun." His quote may have been a variation of a line from the play "Schlageter" by the German playwright, Hanns Johst: "Whenever I hear of culture... I release the safety-catch of my Browning!"
Philangeli
Mar 14 2007, 04:17 PM
'if a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound?'. Well, it would certainly create sound waves which are experienced as sound if there is a suitable device present for picking them up, whether it is a human ear, a frog, a tape recorder or whatever. Sound waves cause vibration, and I understand that even plants can detect them. If there was absolutely nothing there to detect the sound waves, then I suppose there would be no sound as the sound waves would continue flowing into space forever!
Subtemperate
Mar 14 2007, 04:27 PM
I feel the need to point out this definition of sound:
"the sensation produced by stimulation of the organs of hearing by vibrations transmitted through the air or other medium."
If sound is the sensation the ear gets from the vibration... not the vibration itself being made.. .that makes the question quite different.
cladking
Mar 14 2007, 09:43 PM
QUOTE(Philangeli @ Mar 14 2007, 10:17 AM) [snapback]1582355[/snapback]
'if a tree falls in the woods, does it make a sound?'. Well, it would certainly create sound waves which are experienced as sound if there is a suitable device present for picking them up, whether it is a human ear, a frog, a tape recorder or whatever. Sound waves cause vibration, and I understand that even plants can detect them. If there was absolutely nothing there to detect the sound waves, then I suppose there would be no sound as the sound waves would continue flowing into space forever!
If plants can hear then even the tree itself can hear.
Words have meaning only in context. If not then there would have to be far
more words and vocabulary would become more of a burden than most peo-
ple can handle.
For instance "sound" can mean a vibration detected by the ear in some specific
contexts. During a hearing test the examiner will ask if you heard a sound even
though he knows that a tone was emitted from the headphones that you may or
may not have heard. In a room full of people, if someone says shhh and asks if
people heard a sound then he isn't asking if there was a physical vibration of the
air, he is asking if anyone heard a specific (and unreleted) sort of noise. In both
cases one could say there was no sound since it wasn't heard.
But if someone invents a new "pulse" bomb and it is asked if it makes a sound, then
answering that the it hasn't been exploded yet or if there will be any listeners in the
area is simply stifling communication. Saying that a falling tree can make no sound
is essentially the same situation. It would be more comprehensible to simply say that
there was no one around when the tree fell or that apparently there was no one around
when the tree fell.
auraman
Mar 14 2007, 11:28 PM
Sound is a vibrational energy much like Light. If you close your eyes the whole world is in the dark? When a tree falls down it produces a vibrational energy That will exist for a brief moment whether there is an observer or not.
Philangeli
Mar 15 2007, 01:11 PM
The above arguments are sound enough and I don't wish to appear that I'm sounding off, but it sounds like the word 'sound' is, strictly speaking, often used incorrectly when 'sound waves' would be more accurate.
I would tend to go with the dictionary definition until such a time when other common usages of the word become incorporated into standard dictionary definitions. And so, sound is what is experienced by the organ of hearing. The falling tree produces sound waves. The plant feels vibration, just like we can feel a deep, throbbing musical bass note within our body without actually hearing the sound.
When sound waves are stored on a medium, such as a tape or a CD, there is still no sound till some one, or some animal, can detect the sound waves with their ears and translate them into the sensation and experience of sound in their brain. Hope that sounds OK.
Phew, can we now close this topic!

... and what about the sound of silence!
Mr.D
Mar 19 2007, 06:24 PM
I just read a quote "I will not have a battle of wits with and unarmed opponet",
Is "SOUND" not in the form of energy that creats energy waves to be receieved by the human/animal sensories. "ears" to some. So, why should this energy stop ?, If no one is ine the woods, the tree still makes a sound/energy wave and the animals sense this and they react. So put away your books for the day and prepare to go home, "Shools out",
St Q
Mar 20 2007, 12:48 AM
Subjectively speaking, sound is the sensation perceived by the sense of hearing. Objectively speaking, sound is a mechanical, radiant energy that is transmitted by longitudinal pressure waves in a material medium, such as air, and is the objective cause of hearing. The question does not provide a distinction. Without this distinction, critical thinking suffers from endless debate, and the answer remains forever open-ended.
Furthermore, we are also not told if a suitable medium for the propagation of sound waves even exists. Again, we are left with another unknown or assumption. Without air, the tree may have fallen because it had died. If this were the case, then the tree would not have created sound at all, whether someone was there or not.
Of course, I'm just being facetious about the lack of air, but the question does have holes and requires feedback from a dead philosopher. Was he being subjective or objective? I think he knew exactly what he was doing and took the opposite view of anyone who tried to answer it. What a jerk!
How about re-phrasing the question so that it can be readily understood by one and all:
"If a tree falls on a philosopher in the forest, and no one is around to hear him scream, what does he think about as he bleeds to death?"
Thozzman
Mar 20 2007, 01:01 AM
I would imagine any nearby animals in the forest would disagree with the OP.
Crimsai
Mar 22 2007, 10:52 PM
Not sure if this has been said but, if it has the potential to be turned into a sound, an animal could hear it, even if humans aren't around, so it is a sound
St Q
Mar 23 2007, 01:20 AM
If animals could read or understand the question, then they would quite naturally assume that when "no one is there to hear it" also meant "none of them were there to hear it" either.
"One" does not necessarily mean "human". As a pronoun, it can mean a person or a thing. The question would be very long if it listed all life forms and man-made devices capable of sensing or recording noise. I'm surprised no one said parrot.
Jackssa
Mar 23 2007, 08:34 AM
how did a topic like this attract so much attention? :x
Ghost Ship
Mar 23 2007, 08:40 AM
I think it even makes a different sound in a persons absence. We dont hear, see, or smell everyting exactly 100% as they really are.
Larving
Mar 23 2007, 10:19 PM
Was going to reply to a couple of you, but then I remembered that I have no proof you exist and I'm not going reply to people who might not be there... So enjoy your evening
hafizbms
Mar 24 2007, 12:56 PM
It's simple actually.
If a guy steals and nobody sees it,
Does it mean he didn't steal?
If a man dies, and nobody knows about it,
Does it mean that he is still alive?
If i don't know who you are,
Does it mean you don't exist?
Things that you don't see, or hear, smell, touch or know about doesn't mean it don't exist.QUOTE
let me give you an example: if i ask you right now, is there an civilization living on the moon and the people living there are purple and have 3 heads? your answer would be no, there isn't such a civilization, it does not exist. and then next week, a civilization is found on the moon where people heve 3 heads and are purple. that civilization didn't exist last week, but it does now. it didn't exist to us before the discovery, and we were certain that it didn't exist at all. what i'm saying is that if you don't exist to at least someone, no one can say that you exist, so you don't. if the tree falls and i hear it, it exists to me only, if 20 people hear it, it exists to 20 people, but if no one knows of it's existence how can you say it exists, if it doesn't exist to anyone, how can you exist if you don't exist to anyone. IT CANNOT BE CALLED SOUND, SOUND NEEDS TO BE HEARD. we should come up with a new word for an "almost sound", something that could be sound if there was anyone there to hear it. and about the tree killing the deaf guy, the sound didn't kill him, the tree was there and it did fall down, but it didn't make a sound, at least not to him, and since he was the only one who the sound could exist to at the moment, it doesn't exist at all. and about the eiffel tower comment, you know of the existence of the tower, if you had never heard about it or seen it, you would've said that it doesn't exist, but there are other people who know of it's existence, therefore it does exist
And BTW, we won't say that the civilisation doesn't exist. We'll just say that there's no proof to it, and by looking at conditions, we would conclude that there are currently no civilisations there.
crzyamazing
Mar 24 2007, 02:14 PM
I think something with alot of weight that falls a certain amount of feet and hits the ground will obviously make a sound, pretty much anthing that falls will make a sound, just no ones around to hear it doesnt mean it doesnt make a sound.
Right now so many things are falling, and they are making a sound we just cant here them, cause we are far away from it
brave_new_world
Mar 27 2007, 10:22 AM
If no one is there then how can we tell whether it is making a sound? If we didnt hear sound how would we know it is there in the first place?? No observer equals no sound. Even if we had to have a tape recorder to pick the sound up in a humans absence then without the human to listen to the recorder how would we know there was any sound on the recorder???? No person there to prove it then it all comes down to faith and not fact.
cladking
Mar 27 2007, 02:56 PM
QUOTE(crzyamazing @ Mar 24 2007, 09:14 AM) [snapback]1597890[/snapback]
I think something with alot of weight that falls a certain amount of feet and hits the ground will obviously make a sound, pretty much anthing that falls will make a sound, just no ones around to hear it doesnt mean it doesnt make a sound.
Right now so many things are falling, and they are making a sound we just cant here them, cause we are far away from it
By the same token if there is a person there and he tells us he heard
a sound, how are we to know he isn't lying or mistaken? Perhaps he
dreamed it. Perhaps he is part of our own dream and isn't real at all.
Why even have the word "sound" since we don't know other people
really exist. If it's a dream and there aren't really other people then
we should be able to communicate telepathically. Perhaps if we never
learned language and definitions communication would be fascilitated.
Angelic_Demon
Apr 5 2007, 08:55 PM
QUOTE(cheo_vl @ Mar 2 2007, 04:21 PM) [snapback]1564920[/snapback]
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?
what you are saying is true, but you are forgetting about animals. They live in the forest correct. The vibrations reach their ears. vuala sound.
Angelic_Demon
Apr 5 2007, 08:59 PM
QUOTE(hafizbms @ Mar 24 2007, 12:56 PM) [snapback]1597849[/snapback]
It's simple actually.
If a guy steals and nobody sees it,
Does it mean he didn't steal?
If a man dies, and nobody knows about it,
Does it mean that he is still alive?
If i don't know who you are,
Does it mean you don't exist?
Things that you don't see, or hear, smell, touch or know about doesn't mean it don't exist.And BTW, we won't say that the civilisation doesn't exist. We'll just say that there's no proof to it, and by looking at conditions, we would conclude that there are currently no civilisations there.

Ooh that is great. i love it. It makes a lot of sense
and i also wonder why people think that it will affect them in their life. this is going to sound mean but im just stating the obvious. Who cares whether you can hear a tree fall. it falls it falls. sound or no sound.
Merreton
Apr 5 2007, 09:22 PM
I think the true question that the person is asking when he or she is asking it, is Does it matter? Does it matter that a tree fell and nobody was there to witness. To the average person (note: AVERAGE) nobody cares about anything unless it affects them directly, people they love, or a person's beliefs.
I'm more interested in the question: "what is the sound of one hand clapping?"
ReignStarz
Apr 6 2007, 03:36 AM
"Let us say you were alone in a room. If no-one can see you, hear you or is interacting with you do you still exist? Yes, you do so long as you are aware of it. Now sound is not aware of itself (as far as we know) but we can show it exists by measuring its energy (or the effect of its energy) even if we didn't detect the sound itself."
I totally disagree with you leo....If you are in a room by yourself and no-one sees or interacts with you in any possible way. You do not exist..The only thing that "Exists" of you is a memory of who you are...
There are things called "Characteristics"(Please forgive the spelling its wicked late and im tired lol) and these things make you what you are...The way you look,Smell,Act,Interact with one another. These things make you who you are..If you dont have any of these things then your nothing..
Lets take a fire for instance...It is mainly composed of oxygen, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and water vapor lets take some of these traits away. And would a fire be the same thing? Absolutely not..
So as far as the question goes. If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound. Yes it does, because you dont create the "Fate" of wether or not the tree makes a sound. You can say "okay well I want it to make a sound" the reaction is still there. The outcome is the same regardless if you are there or not..
If you take a math problem and you never solve it is the answer the same or different?
cladking
Apr 6 2007, 04:22 AM
QUOTE(Merreton @ Apr 5 2007, 04:22 PM) [snapback]1614943[/snapback]
I think the true question that the person is asking when he or she is asking it, is Does it matter? Does it matter that a tree fell and nobody was there to witness. To the average person (note: AVERAGE) nobody cares about anything unless it affects them directly, people they love, or a person's beliefs.
I'm more interested in the question: "what is the sound of one hand clapping?"
Yes it matters. Whether most people believe it or not it matters a great deal.
The phsical world is extremely complex and is at all times determined entirely
by previous events. Insignificant things become more important with the passage
time. Chaos rules.
One hand can applaud on the knee or any relatively solid object.
Baalial
Apr 7 2007, 02:10 AM
if a tree falls and no one is there to hear it, obviously no one saw it either. if that's the case how can we be sure that that tree even existed. of course there would be something left. so, yes, scientifically it would make a sound or at least a vibration that could be interpreted as a sound.
brave_new_world
Apr 8 2007, 08:38 AM
Without an observer how can we prove the observable?
St Q
Apr 8 2007, 11:37 AM
Helen Keller called... she wants her chainsaw back.
Mademoiselle
Apr 8 2007, 01:26 PM
QUOTE(Shadow Dweller @ Apr 7 2007, 04:10 AM) [snapback]1616835[/snapback]
if a tree falls and no one is there to hear it, obviously no one saw it either. if that's the case how can we be sure that that tree even existed. of course there would be something left. so, yes, scientifically it would make a sound or at least a vibration that could be interpreted as a sound.
I have this thought , that might sound weird - or even somehow naive - to many .. still, it keeps coming to me .
What if the " observable " was the observer ?
Did we ever imagine being "observed " by what we usually - and so casually - call the " observable " ?
Sama
Ashigaru
Apr 8 2007, 03:25 PM
Sound is just how our brain interprets vibrations in the air. Obviously a tree falling would create vibrations.
mewt
Apr 8 2007, 09:05 PM
QUOTE(cheo_vl @ Mar 4 2007, 04:52 AM) [snapback]1567040[/snapback]
you missunderstand, i know that the vibrations are there, but as someone mentioned above it comes down to the definition of sound, if something is not heard, it is not sound, it's just all the vibrations. the avalanche is not triggered by sound, it's triggered by vibrations. technically, if no one hears it, it's not a sound.
Well dogs can hear sound waves that are too high for humans to hear it, so humans can't hear it but it's still a sound. And when a tree falls down in the forest there will still be other animals/insects(not sure they can hear) that can hear the sound. So basically, according to your explanation; if a human can;t hear it, the sound doesnt exist?
brave_new_world
Apr 9 2007, 04:59 AM
Again, how can we prove the observable without an observer? It is an act of faith to believe whether the tree makes a sound or not because no one is there to determine whether it is making a sound or not.
Unless you hear it then it isnt a sound. Also if no one is gonna be there to hear it then no one is gonna be there to sense the vibrations.
cladking
Apr 9 2007, 06:01 AM
QUOTE(brave_new_world @ Apr 8 2007, 11:59 PM) [snapback]1619595[/snapback]
Again, how can we prove the observable without an observer? It is an act of faith to believe whether the tree makes a sound or not because no one is there to determine whether it is making a sound or not.
Unless you hear it then it isnt a sound. Also if no one is gonna be there to hear it then no one is gonna be there to sense the vibrations.
The question isn't whether it can be proven, but whether the sound exists.
A microphone or video camera can prove the event. The cloud of dust might
be seen for miles. An observer at a distance might not know what the sound
was.
It simply gets back to the definition. Reality is defined by the event and the
description is defined by language.
brave_new_world
Apr 9 2007, 06:09 AM
QUOTE(cladking @ Apr 9 2007, 02:01 PM) [snapback]1619668[/snapback]
The question isn't whether it can be proven, but whether the sound exists.
How can we say it exists if it cant be proven???
QUOTE
A microphone or video camera can prove the event. The cloud of dust might
be seen for miles. An observer at a distance might not know what the sound
was.
But unless an observer hears or observes what is recorded by the microphone or camera there is no sound.
QUOTE
It simply gets back to the definition. Reality is defined by the event and the
description is defined by language.
But if there is no observer how can we prove that any event exists?
Fenzo
Apr 9 2007, 08:16 AM
If someone uses a dogwhistle, and there aren't any dogs nearby does it still make a sound?
If a deaf man is around a tree that falls down, and he's the only one around... does it still make a sound?
Yes ofcourse it still makes a sound, there is still a vibration in the air, even though they can't hear it.
Just because their ears can't pick up the vibrations it doesn't mean there is no sound.
The same goes for a tree without any people around it. Even, though there's no-one around to hear it; the sound still exists.
brave_new_world
Apr 9 2007, 10:40 AM
QUOTE(Fenzo @ Apr 9 2007, 04:16 PM) [snapback]1619812[/snapback]
Yes ofcourse it still makes a sound, there is still a vibration in the air, even though they can't hear it.
Just because their ears can't pick up the vibrations it doesn't mean there is no sound.
If there is no one there how can you prove that there is vibration? It would be an act of faith.
QUOTE
The same goes for a tree without any people around it. Even, though there's no-one around to hear it; the sound still exists.
Well how can you be sure? You are not there to see whether it is there or not. There is a probable chance there may be but we cant be certain. Either way, unless there is someone there we will never know for sure.
Mr Slayer
Apr 9 2007, 11:12 AM
Hypothesis: If there is oxygen, the vibrations from the falling tree will inevitably produce a sound, regardless if there is anyone to catch the sound through his/her ears or not.
Fact: Falling objects of the size of a tree produce vibrations when hitting hard ground.
Fact: There is oxygen where there is forest.
Fact: Vibrations that travel through oxygen- induced air transport sound.
Resolve 1: A sound is produced when a tree falls on the ground in a forest.
Resolve 2: A sound can exist per se, regardless of a receptive ear.
Conclusion: If a tree falls in the woods without anyone hearing it, it
does produce a sound.
Fenzo
Apr 9 2007, 11:18 AM
QUOTE(brave_new_world @ Apr 9 2007, 10:40 AM) [snapback]1619947[/snapback]
Well how can you be sure? You are not there to see whether it is there or not. There is a probable chance there may be but we cant be certain. Either way, unless there is someone there we will never know for sure.
If a tree falls down and you ARE there to witness it, it makes a sound.. why would it not make a sound if nobody's around.. its still the same process.
And I do wonder what people think about this; If a deaf man is around, does it still make a sound?
brave_new_world
Apr 9 2007, 11:58 AM
QUOTE(Fenzo @ Apr 9 2007, 07:18 PM) [snapback]1619971[/snapback]
If a tree falls down and you ARE there to witness it, it makes a sound.. why would it not make a sound if nobody's around.. its still the same process.
But how can you be sure it is the same process if you are not there to witness it????
QUOTE
And I do wonder what people think about this; If a deaf man is around, does it still make a sound?
Well if he can;t hear it how is he to know whether it makes a sound or not?
brave_new_world
Apr 9 2007, 11:59 AM
QUOTE(AshKatNah @ Apr 9 2007, 07:12 PM) [snapback]1619968[/snapback]
Hypothesis: If there is oxygen, the vibrations from the falling tree will inevitably produce a sound, regardless if there is anyone to catch the sound through his/her ears or not.
Fact: Falling objects of the size of a tree produce vibrations when hitting hard ground.
Fact: There is oxygen where there is forest.
Fact: Vibrations that travel through oxygen- induced air transport sound.
Resolve 1: A sound is produced when a tree falls on the ground in a forest.
Resolve 2: A sound can exist per se, regardless of a receptive ear.
Conclusion: If a tree falls in the woods without anyone hearing it, it
does produce a sound.

Fact: None of this can be proven at the time without an observer.
Fenzo
Apr 9 2007, 12:16 PM
QUOTE(brave_new_world @ Apr 9 2007, 11:58 AM) [snapback]1620000[/snapback]
But how can you be sure it is the same process if you are not there to witness it????
If a tree falls down and there is noone around does it magically change?
I think it's impossible to convice any of you of the fact that it will make a sound :S
QUOTE(brave_new_world @ Apr 9 2007, 11:58 AM) [snapback]1620000[/snapback]
Well if he can;t hear it how is he to know whether it makes a sound or not?
That's what i'm asking, if a tree falls down and there's no-one around to hear it it doesn't make a sound (according to people)
A deaf man can't hear it falling, but he is around there to witness it. Isn't this basically the same as when there's nobody around to hear it?
In both cases, there IS a tree falling down, but there is nobody to
hear it. . If the deaf man
can see the tree fall . (but not hear it, cause he's deaf) Does it still make a sound?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.