Does a tree in a forest make a sound if it falls when...

Troyson · Post by **Troyson** » 10 May 2006 13:01

like some of you have basically said, there is really no such thing as sound. Your ears pick up the vibrations in the air and creates a sound in your head. Sound is only something that your mind creates, nothing more. It is imaginary, and all species interpret it differently.

However, if the tree falls in the woods, there are various other creatures that will either see or hear it, which means that it did make a sound. But if what the animals hear is only an imaginary sound that it's mind created, than there really was no sound produced.

mahhkohh · Post by **mahhkohh** » 10 May 2006 13:22

i too think it makes a sound, there would be just noone too hear it, cause, like you said it is a vibration that your brain interpretates thro your ear as a falling tree. but, the tree when falling produces this vibration, and since we recognice this vibration as sound, thus making the vibration a sound, it is still there!

thats a question that is dicussed by phylosopher for thousands of years now, why, tell me why, we on modified should riddle it out?... there is a sound, but noone hears it!

Bander87 · Post by **Bander87** » 10 May 2006 15:49

If you walk into a forest and hear a tree fall, did one really fall?

JoFa · Post by **JoFa** » 10 May 2006 16:49

SOUND

OPTION ONE

sound 1 |sound| noun vibrations that travel through the air or another medium and can be heard when they reach a person's or animal's ear

sound1
n.
Vibrations transmitted through an elastic solid or a liquid or gas, with frequencies in the approximate range of 20 to 20,000 hertz, capable of being detected by human organs of hearing.
Transmitted vibrations of any frequency.

sound 1 a : mechanical radiant energy that is transmitted by longitudinal pressure waves in a material medium (as air) and is the objective cause of hearing

1 something that you can hear or that can be heard
[^^^ notice that this is something that can be heard, not something that is heard.]

-mechanical vibrations transmitted by an elastic medium

OPTION TWO

1. A sensation perceived by the ear caused by the vibration of air or some other medium.

the sensation that results when the organs of hearing are stimulated by certain vibrations

- The peceived object occasioned by the impulse or vibration of a material substance affecting the ear; a sensation or perception of the mind received through the ear, and produced by the impulse or vibration of the air or other medium with which the ear is in contact; the effect of an impression made on the organs of hearing by an impulse or vibration of the air caused by a collision of bodies, or by other means

(n.)The sensation stimulated in the organs of hearing by such vibrations in the air or other medium.

-the particular auditory effect produced by a given cause
-the subjective sensation of hearing something

And, finally
OPTION THREE

SOUND, n. The air bladder of a fish.

-----

As you can see, the definition varies depending on who you go to. However, this page would explain why I believe it does indeed make a sound:

http://www.bartleby.com/65/so/sound.html

especially, "sound is considered to be the waves of vibratory motion themselves, whether or not they are heard by the human ear"

slapdash21 · Post by **slapdash21** » 10 May 2006 17:35

BainbridgeShred wrote:
existentialism = poo.
What reasoning do you have to support this?

the fact that it's unproven philosophy

Larson · Post by **Larson** » 10 May 2006 22:04

Most philosophy can't be proven.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 11 May 2006 01:37

I tend to believe that the world exists outside of human perception and as such the tree definitely makes a sound. I also think that the standard definition of "sound" isn't a matter of if the sound is actually heard or not. I think "sound" refers to what happens - not if there is something around to record it.

QuantumBalance · Post by **QuantumBalance** » 11 May 2006 04:20

It's like you guys didn't read what I wrote. It actually covers ALL possible situations. The "observer" can even be some small animal that hears a sound. And, if you read the definition of sound, it is the perception of the observer, not the energy waves created.

Switch Kicker · Post by **Switch Kicker** » 11 May 2006 06:13

Damnit, lol. Quit saying that there would be woodland creatures and small animals around to hear it. It's already been established that the scenario is that there IS NOTHING THERE TO HEAR IT!!! That is the scenario, whether you like it or not, lol. You're starting to throw in things that have nothing to do with what we're talking about. Because simply, there would NOT be animals there, becuase teh scenario SAYS SO. So quit it, lol, because your argument is completely void once you say that.

Shit, gtg.

Peace,
Fred.

JoFa · Post by **JoFa** » 11 May 2006 19:13

You guys are still arguing over the definition? Read my post up there ^ and it should clear things up.

Switch Kicker · Post by **Switch Kicker** » 12 May 2006 07:20

JoFa wrote:You guys are still arguing over the definition? Read my post up there ^ and it should clear things up.

Basically... We're debating what the definition of sound is. You can't just post a dictionary definition. We can all do that, that's easy. That's kinda the whole point of these discussions. Changing ideas and such.

Just because a dictionary says that sound is... you know, whatever, doesn't make it true.

Sound is just a word. How you interpret that word is what gives you the definition. I interpret the word "sound" as something that is created by my mind, to make sense out of vibrations in the atmosphere around me.

I think some of you are saying that the shockwaves and sound are the same thing. But if we already have other words to represent those shockwaves and such, then there should be a different definition for the word sound....

I don't know. I just think that sound can't be used to represent those shockwaves. What you see is what you get. Well in this case, it's what you hear is what you get. What I hear, is sound. Sound cannot be heard if there are no minds there to create it. Think about it. Picture a small planet in the middle of the universe. Then picture a rock floating in the air. (I know it's not possible, but the floating part is irrelevant.) Now picture that rock, hitting the ground. Now... If you're not there to hear it... There is no sound.

There simply cannot be sound if there is no mind there to create it. There just can't be...

Also. If sound is really there like you say it is, then what the hell... When imagining things... like remembering back to when someone was talking to you or something... You can honestly HEAR the voices in your head. You can hear the sounds of that person's voice in your head. But there is nothing in your head that is able to create those vibrations. There for sound CAN'T be those vibrations... Otherwise you wouldn't be able to imagine sound.

Another thing. Saying that you can "hear" sound through subwoofers and such through your bones and other parts of the body... Go ask a deaf person if they can hear Pangea by Visionaries blasting in the back of your car. They will say no. You know why? Because that theory was absolute BS. (Sorry to rain down on it whoever suggested it.)

You need an ear to catch vibrations and shockwaves. And you need a brain to interpret them. And we need a simple thing for us (simple humans) to be able to understand these vibrations. So our minds create sound. Sound, COULD have been seen instead of heard. But then we would have to be an advanced race (Naturally) to be able to see and understand these things. Sound is just much quicker to be able to understand, and react apon.

I don't even know if this whole post is just me rambling... But to me. This all makes perfect sense.

Peace,
Fred.

Larson · Post by **Larson** » 12 May 2006 14:54

Intresting thoughts.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 May 2006 23:30

Ok - so if sound is something you need to hear to exist then does a dog whistle make a sound? You can't hear it but the dog can... What if a dog isn't around to hear it? Does it then make a sound?

What if I'm blowing my dog whistle (presumably making a sound that I can't hear) and then somebody shoots the dog - does my whistle suddenly stop making a sound?

And if sound only exists if you hear it - how can you travel faster than sound? Does somebody need to hear the sounds you're travelling faster than for you to be actually travelling faster than sound? Is "travelling faster than sound" just an expression saying that if there was a sound you'd be travelling faster than it? Sound travels at different speeds in different substances but there is always a sonic boom when you travel faster than sound (if there are is sound). In space where there are not enough particles for sound to travel there is no sonic boom because you can't travel faster than sound (since there is no sound).

If as some of you believe, sound only exists when you hear it - are scientists incorrect in giving names to travelling faster than sound (mach 1,mach 2 etc.) since you're only travelling faster than sound if somebody hears the sound - otherwise you're just travelling faster than particles bouncing into each other.

From a scientific view I think sound definitely refers to the effect of vibrating particles and has nothing to do with if people hear it or not.

Splint · Post by **Splint** » 13 May 2006 00:18

If a man speaks and a woman isn't around to here him, is he still wrong?

professor · Post by **professor** » 13 May 2006 22:47

If you must have ears and a brain for sound to exist, then essentially sound is just electrical signals sent to the brain. Therefore, everything does not exists unless someone is around to experience it. This is sorta true for us humans because if we didn't exist we wouldn't be around to define what sound is, but that doesn't mean everything does not exist (unless we are in the matrix....

).

It's almost like saying, "Since I don't have a radio, radio waves don't exist because I can't experience them." Radio waves exist without you having a radio, just like sound waves exist without out you being around.

I say if a tree falls, it makes a sound.

Splint · Post by **Splint** » 14 May 2006 01:36

Sound is like shit... it happens.

Hakker · Post by **Hakker** » 14 May 2006 05:56

This is just like the ol' saying,
" If a fat girl cries in the woods and nobody is around to hear, does anybody care?"

I know, Iknow thats pretty mean...

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 14 May 2006 07:23

This is just like the ol' saying,
" If a fat girl cries in the woods and nobody is around to hear, does anybody care?"

I know, Iknow thats pretty mean...

WTF?

Switch Kicker · Post by **Switch Kicker** » 14 May 2006 10:00

professor wrote:If you must have ears and a brain for sound to exist, then essentially sound is just electrical signals sent to the brain. Therefore, everything does not exists unless someone is around to experience it. This is sorta true for us humans because if we didn't exist we wouldn't be around to define what sound is, but that doesn't mean everything does not exist (unless we are in the matrix....).

It's almost like saying, "Since I don't have a radio, radio waves don't exist because I can't experience them." Radio waves exist without you having a radio, just like sound waves exist without out you being around.

I say if a tree falls, it makes a sound.

If a tree falls, it makes a vibration/shockwave.

No one is saying that something doesn't exist if we're not there to experience it. But you're replacing the word "sound" with vibrations/shockwaves.

Sound IS the electrical pulses going from your ear to your brain. So if you're not there to interpret those vibrations/sounds, then no electrical pulses are sent because no thing is there to hear it. So sound is not created because of the tree.

JoFa · Post by **JoFa** » 14 May 2006 14:51

Switch Kicker wrote:We're debating what the definition of sound is. You can't just post a dictionary definition.

JoFa wrote:Read my post up there ^

You obviously didn't read my post. Try again.