If a tree falls in the forest...

[mjrpes3]

Originally posted by: Tiamat

Originally posted by: Rastus
Since it is in a forest, the forest is the receiver.

Now, if a tree falls in a vacuum....

now thats fscked up. Try picturing a tree falling in a vacuum where there is no sense of direction... One could argue that the tree is not falling, but the observer is rising or spinning.

If a tree is 'falling' then it must be accelerating towards another object in space. This motion would give the appearance of direction.

 

[SpiderWiz]

....how many people would blame 'W'? hehehe













Edit - spelling

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: Dumac

Originally posted by: flunky nassau
You know what? I've also reached the conclusion that if no one/nothing is there is hear it, it doesn't make a sound.

Does the tree falling cause displacement of air molecules into a wave-like pattern? Yes.

But remember, "sound" is only our brain's interpretation of the wave-like pattern. Sound requires specialized receptors to translate those vibrations into "sound."

So, what if a beetle nearby has receptors that pick up the waves, but instead, it sees flashing lights instead. It didn't hear a "sound" but saw flashing lights.

So if a tree falls in the forest & no one "hears" it, then no, it doesn't make a sound (in the sensory sense).

But scientists and engineers use the term sound for high and low frequency vibrations that can't even be heard by the human ear. Hearing is just our perception of sound; sound can be independent from the perception.

:thumbsup:

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: IGBT

Originally posted by: Atheus
Sound is a pressure wave which exists regardless of whether anyone detects it.

..:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[mjrpes3]

Originally posted by: MotionMan

Originally posted by: flunky nassau
You know what? I've also reached the conclusion that if no one/nothing is there is hear it, it doesn't make a sound.

Does the tree falling cause displacement of air molecules into a wave-like pattern? Yes.

But remember, "sound" is only our brain's interpretation of the wave-like pattern. Sound requires specialized receptors to translate those vibrations into "sound."

So, what if a beetle nearby has receptors that pick up the waves, but instead, it sees flashing lights instead. It didn't hear a "sound" but saw flashing lights.

So if a tree falls in the forest & no one "hears" it, then no, it doesn't make a sound (in the sensory sense).

So if the tree falls a mile away from me, did it not make a sound until I hear it a few seconds after it fell?

MotionMan

No no! The reality of the sound is held in a state of limbo until it can be validated. At the moment the sound is registered by the brain, it causes the reality of the event to extend backwards in time, up to the moment it was created. This happens at a rate equal to the speed of sound, such that if it takes 5 seconds for the sound the propagate to the listener, it will take another 5 seconds for the sound to become fully real.

 

[RallyMaster]

If you take two slices of the same apple and give it to two different people, how do you know that same apple tastes the same to both people?

AgaBoogaBoo raised this question and I give him full credit.

 

[nonameo]

Originally posted by: Kwaipie
I contend that if nobody is there to hear it, it doesn't make a sound.

Sound requires three things.

Source, medium, receiver.

Is this correct?

Sound does not require a receiver. "Sound" is just a concept we made up to describe the behaviour of things around us.

If sound requires a receiver, and it is argued that there is no sound if there is no receiver, then the following must be true:

The sound is created at the receiver.

Why is this wrong?

Well, if the sound is created at the receiver then two different receivers will always hear a different sound. This means that if a tree falls and two people are in the field, and one guy says " did you hear that?!?!?", then the other guy says "no, but man, I heard something else!"

Then someone might argue that, well, the sounds ARE technically different because the two people will hear slightly different things.

But then I say, What if the receiver hears a sound, and then we turn back time and mess with the guy's hearing so that it sounds different. Did the tree make a different sound? If you're like me, then the tree made the same sound, the guy just heard it differently because his hearing was messed up(earwax or something, I dunno...)

If it makes the same sound, then if we turn back time again and make the guy deaf, does the tree still make a sound? I'd say yes, because the guy's hearing is still messed up, and messed up hearing doesn't mean that the sound is different. If it's the same, then it has to still exist.

And I don't think anyone can honestly say that, at least when it comes to sound production and interpretation, that there's a difference between someone who's totally deaf and having no one there at all.

(I know the argument isn't perfect, but whatever)


Hearing, on the other hand, does require a source, medium, and receiver.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Originally posted by: RallyMaster
If you take two slices of the same apple and give it to two different people, how do you know that same apple tastes the same to both people?

AgaBoogaBoo raised this question and I give him full credit.

It doesn't.Their taste buds are arranged in different ways, and their brains respond differently to different taste signals

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: flunky nassau
You know what? I've also reached the conclusion that if no one/nothing is there is hear it, it doesn't make a sound.

Does the tree falling cause displacement of air molecules into a wave-like pattern? Yes.

But remember, "sound" is only our brain's interpretation of the wave-like pattern. Sound requires specialized receptors to translate those vibrations into "sound."

So, what if a beetle nearby has receptors that pick up the waves, but instead, it sees flashing lights instead. It didn't hear a "sound" but saw flashing lights.

So if a tree falls in the forest & no one "hears" it, then no, it doesn't make a sound (in the sensory sense).

Suppose there's a tape recorder. Does the tree only make a sound if someone later plays the tape back?

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: DrPizza

Suppose there's a tape recorder. Does the tree only make a sound if someone later plays the tape back?

Better bring batteries.

 

[alrocky]

Originally posted by: Googer
What if the tree fell in the woods and Helen Keller was in the vicinity? Did it fall?

If it fell on top of Helen would she make a sound? Wood she fall?

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: Quasmo
I farted and no one heard it, does that mean it didn't happen. No, it just means I released it slow enough so my butt cheeks didn't quiver.

So if no one hears it, does it still stink?