and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
this is one i started years ago when i was known as willakitty. this time i'll add a little more to the question.
i know it will create vibrations in the air around the impact and that this would in theory be sound, but is it sound if no one is there to hear it ie process the vibrations into something the brain percieves as sound. you may already know that i believe that no, if no one - and nothing - is there to hear it(please don't waste space arguing the impossibility of nothing being around), it does not make a "sound".
feel free to shoot down my theory with scientific evidence...just be gentle. ;)

Sound is perception by the senses; auditory perception. So, by definition, no sound

;)

Dictionaries disagree, which is to be expected since our language is in a state of perpetual flux. But never more than during a paradigm shift, when the role of science in civilization is increasing steadily.

In some dictionaries, definition #1 is subjective, perception-oriented. A sound is a sensation.

In other dictionaries, definition #1 is objective, physics-oriented. A sound is the vibration of air molecules.

Some take a middle ground. A sound is a vibration of air molecules that can be heard. It leaves it vague as to whether one particular sound that could be heard if someone were nearby fails to qualify as a sound just because no one happened to be there.

I think it's safe to predict that the next generation of dictionaries will be more heavily influenced by science, and will agree that a sound is vibration of air molecules (or some other medium) whether or not any humans are within earshot.

We already often talk about "sounds" that are above or below the threshold of hearing. That would be an oxymoron if the definition of "sound" required that it be heard.

My attitude toward things like this is that when I see a trend I just go with it. In the future everyone will agree that the falling tree makes a sound in an empty forest. I don't want them to disregard my writing as a quaint relic of the pre-scientific age, since there's no compelling reason to do so.

Very nice, Fraggle Rocker.

This thread was done a few weeks ago. We already discussed this.
The question is about the existence of reality beyond observation.

Does reality exist if there is nobody to observe it.
Realism is the belief that reality exist whether or not anybody is there to observe its existence.

I am a realist. From a realist persective, if a tree falls makes a sound whether anybody is there to observe it or not.

'Reality is that which, when one stops believing in it, does not cease to exist.'

I would treat a silent tree with some suspicion.

Examine the available evidence.

If no one was around, how do we know that a tree fell?

A virtual tree is possibly not quite so loud.

--- Ron.

I would treat a silent tree with some suspicion.

Examine the available evidence.

If no one was around, how do we know that a tree fell?

A virtual tree is possibly not quite so loud.

--- Ron.

you silly man. ;)
seriously, that makes me think of that theory about the single act of witnessing something changing the very nature of the thing and its behavior.

http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=55465&page=2&pp=20

http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=55465&page=2&pp=20

hey, thanks.

if a tree falls in the forest,

and crushes a mime, does anyone care?

,

and crushes a mime, does anyone care?

:p only if the tree manages to squeeze a sound out of the mime!

,

and crushes a mime, does anyone care?
I care. You insensitive bastard.

I care. You insensitive bastard.

hey! that's the symbol for myspace! if you colored the people in it red, white, and blue it'd be the symbol for myspacenation.

*ahem!*

Yeah. I hate my avatar and everything it stands for.

Yeah. I hate my avatar and everything it stands for.


why...you insensitive bastard!
;) i like myspace.

I think that this all depends upon the definition of sound, unfortunately. However, words are connected to concepts --and I think that when we hear the word "sound" the concept it is tied to would answer the question as "yes, it does make a sound."

I have a feeling that the idea I'm trying to express didn't come through at all in this post.

nah, i gotcha dude. what you're saying is, when someone thinks of the word "sound" they think of the source of the sound rather than the sound itself. in other words, the fact that the tree fell ensures that there was a sound.

...i also understand why you would think that you didn't express yourself as thoroughly as you wanted...i don't think i did either. :(

If the wind that made the tree fall over was blowing really really loud and fast you might not hear anything.

If the wind that made the tree fall over was blowing really really loud and fast you might not hear anything.

maybe you'd hear it but just barely...not enough to really register.