If a tree falls

There is only a sound if there is something to hear it.
Otherwise it is merely a disturbance of air forming waves which affect the surroundings as a pressure differential. If there is no receiver to record or interpret the air wave disturbance as sound data, then all is quiet in the forest."In space, nobody can hear you scream." Alien 1979

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

But is it music? And is the music real? Does music require sound? If a score is written then to one who reads music it is imagined....but to one who does not it is so many ink blots.
And if someone who has never heard a note, can they ever know what sound is?

Hello Mr. Rrhain, Good point....except that there is the physical definition of sound, and the mental definition. I am sure you know the difference. The tree falling in the absence of a receiver makes sound waves. But to hear the sound requires a tympanic membrane and associated neurological hardware and software. Without such there is no way to interpret the soundwave as sound data. Technically speaking yes soundwaves are produced, if you wish to call that sound then fine. I wont argue the point. Some people call things they can not hear silence. Good point.....except the phenomenon of visable light requires a mechanism to observe it. What you see as the sun or a star as it exist static is meaninless because there is no means to make that observation. All we see is a electromagnetic field or a quantum interaction from the local field and our retina absorbing energy from the field to our eyes and causing a change to the local field. We affect reality by our observation. And did the sun shine before there was a lifeform to observe it. No it did not shine, it eminated electromagnetic radiation and life forms that eventually evolved on Earth precieve this as visable light.I do understand your points though...do you understand mine?
Happy New year !!! **Heh, I just re read this and I sound sort of asshole-ish,,, I did mean it to SOUND that way..ha ha.This message has been edited by 1.61803, 12-30-2005 05:22 PM

Howdy Riverrat, Yes it would be soundwaves, but the word sound infers that something heard it. If it is inperceptable then how can one say they hear a sound? The question posed is if a tree falls in an empty forest does it make a sound? NOT if a tree falls in a forest does it produce soundwaves in a frequency that can could be heard. It is a phylosophical point. Half full/ half empty. Tomato, Toe-mat-toe.Do this thought experiment: You are in a vacuum. I drop a large Cymbal in the room. Did it make a sound?Then In a normal room I ask you to tell me what sounds you can hear or if there is any sound while a ultrasonic device is ocillating.Then I turn off the device and ask you to tell me is any sound present?In which instance can you tell me what if any sounds were made? The barrier as you call it was a coined term during a moment in time when aeronautical engineers where trying to make jets travel at a speed that soundwaves travel. It has nothing to do with sound. Save for the word sound in sound barrier. And radio waves exist whether we hear them or not is true. Your liver exist whether you hear it or not. But I do not see anyone recording the best of compilations of they're liver. LOL. **edit typosThis message has been edited by 1.61803, 12-31-2005 08:15 AM

LOL.

Hello Mr. Rrhain,
There are several theories in regards to reality:
The Copenhagen interpretation #There is no deeper reality
The Copenhagen interp # reality is created by observation
The Quantum reality of undivided wholeness
The quantum reality of many worlds
quantum reality of neo realism
Conciousness created reality
quantum Duplex world
Oh, and the Rrhain interpretation
You emphatically state that observation does not affect reality. If this is correct then why is it everytime I observe one of your sarcastic post I feel the urge to pimp slap you? Just kiddn.:}

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

Hi riVerat!! Yes I agree that soundwaves exist in the absence of being heard. I agree. Your right. Using that definition of sound you are correct. I dont know,
Because glass not only resonates it can also break due to being clumsy or a projectile hurled at it. So if I am not in the room and I come back and see the glass broken how do I know how the glass was broken? Was there a sound? I do not know because I was not there to hear it. Big foot could of came in the room for a beer and broke the glass for all I know.

Hello Senior Rrhain, Why? Do you have the final ultimate knowlege of how reality is manifested? Whatever. I am certainly more impressed by: Dr. N. Bohr,J. Wheeler, W. Heisenberg,Jon von Neumann,D. Bohm, H. Everett. All of which are contributors to the sample theories I posted earlier. And Mr. Rrhain suppose you explain the Uncertainty principal to me. So that I may be enlightened (lol) get it? Really if it does not mean what I think it means then I need straightening out.You said that observation does not affect reality... " your not a quantum particle." Now I say umm. What am I composed of if not the stuff that composes atoms? And you say....but that is not the macroscopic reality we know and does not apply. And I say Ok then why the fuck is science so interested in it?We are part of the system. Our observations do impact how reality plays out. A tiny fluctuation in intial conditions impacts and affects the resultant outcomes enormously. Even if the waveform propagates determinalistically the outcome is not carved in stone.
And I do understand your point about observation, I just do not think you understand mine, hence the disagreement.

No, he was answering the question with a definition of sound that does not involve the phenomenon we call hearing. Making emphatic statements and handwaving someone elses opinion as irrelevent or illogical is a positon of arrogance and self imposed superiority in my opinion. I already know my opinion means squat to you since you seem to only agree with those who share your personally carved out version of what reality is or is not. Basing all of it on the premise that you know your right and everyone else must be wrong. How sad is that.Of all those 7 theories I posted, the only one that divorces
observation from reality is neo realism. Favored by Dr. Einstien, who had to eventually accept observation/or measurement can have affects on how events are actualized. Why should I accept a dude off the internets statement that observing quantum events has No bearing on macro events? Or the fact that a word can be defined in different ways can have a bearing on how the proposition is interpreted. Why should I accept only his definition? Is it not true that any change in initial conditions, however small, affects the out come of events enormously? Is that not what is taught in caos theory? Is that not why there is a element of randomness in reality? Maybe I am incorrect.I know you know the sun is a thermonuclear reactor creating He from H {a quantum event} and also your eyes you use to observe the macro world around you, absorbs the light energy emittied by the sun from the local field in fact makes a CHANGE to the field which can be otherwise stated as observation affecting reality. Or is that not correct? Do not trees use leaves to collect the energy from light, begining a electron transport {a quantum event}to eventually make glucose? Which in turn supports human life. Can it not be said that the leaves absorbing this energy are affecting reality by changing light energy into human fuel. Do not plants percieve light? Can this not be also interpreted as a form of observation? Do they not affect how reality plays out? Can you divorce yourself from the mosaic of matter and energy / quantum soup that everything is composed of? Maybe I am just reading into things to much. Maybe things are much simpler than they seem to be. Peace.

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

Quantum fieldtheory explores the phenomenon of light and it's interactions with organic bags of carbon and water such as yourself. It is another example of what you called knowlege for the sake of knowlege that you know nothing about.

I think this thread is .....bushed, whattya think admin?