If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it does it make a sound?

[dukebound85]

If the qualification for sound is a receiver and the question is "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it does it make a sound?".

Then what if a recorder was there to record the sound then played back later. The sound did exist even though no one was around to hear it. As it can be reproduced later.

Yup, as a receiver (the recorder) was there to interpret the pressure waves

The receiver could also be an animal. It is not a person but if the tree fell the sound would be heard by a nearby animal likely spooking them.

Yup, and as I had mentioned earlier, a sound is dependent whether it is able to receive the pressure waves and interpret them (dog vs human or a deaf person for example)

In other words, sound is subjective to the receiver

In either instance even though no one was around to hear the tree fall. There is a receiver to hear the sound. Thus all qualifications have been met.

Source, medium, receiver

I agree 100% with what you said

The intent of the question though is as I interpreted it, if there are no receivers, does a tree falling down make a sound? The answer is no even though air vibrations are generated

 

[djellison]

sound is the interpretation of the pressure waves.

It isn't. But whatever floats your boat.

That something makes a sound because you leave a tape recorder next to it, but doesn't if you don't is a very weird strange sort of logic.

 

[dukebound85]

It isn't. But whatever floats your boat.

By definition, it is
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound

Sound is a travelling wave which is an oscillation of pressure transmitted through a solid, liquid, or gas, composed of frequencies within the range of hearing and of a level sufficiently strong to be heard, or the sensation stimulated in organs of hearing by such vibrations.[1]

That something makes a sound because you leave a tape recorder next to it, but doesn't if you don't is a very weird strange sort of logic.

Exactly.

It is all about having a receiver to decipher the pressure waves. If you have no receiver, how can you deduce it is sound? Did you even read my examples?

It's not a hard concept to grasp really

Your argument would apply if I was to claim that no pressure waves are created if a tree falls down and you would be right in that there obviously are pressure waves being generated. However, you fail to grasp the difference between what constitutes a sound and what are merely vibrations in the air.

There is a subtle difference, and that difference is the receiver, or lack thereof in this case in question

Ask yourself this
If you had no ears, could you deduce a sound from the tree falling down?
The answer is no as you lack your ears to decipher those very pressure waves to what is known as "sound"

If you had a buddy right next to you, he would say it's a sound as he has the tools to decipher the waves, in the form of his ears...but to you, there would be no sound

As I said before, sounds is subject to the receiver

 

[djellison]

how can you deduce it is sound?

No deduction is required. We know falling trees make sounds.

Wiki is not a definition. Let's take Apples dictionary (and this definition is similar to others)

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

Notice the lack of MUST be heard. Just that they CAN be heard. So - if a falling tree causes air vibrations that would be interpreted as sound if there were a person there - then, by definition, it's still a sound. If it CAN be heard - then it's a sound. We know falling trees make sounds - thus we know those vibrations CAN be heard - thus no person is required to know that the tree, falling, has made sound.

 

[dukebound85]

No deduction is required. We know falling trees make sounds.

You only "know" because you have had experience with sounds

If you grew up with no ears, you would not "know" that

Wiki is not a definition. Let's take Apples dictionary (and this definition is similar to others)

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

Lol fine, let's use your definition. By the way, for this purpose, the wiki is more than adequate. Regardless, i have been providing dictionary definitions as well....

Anyway, that proves my point......can be heard when they reach a person's or animal's ear In other words, in order to hear it, you need a receiver, such as an ear

Thanks again for illustrating my point

Notice the lack of MUST be heard. Just that they CAN be heard.

Has no relevance. Sound is sugject to the receiver

Do you even read my examples?

Is a dog whistle a sound to you? Can you hear the whislte? No you can not, but the dog can. It is a sound for the dog but not for you. To you. it is merely non deciphered pressure waves
Sound is subject to the receiver

So - if a falling tree causes air vibrations that would be interpreted as sound if there were a person there - then, by definition, it's still a sound. If it CAN be heard - then it's a sound.

*sigh*

Once again, sound is subject to the receiver. I have illustrated this concept already and the definitions of what a sound is support it.

We know falling trees make sounds - thus we know those vibrations CAN be heard - thus no person is required to know that the tree, falling, has made sound.

If you never had ears, you would not know vibrations can be heard

Just like a blind person does not know what the color spectrum looks like

Another Summary

Your argument

Hinges on that fact that if pressure waves can be considered a sound for some, it is considered a sound for all.
That is not true

All you need to do to prove the fallacy of your argument is that a deaf person can not experience that "soun"d as he lacks the instrument to decipher the pressure waves as sound

My argument

Pressure waves are ONLY considered a sound if the person/animal/device experiencing the pressure waves can interpret the pressure waves as "sound" via a receiver. If they can not, then it is not a sound to the person/animal/item in question

 

[djellison]

You REALLY care about this. Wow.

 

[Apple Genius]

If the qualification for sound is a receiver and the question is "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it does it make a sound?".

Then what if a recorder was there to record the sound then played back later. The sound did exist even though no one was around to hear it. As it can be reproduced later.

The receiver could also be an animal. It is not a person but if the tree fell the sound would be heard by a nearby animal likely spooking them.

In either instance even though no one was around to hear the tree fall. There is a receiver to hear the sound. Thus all qualifications have been met.

Source, medium, receiver

You can listen to Jimmy all you want, but I doubt you can hear him.

Ok, to summarize this discussion, "sound generated" = x. Tree falls=y z=perception.

y=x is true. sound is defined as a physical wave, not it's perception. But if it was: Let y=Microsoft, x=Buzz and z- no one cares.

 

[slapguts]

Without a receiver, it's just noise.

 

[SkyBell]

You only "know" because you have had experience with sounds

If you grew up with no ears, you would not "know" that

Perhaps, but that seems to be irrelevant to me. Why does it matter how we know something?

Is a dog whistle a sound to you?

Yes. I can't hear it, but I know it's a sound.

Just like a blind person does not know what the color spectrum looks like

But he knows that there is such a thing as color. Color exists, whether you see it or not.

All you need to do to prove the fallacy of your argument is that a deaf person can not experience that "sound" as he lacks the instrument to decipher the pressure waves as sound

Again, he may not be able to experience it or interpret it. But just because he lacks the ability to do so does not mean it cannot exist to him.

Also, I'm pretty sure this thread was about Windows 7 and the tree falling thing was just used as a metaphor/ some other literary term I'm not familiar with.

 

[justaregularjoe]

Chicken, egg. Egg, chicken.

No, not at all.

I also disagree with the previous comparison of sound waves to earthquakes and corporeal objects ie trees.

A sound wave is a temporary excitation of the particles of a medium, which in this case is air. (Not up for debate.)

The excitation of the particles is caused by a release of gravitational potential energy of the tree. (Also not up for debate.)

However, SOUND (read NOT SOUND WAVES) is the INTERPRETATION of electrical signals produced by the unique structures of the ear, including but not limited to the ear drum, the malleus and incus (bones) and the cochlea, by the brain. The WAVES in the medium cause a vibration of the ear drum, which passes the now MECHANICAL energy to the bones, then to the cochlea, where the energy is actually converted and sent to the brain through the cochlear nerve as ELECTRICAL energy. (Still not up for debate.) This electrical energy IS the SOUND. The sound has not existed, EVER, up until the point at which the cochlea hosts the conversion to electrical energy, and the energy is sent to the brain and interpreted.

Therefore, no sound is produced by a falling tree. It is only produced when the proper structures (or their clones ie cochlear implants; microphones) are in place.

<snip>

Again, he may not be able to experience it or interpret it. But just because he lacks the ability to do so does not mean it cannot exist to him.

<snip>

That is precisely what it means. Existence IS experience OR interpretation. Because of the nature of the human mind, nothing ever exists TO YOU until you experience it or interpret it. (Note: the argument that Heisenberg's uncertainty principle also leads that the human mind cannot ever experience anything without interpretation is not up for debate, but I could say a great deal there.)

Example.
There is a tree is Europe. It is wholly unremarkable, an oak in the middle of any given forest. If you lived to be a hundred years old, never traveled to the forest nor saw a picture of it, it does not exist TO YOU!

You would die toothless in your bed (Bonus points to whoever gets the reference ) without this tree ever existing, at least in your mind.

*brainsplosion*

 

[lordonuthin]

I have determined, through purely scientific means of course, that the sound emanating from my toobe is the sound of macrumors citizens falling in a forest. DON'T get up just yet though because if you do my toobe will splode and make even more sound and goo that will have to be anal-ized after I pull the bits o toobe out of my arse I mean face.

 

[iOrlando]

whoever is the one with the extremely long posts...if the entire post is longer than my hand...i tend to skip it due to lack of concentration and effort. I will go out on a limb and say you are very correct with your original statement but somewhat off when it comes to countering the 2nd and 3rd statements that you make.