Did you ever hear a tree fall in a forest, did it make any sound, my guess is that it sounded like a tree falling in a forest? Why would a tree falling in a forest NOT make any sound simply because of the fact that you are not there to hear the tree fall? That would make you responsible for the sound being made, and not the tree?! That would mean that you could make a tree falling in a forest sound like something else?
Those are all based off of things you heard before. Does the song have drums, guitar, piano etc you had to hear all those before to know what they sound like. The configuration is up to you, but the fundamental parts the instruments are all based on recollections. That's true if your ear had some defect, the falling tree might sound like breaking glass or a cat howling.
What would be the difference? A deaf man watching a tree falling, or nobody is around hearing it? The sound does not exist. Does it make a difference if somebody has heard a falling tree before? It is common sense that a tree makes some noise when falling, since when another object is falling there is some noise as well. But these are assumptions only. How do humans 'prove' the existence of a sound when a tree is falling? Sound itself alone neither can be proved nor perceived. Only its effect can be perceived or detected. Therefore an observer is needed. I can assume an infinite amount of sounds and assign them to any process I can imagine, but do they exist then? Does that make any sense? Who says that it's the tree that is responsible for the sound? There must be a cause that is responsible that the tree is falling. So why not say it's that cause that is responsible for the sound? Or the ground? Or the bark of the tree? Or the observer’s mind? Or the air? Sound waves need air to be spread. No matter which idea one agrees with, it are only ideas and the idea sound is always in one’s mind! Yes or no both are relatively right and wrong. In Reality the seer, the seen and the sight are all manifestations of the same consciousness
This suggests that before life evolved, nothing existed. This suggests that before life evolved senses, nothing existed. This suggests that after all life dies (ie. the Heat Death of the Universe), nothing will exist. A five year old can see clearly that this is ridiculous. Sorry.
What do you mean with 'this'? Could you be more specific? You mean the answer 'no'? Or that sound is only a idea in the mind? Btw: Stating that something is ridiculous (even by a five year old) doesn't make it ridiculous.
From what I understand he is referring to this ... The act of hearing the sound, sound waves to ear, is a physical action and does not depend on the mind for anything. Unless you are saying that the tree and the vibrations of the falling tree are all created in the mind ? In that case we would not need ears to hear! It is the interpretation of the sound that is dependent on the mind not the creation of it.
That proves the illusionary character of 'sound'. What is a defect? Are all ears of the same shape? Is 'my' falling-tree-sound yours? No problem. What about a deaf person? To tell about sound he'd need another idea of sound, but also in his mind. "It is the interpretation of the sound that is dependent on the mind not the creation of it." So the sound is created 'outside' of the mind? Where is the falling tree? Nothing can be outside of the mind, its creation also. I guess your mind has fooled you. "Unless you are saying that the tree and the vibrations of the falling tree are all created in the mind ? In that case we would not need ears to hear!" This statement is not conclusive. To hear means a auditory sensation. Everybody needs the sense of hearing to hear. But nobody needs ears to have the idea of sound. 'Ears' (perception of them) and the sense of hearing are happening in the mind also. Can't I recall the sound of a falling tree without using the ears? Can't a deaf person have an idea of sound? Let's say a deaf person uses a microphone with a visual indicator and I tell him every time when the indicator lights up then there is sound. So he's got his own idea of sound, but also in his mind. And its creation is also in his mind. Sound needs to be perceived (in a way) to exist. It is always the one that perceives sound that says sound exists, it is never the sound itself that says it exists. The thought of sound of someone's mind makes it existent. The idea of cause and effect makes one to answer yes.
All of this seems a rather convoluted way to say no? Edited to strike no, and replace with YES! You all discombobulated me with the who hah - LOL
The answer is, yes, it does make a noise. Just because nobody was around to hear it doesn't mean the sound didn't briefly exist. If I'm sat in the kitchen eating cake, and nobody is around to see it, did I really eat the cake? I want some cake now.
I think there is only one way to be sure, provide proof! Someone must go into a forest and set a recording device to make an audio recording of the event of a tree falling without anybody present to hear it. Supposing that a recording device does not count as anybody present?! If a tree falls and the device does not record a sound, we have proven that ... the device has not recorded a sound
Yes the entire topic is about cause and effect versus perception-existence I have posted the answer yes (cause and effect) or no (perception-existence) are relatively right or wrong. Both are illusionary from the aspect of Reality. But that doesn’t matter here to the most. The issue: Both matter to physicists and both are used by them. Anyway the one way answers the question with yes, the other with no. “If a tree fall in the forest --- does it make any sound?” To predict the event cause and effect say: yes. Anyway the sound of this particular falling tree does NOT exist. Let me explain: How do scientists prove the existence of something??? Before the year 1800 humans did not know the existence of infrared radiation. Wilhelm Herschel used sunlight and passed it through a prism. Due to different diffraction of different wavelengths we can separate the contents of sunlight into their wavelengths. (Visible: Rainbow colours). Herschel assumed radiation below of the lower visible wavelength (colour red). So he created an detector. He used a thermometer with a blackened bulb and held it into the spectrum below where the red colour appeared. As result he perceived a increasing temperature. Then this phenomenon became its name: infrared radiation. (infra= below) Before all this the idea infrared radiation was not existent. And infrared radiation actually doesn’t exist per se. It needs an observer who CAN perceive the effects of infrared radiation. Those effects must match with the idea infrared radiation that they can exist in present. Why is the answer no less illusionary then the answer yes? Because yes assumes an effect which is not perceived in present. An assumption is more illusionary than an event that happens presently and is perceived. An event needs an observer that it can be existent to the one who observes it. Anything else is no existence, it’s an assumption that it exists. (illusion). Does the awake world exist when you sleep? No it doesn’t! You assume that it exists, but that is an illusion. One never can prove its existence (of the awake world) when sleeping. When you leave your house and go to work does your house still exist? Yes you think so, but you don’t perceive its existence and so its existence is an assumption only. You know it for sure when you perceive the house again. “Therefore extreme heat cannot destroy something without an observer? Destructive sound waves cannot affect or destroy matter if no one observes it?” What is heat? What is destruction and what are sound waves without the idea of these made by an observer? They don’t exist per se. They cannot exist without the observer. There is no heat itself alone. Heat is an idea of Reality. “1250-star23.9 is moving through wormhole x23 every 48 years” This event is as existent as the both events from above without an observer. What about the flat earth? To our ancestors the flat earth existed to us not anymore. Why? Because there is no more idea (of the perceiver) of a flat earth. This proves that a flat earth alone never existed without the one who had observed it. The flat earth was just an idea of the observer. So heat and sound are also ideas of an observer and do not exist without them. To be familiar with definitions, like heat and sound doesn’t mean that they are more real and more probable. Finally the recording of the sound of the falling tree. Of course there will be recorded a sound that sounds like a falling tree. But to notice of that you need somebody that perceives the recorded sound by playing the record. So here as well the sound does not exist without the one that is perceiving it. Existence happens in present and is perceived by an observer, anything else is illusion. The separation of the seer, the seen and the sight itself is also a illusion but that would go too far here… The problem of humankind is self-alienating of humans' true nature by declaring illusionary states as to be real and reasonable. I know this POV is ‘special’ Try it to disassemble and to disprove. I am sure nobody will be able to.
Mmmmmm I didn´t want to write anything about this and a few Threads earlier posted,because i think it´s useless to talk about such questions/Threads. You can talk about this for 100 more years and wont finish. It´s the same if i would ask you in a new Thread: I farted and you didn´t hear it,does it mean i didn´t fart??? IMHO these kind of questions are useless and kinda ...... don´t want to insult anybody When a tree falls if i´m there i will hear it (sound),if i´m not there i wont hear it (sound),but it will still fall !!! These kind of questions are IMHO POINTLESS Now lets go all together and drink a BEER and cuddle with nodnar´s Black cat Pompey
The pemise3 is not true (the falling of a tree is unobserved in the question) and from a false premise you can't conclude a valid argument. That analogy is flawed 'cos there are possibilities of- 1- there might be no gas in the stove 2- there might be the case of the stove goes out 3- something might have stocked at the tip of the whistle and you can't hear the sound 4- you could have heard the whistle of another kettle put on a stove from the nearby house. These are the possibilities for the analogy you provided when unobserved . The Wiki has a good presentation on this topic, see here
This statement is ridiculous. If you weren't a member at MDL and posting this ridiculous statement , does MDL exist for you? Even if we aren't interacting with each other through this post, would sid_16 know the super bobble of the sunlight detergent exist? A real thing does not become a real thing unless observed.
Now lets say I'm a person with one less sense of perception which is hearing/sound. I can't hear anything at all. So for me there is nothing like sound. I would say a tree just fall and hit the ground. There is no concept of sound in my world, yet we both exists in the same world. How is it possible? Can you show/prove it to me that anything that falls makes a sound? Mind it, there is no concept of sound for me at all.
Mr Acrsn wrote; Now going further, the universe as you know it will cease to exist for you once you are removed from the scenario. To an external observer, the universe will continue to function as it did, but you can no longer claim that the universe exists since you no longer possess any means to determine this. You cannot rely on an outsider, (how would you know he exists) since you do not exist anymore. p.s no offense intended.
You've eaten breakfast or drank beer for countless time and will continue that for many more years, each time you've a new experience in term of taste, likes and dislikes . Similarly this question might have been asked many times before , each time one must have find something new to ponder / think about. The fart analogy you made is subjective experience that's only for you of course you've farted , even if no one can hear it. I've no job in other forums (technical) why sit idle just to engage myself with the like minded people in philosophical mind game. cheers for the beer with nodnar.