If: ?

[GardDog]

Because we know the tree will make sound waves when it falls, if you drop a pen it will make a sound, if you get a voice recorder and set up a mechanism to drop the pen when you are not around, it will STILL make a sound, a tree is no different than a pen, besides the size and material its made of.

[psidan]

Ah but the voice recorder is there to observe the sound. I mean no one as in nothing.
Also, we do not know that the tree made a sound until we observe what's on the tape recorder.

[Darin Rosewood]

However, we know that any two objects striking together will produce a vibration, and therefore a sound. So we've established that it makes a sound, but we're still debating as to whether it makes a noise, correct? I say it doesn't. Logivcally, if nothing is around to hear it, then there is nothing in the vicinity that can hear it. If nothing can hear that particular sound, then it can't be heard. Since it can't be heard, and a noise is defined as something that is heard, that particular sound is not a noise.

[psidan]

Kudos to you.
Is what I'm trying to say all along. It just depends on what people think a sound is.

[GardDog]

If people think a sound is something that it is not that means they don't know what a sound is, that dose not mean there is no sound.

Sound =/= Noise

[The Adfeng]

But, the tree that fell could have been a special kind of tree that cheated the laws of physics. You never know, I don't think it makes a sound, because I think a sound is something that can be heard.

[Darin Rosewood]

Okay, we're not going outside the laws of physics. I call Converse Accident, Gambler's Fallacy and Appeal to Probability. Also, a sound is vibrations traveling through a medium. A noise is a sound that is heard.We've already established this numerous times and have changed the debate to match.

[ismavatar]

Actually, within the scientific community, Noise is considered an [you]undesired[/you] interference in readings, such as sound.

Sound requires 3 components:
1) A sender, the tree
2) A medium, the vibrations in the air and ground
3) A receiver, the person, who is not there to here it.

So the question at bay is, even though the person is not, there is a sound still made? You could argue that it is "made", although it is never received. You could also argue that all 3 components are needed in order to make a complete sound, and since the third component is missing, there is no sound.

I think a far more interesting offshoot quesion is:
Does the moon still exist when nobody's looking?

This was posed by Einstein to his good friend, to see if he was on the same side as Einstein in the Objective/Subjective reality debate. Although it may require its own topic, seeing how popular this debate is!

[psidan]

And also someone look up quantum physics. Everything is in an undetermined state until it is observed. So if someone puts a cat in a box with a vial of poision in a vapour/gas state and puts an axe above it tied in place with a rope. So when the rope burns from a candle underneath and breaks open the vial releasing the poision what happens to the cat? The theory is we do not know if the cat is either dead or alive until something observes it. This could be anything like the axe, candle, etc, etc, but until something does observe it the cat is neither dead or alive.

What im saying is until something is observed we do not know it has happened/is there. If there is a tree in a forest and it falls to the ground we do not know if that peticular tree made a sound/noise until we or something observes it. When we talk about the forest in the question it is not there since something would then be there to observe the tree. But we cannot observe that something to prove it exists so it might not exist or vise versa. So really if we do know there is a tree in the forest and it did fall, the only way for us to know that is if we could see it, or in other words, observe it. So therefore the question is almost impossible to decide on the answer unless we are assuming the tree obays the normal laws of physics.

[The Adfeng]

Yes, maybe the moon is just an illusion until we look for it. It could be something that was never there. But we know it is there, but with the tree, it may have made a sound, but not a noise. Like everyone said before, a noise is something heard, but no one heard the tree fall.

[Darin Rosewood]

psidan said:

And also someone look up quantum physics. Everything is in an undetermined state until it is observed. So if someone puts a cat in a box with a vial of poision in a vapour/gas state and puts an axe above it tied in place with a rope. So when the rope burns from a candle underneath and breaks open the vial releasing the poision what happens to the cat? The theory is we do not know if the cat is either dead or alive until something observes it. This could be anything like the axe, candle, etc, etc, but until something does observe it the cat is neither dead or alive.

What im saying is until something is observed we do not know it has happened/is there. If there is a tree in a forest and it falls to the ground we do not know if that peticular tree made a sound/noise until we or something observes it. When we talk about the forest in the question it is not there since something would then be there to observe the tree. But we cannot observe that something to prove it exists so it might not exist or vise versa. So really if we do know there is a tree in the forest and it did fall, the only way for us to know that is if we could see it, or in other words, observe it. So therefore the question is almost impossible to decide on the answer unless we are assuming the tree obays the normal laws of physics.

You did Scroedinger's Cat experiment wrong. In order to truly not know whether the cat is alive or dead, you put an atom of radioactive substance with a certain half-life in a container monitored by an instrument that detects radioactive decay. If the atom DOES decay, the device is tripped and the kitty dies. After the half-life is up, you have no idea whether the device has been tripped or not (and as such, whether the cat is alive or dead) before opening the box.

However, unlike in that experiment, where the prerequisite is to not know whether the device has been tripped or not, this debate mandates that we must know that the tree has fallen (how can we even debate whether a tree makes a sound if we're not even sure it's fallen yet? =P). Sound is vibrations passing through a medium, it does not require an observer to exist. Any contact between two objects will produce a vibration. Since the tree has fallen, it must have made contact with the ground, therefore producing a vibration and therefore sound.

[The Adfeng]

I still don't think it makes a sound. A sound is vibrations, but no one was there to see if it made vibrations, or a sound or noise, so I say that it didn't.

[Darin Rosewood]

By the laws of physics, two objects striking together will ALWAYS transfer energy between them and another medium in the form of vibrations. The only exception to this is in space, where there is no additional medium for the vibrations to pass through. Since a tree wouldn't fall in space (hells, a tree wouldn't even be in space), it will make sound. Not all events need an observer in order for them to take place. Tree falls, it hits the ground or something on the ground. Tree hitting the ground produces vibrations. Vibrations==sound, therefore tree falling produces sound. A-->B, B-->C, therefore A-->C.

[The Adfeng]

But not all vibrations can be heard by everyone. It could be a different kind of ground, there are many factors effecting the tree. There's no absolute proof that the tree made vibrations, or sound, or noise. I would say that it didn't do anything, because who knew if the tree even fell?

[Darin Rosewood]

The type of ground is irrelevant. Even the tree falling through the air will produce vibrations due to air resistance. That's why you hear a whooshing sound when you swing a big stick. We have proof that the tree will produce vibrations when it falls because physics states that it will. Vibrations and sound are very nearly synonyms, so if it makes vibrations, it will make a sound, without question. Whether it is a noise (due to the fact that we can't observe it) is a different question. THAT'S what we're debating now. Enough with whether it's a sound. The laws of physics are superior to just about any argument you can pull out of your hat. Claiming that it's not is a blatant Converse Accident fallacy and an Appeal to Probability.

Also, you can't argue that we don't know whether the tree actually falls. It's stated in the debate topic that we do. If a tree falls! If we don't know whether the tree falls, the debate does not exist.