I find it remarkable that people INSIST that "sound waves" is always identical to "sound". But what's more absurd is that they thinks that those who distinguish the two are denying that the sound waves/vibrations were produced.
The answer to the question depends, of course, on which definition of "sound" we use --
1 a : a particular auditory impression : TONE
b : the sensation perceived by the sense of hearing
c : mechanical radiant energy that is transmitted by longitudinal pressure waves in a material medium (as air) and is the objective cause of hearing
http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
So if you're asking about the vibrations which are the "objective cause of hearing" the answer would be, "Yes, it does MAKE a sound [=cause such vibrations] ". (objective sense)
But if you are using the ORIGINAL sense of "sound", as that which is actually HEARD by someone, then No, there is no sound made. (subjective sense). Andt this is the more ordinary way of using the word. If we say "he was so good, he didn't make a sound!" we're not really thinking about whether there were any sound-VIBRATIONS (that a machine or perhaps some creature with very acute sense of hearing could detect), but about whether he did did someting that affected us... that we HEARD.
I do think the role of the hearer, who takes in and inteprets the sound-waves, is important in all this. Sound is not JUST "sound waves" (the cause)
If we think of OTHER human senses the point might be clearer. Is it meaningful to talk about the "taste" or "smell" of something if there is no one with a SENSE of taste or smell?
Or ask 'What KIND of sound does the falling tree make? or what kind of sound does the crow or nightingale make?' The terms we use for these (as for taste and smell) are NOT descriptions of the vibrations but of our EXPERIENCE of them -- loud, thunderous, shrill, harsh, piercing, muffled, high, sweet, mournful .... (It's true that we might be able to scientifically describe the features of the sound-waves that are connected to our experiences, but that is not exactly the same thing.)
2006-08-08 12:36:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by bruhaha 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
O.K genius.
Then how about this scenario:
NO ONE is around to hear the tree fall, but there is a microphone to record the sound. It is then played back to EARS at a later time. Doesn't this prove that sound waves were present despite the absence of ears?
2006-08-08 12:19:50
·
answer #2
·
answered by _Kraygh_ 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think that is a stupid definition of sound. The reason is that the sound is there regardless of whether or not there is an ear o pick it up or not. Secondly, there are new hearing aids now that allow deaf people to hear SOUND by bypassing the ear. Does that mean that there is no sound when he hears?
I agree with you because the definition is what it is, but it still is stupid.
2006-08-08 12:23:19
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Actually, just by tree falling, it automatically creates a sound wave, thus, sound, wheather you are there to hear it or not is totally irrelevant.
It still makes a sound. Now, that puts it to bed !
2006-08-08 12:20:00
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jojo 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It still makes a sound. Animals in the forest hear it fall.
2006-08-08 12:17:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Alex 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
1) Whether a tree falling in the forest with no one there to hear it makes a sound or not is dependent on one's view of reality, namely, whether it is objective or subjective.
2) Sound waves are not sound waves by virtue of their being heard, they are sound waves by virtue of lying where they do on the electromagnetic spectrum. Outside this, they are light waves, microwaves, gamma rays, or whatever.
2006-08-09 15:51:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The sound waves are still there if no one is there to hear it it would still make a noise as we can scientifically see that sound waves are created whether anyone hears it or not is irrelevant.
2006-08-08 12:20:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by Levi I 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Of course the tree makes a sound .If the radio is playing in another room and you can not hear does it stop making sound.
2006-08-08 12:21:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by kcbrown1979 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, sound is what humans call the processed wave that enters the ear, but if no ones there then it is not called sound but the vibrations still occure.
2006-08-08 12:20:23
·
answer #9
·
answered by Hanif 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
If a tree falls in the forest with no one to hear it - do all the other trees laugh?
2006-08-08 12:19:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋