Sadly, that is purely a koan for a pre-scientific age. It can be paraphrased as “We don’t understand sound”.
The thing is, nowadays we know exactly how both sound (in the scientific sense of the word) and hearing work. And we also now understand that the answer to a question can change according to the definitions of the entities involved. So, for the purposes of the koan, the answer is entirely down to how you want to define “sound”- but, importantly, however you choose to define it, there IS an unambiguous answer.
If “sound” is vibrations passing through air or another medium (nromally as comression waves), then the answer is, unambiguously, “Yes. A falling tree makes a sound, even when there is no-one around to hear it.”. (And, frankly, that’s the best answer – because if those waves are sufficiently intense, they can cause detectable, permanent physical changes at a distance. A sonic boom doesn’t need anyone around to hear it in order to break your windows, for example.)
If you really feel the need to take a more humanocentric view, and insist that “sound” in this context isn’t truly sound until it’s been “heard” – received by a human ear and processed by a human brain – then the answer is probably “No”. Although there’s still room for discussion over what exactly “no-one” means (is a passing badger “someone”?), and whether the ear and brain in question definitely have to be human. And it’s possible that the answer will become “We don’t have enough information to know.” But whatever the decisions, the answer is no longer the paradox that it used to appear to be.
Starman1948 about 9 years ago
Good morning everyone. There is no hope for that dog. LOL.Y’all have a great day my friends.
DaveG1960 about 9 years ago
If a man is in a wood and says something, and no woman is around………is he still wrong?
Starman1948 about 9 years ago
@DaveGlass: if a man….._______________Probably. Have an awesome day my friend.
tcar-1 about 9 years ago
Depends on if it’s near Possum Lake or not……
damifid0 about 9 years ago
“Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati” . Red Green@possim lodge.
ChukLitl Premium Member about 9 years ago
History’s most arrogant question. Is the existence of phenomena dependent on the existence of an observer? So ratings equals importance?
fredd13 almost 9 years ago
Sadly, that is purely a koan for a pre-scientific age. It can be paraphrased as “We don’t understand sound”.
The thing is, nowadays we know exactly how both sound (in the scientific sense of the word) and hearing work. And we also now understand that the answer to a question can change according to the definitions of the entities involved. So, for the purposes of the koan, the answer is entirely down to how you want to define “sound”- but, importantly, however you choose to define it, there IS an unambiguous answer.
If “sound” is vibrations passing through air or another medium (nromally as comression waves), then the answer is, unambiguously, “Yes. A falling tree makes a sound, even when there is no-one around to hear it.”. (And, frankly, that’s the best answer – because if those waves are sufficiently intense, they can cause detectable, permanent physical changes at a distance. A sonic boom doesn’t need anyone around to hear it in order to break your windows, for example.)
If you really feel the need to take a more humanocentric view, and insist that “sound” in this context isn’t truly sound until it’s been “heard” – received by a human ear and processed by a human brain – then the answer is probably “No”. Although there’s still room for discussion over what exactly “no-one” means (is a passing badger “someone”?), and whether the ear and brain in question definitely have to be human. And it’s possible that the answer will become “We don’t have enough information to know.” But whatever the decisions, the answer is no longer the paradox that it used to appear to be.
Will The Pitbull over 2 years ago
What?