Jump to content
Gibson Brands Forums

If a Tree Fall's in the ........

RaysEpiphone

By RaysEpiphone
in The Gibson Lounge


Recommended Posts

pippy

pippy

Posted
Posted

What gives? I can't post youtube video! [cursing]

That's odd!

 

In the first post I heard the sound of one hand clapping.

In the second clip I heard your version of Simon and Garfunkels 'The Sound of Silence'.

The thirdclip was (I think) the soundtrack to the film 'All Quiet on the Western Front'. I could be mistaken, though.

The fourth clip was, of course, a tree falling in the woods (even although there was no-one there).

 

I'm anticipating another clip; this time your rendition of John Cage's " 4' 33" ".

 

 

 

 

Should any of you be unfamiliar with this sublime work here's a snippet from Wiki;

"It (4'33") was composed in 1952 for any instrument (or combination of instruments), and the score instructs the performer not to play the instrument during the entire duration of the piece throughout the three movements.

 

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ryan H

Ryan H

Posted
Posted

Quantum mechanics, what a strange and wonderful thing...You can hear the sound of the tree falling because although you aren't looking at it, you are Observing it (through recording the sound), and therefore collapsing the wave function. If you were to remove the audio recording device, then we would have a "Schrodinger's Cat" situation, where we Must assume that the tree is both standing And fallen, and that it made a sound And was silent, all at the same time. Dammit quantum mechanics...

 

-Ryan

(And no, I don't have a degree. I just research a lot of random crap)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Farnsbarns

Guest Farnsbarns

Posted
Posted

Quantum mechanics, what a strange and wonderful thing...You can hear the sound of the tree falling because although you aren't looking at it, you are Observing it (through recording the sound), and therefore collapsing the wave function. If you were to remove the audio recording device, then we would have a "Schrodinger's Cat" situation, where we Must assume that the tree is both standing And fallen, and that it made a sound And was silent, all at the same time. Dammit quantum mechanics...

 

-Ryan

(And no, I don't have a degree. I just research a lot of random crap)

 

This is interesting. There is no correct answer, although Schrodinger himself, when pondering the cat, I believe, shared your opinion. I believe the fact of the tree falling has been established in the question with this similar problem, unlike the buried cat whose mortality is not yet proven in Schrodinger's problem.

 

With the falling tree it depends on your definition of sound. The question would be better put, although less interesting, as... Are shock waves in air actually sound if not picked up by an ear and turned into neurological impulses and perceived as sound? The tree and it's solitude are beside the point.

 

This is really symantics and linguistics then, although it is often thought off, erroneously imo, as a philosophical or quantum problem.

 

My answer is yes, it does make a sound. I hold this opinion based upon linguistics alone. We often talk of ultrasound, sound that is too high pitched to be detected by our ears. If we consider this to be sound then we must also consider a sound we don't hear because of our absence to be sound.

 

Just my opinion.

 

Nice playing and singing Ray!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ryan H

Ryan H

Posted
Posted

This is interesting. There is no correct answer, although Schrodinger himself, when pondering the cat, I believe, shared your opinion. I believe the fact of the tree falling has been established in the question with this similar problem, unlike the buried cat whose mortality is not yet proven in Schrodinger's problem.

 

With the falling tree it depends on your definition of sound. The question would be better put, although less interesting, as... Are shock waves in air actually sound if not picked up by an ear and turned into neurological impulses and perceived as sound? The tree and it's solitude are beside the point.

 

This is really symantics and linguistics then, although it is often thought off, erroneously imo, as a philosophical or quantum problem.

 

My answer is yes, it does make a sound. I hold this opinion based upon linguistics alone. We often talk of ultrasound, sound that is too high pitched to be detected by our ears. If we consider this to be sound then we must also consider a sound we don't hear because of our absence to be sound.

 

Just my opinion.

 

Nice playing and singing Ray!

I respect and value your opinion on this, and you've made some very good points. However, in regards to your "ultrasound" example, I have a rebuttal. Ultrasound exists because we can observe it. We know it exists because we have devices which tell us that it exists. If we could not observe it, "ultrasound" would not exist, since phenomena such as this are products of the human mind demanding a Reason for some event.

 

Okay, prepare for some deep mind-f***ery.

 

And so we constructed the concept of "ultrasound" in our minds, created machines which can "hear" it, and it spreads like wildfire, because humans are curious and always looking for innovations. And so the concept of "ultrasound", however artificial it is, has been engraved into our minds. Does it exist? That's subjective. It exists in the minds of those who want to believe it exists. It may not be "ultrasound" but some other phenomenon. We merely decided to give it the name "ultrasound".

 

In this way of thinking, all things in the world; matter, light, sound, space: They're all creations of the collective human consciousness. We require explanations for everything, otherwise we believe it to be "myth" or "undetermined". The way we collectively, as a race, decide whether something exists or not is through comparison. Our "evidence" for the existence of one concept is based solely off of the comparison to the existence of other concepts.

 

Do you exist? Yes, because some other being's sense of sight, hearing, smell, touch, and taste allows them to observe you. Before there were lifeforms, organisms, Living cells, there were consciousnesses. There must have been, otherwise we wouldn't be here today. These consciousnesses had the desire to exist in physical form, ad so matter was created, and so were cells. We then desired the ability to observe one another. And so Evolution happened, and we developed our 5 primary senses. This, in my opinion is the perfect marriage of creationism and evolutionism.

 

Okay, I'm done with the deep philosophical rant on existence and the human consciousness...carry on.

 

-Ryan

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rabs

Rabs

Posted
Posted

Of course it makes a sound. It is human arrogance that raises the question.

I think that the whole point of these questions is not to actually find an answer.. Its to help open your mind to new possibilities.....

 

Thats the whole point of quantum physics, its all theory about how we think things work. In order to think out of the box you havve to ask questions that are out of the box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Farnsbarns

Guest Farnsbarns

Posted
Posted

I respect and value your opinion on this, and you've made some very good points. However, in regards to your "ultrasound" example, I have a rebuttal. Ultrasound exists because we can observe it. We know it exists because we have devices which tell us that it exists. If we could not observe it, "ultrasound" would not exist, since phenomena such as this are products of the human mind demanding a Reason for some event.

 

Okay, prepare for some deep mind-f***ery.

 

And so we constructed the concept of "ultrasound" in our minds, created machines which can "hear" it, and it spreads like wildfire, because humans are curious and always looking for innovations. And so the concept of "ultrasound", however artificial it is, has been engraved into our minds. Does it exist? That's subjective. It exists in the minds of those who want to believe it exists. It may not be "ultrasound" but some other phenomenon. We merely decided to give it the name "ultrasound".

 

In this way of thinking, all things in the world; matter, light, sound, space: They're all creations of the collective human consciousness. We require explanations for everything, otherwise we believe it to be "myth" or "undetermined". The way we collectively, as a race, decide whether something exists or not is through comparison. Our "evidence" for the existence of one concept is based solely off of the comparison to the existence of other concepts.

 

Do you exist? Yes, because some other being's sense of sight, hearing, smell, touch, and taste allows them to observe you. Before there were lifeforms, organisms, Living cells, there were consciousnesses. There must have been, otherwise we wouldn't be here today. These consciousnesses had the desire to exist in physical form, ad so matter was created, and so were cells. We then desired the ability to observe one another. And so Evolution happened, and we developed our 5 primary senses. This, in my opinion is the perfect marriage of creationism and evolutionism.

 

Okay, I'm done with the deep philosophical rant on existence and the human consciousness...carry on.

 

-Ryan

 

Since you seem to see this as a positive difference of opinion and not a row, I think it's safe to continue this. You've taken it in a more philosophical direction, which is great because it ain't no quantum problem!

 

Philosophically, I disagree fundamentally with the idea that the environment around us is a product of, or depends upon our consciousness of it. That makes it no less valid a belief system than mine, we see it differently is all.

 

My opinion is based on the enormous amount of evidence to the contrary. The evidence that the earth existed long before there was any life to perceive it. The evidence that billions of other planets and celestial bodies existed before anyone/thing was there to perceive them and most importantly (to me) the fact that there is no reason or necessity for the mechanics of existence to work that way and there is no method, theoretically or otherwise, in physics for this to happen. There is, however, a theoretical necessity for the mass of the universe to remain constant which get's very tricky when huge swathes of it cease to exist every time we look away.

 

I think that the whole point of these questions is not to actually find an answer.. Its to help open your mind to new possibilities.....

 

Thats the whole point of quantum physics, its all theory about how we think things work. In order to think out of the box you havve to ask questions that are out of the box.

 

There is no real quantum element to this problem. It's purely philosophical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
quapman

quapman

Posted
Posted

I think that the whole point of these questions is not to actually find an answer.. Its to help open your mind to new possibilities.....

 

Thats the whole point of quantum physics, its all theory about how we think things work. In order to think out of the box you havve to ask questions that are out of the box.

 

 

Yes I get that, I still think it's silly. Wanna open your mind? Drop acid. lol...

 

I find minds are typically open or shut and no philosophical question will open the shut ones.

These questions are just fodder for the already open mind.

Plus, having an open mind is not defined by your knowledge of quantum physics. It is much more than that.

 

Ask the squirrel the tree fell on if he perceived the sound of it before it drove him into the earth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zigzag

zigzag

Posted
Posted

...Before there were lifeforms, organisms, living cells, there were consciousnesses. There must have been, otherwise we wouldn't be here today. These consciousnesses had the desire to exist in physical form, and so matter was created...

 

A quantum leap. Not sure I buy it. I do, however, believe in one God.

 

As for the tree... well... nevermind... that's been covered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rabs

Rabs

Posted
Posted

There is no real quantum element to this problem. It's purely philosophical.

Well so is most quantum physics :) its about what we think we know and what we dont understand... And questions like that help open your mind to new ideas.. That all they are..

 

There is a practical science side to quantum physics but most of it is pure theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Farnsbarns

Guest Farnsbarns

Posted
Posted

Philosophy we'll get away with if we discuss it with maturity and mutual respect. If religion is brought into this the thread and Ray's fantastic recordings will be deleted. I am in no position to dictate the direction of this thread but these are the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...