What's new
By:

Utes 2011 Football Discussion

TroutBum said:
If a squirrel is in the forrest, or a bird, or a microphone, or any other type of receptor, then there will be a sound. If there is not, then there is nothing to absorb the waves, therefore, no sound is made.
Click to expand...

What if it's another tree, and the tree is shaped like a microphone?
Does that mean the "sound" does not exist? No waves would go out from the tree falling because there wasn't a squirrel near enough to hear it?
 
JazzSpazz said:
What if it's another tree, and the tree is shaped like a microphone?
Does that mean the "sound" does not exist? No waves would go out from the tree falling because there wasn't a squirrel near enough to hear it?
Click to expand...

That sounds just as good as anything I've posted.
 
TroutBum said:
That sounds just as good as anything I've posted.
Click to expand...

I say the sound exists, whether or not there is someone or something to "hear" it.
The sound waves would still happen. Someone being there to hear it makes no difference.
Gravity still exists in China, even if I'm not there to experience it.
Water is still in the deepest hole in the ocean, even if nobody has ever seen it.
Ute students are still idiots, even if they transfer to Stanford.

There are just some laws that are absolute.

Quit trying to distract me from my cognitive dissonance line.
 
JazzSpazz said:
I say the sound exists, whether or not there is someone or something to "hear" it.
The sound waves would still happen. Someone being there to hear it makes no difference.
Gravity still exists in China, even if I'm not there to experience it.
Water is still in the deepest hole in the ocean, even if nobody has ever seen it.
Ute students are still idiots, even if they transfer to Stanford.

There are just some laws that are absolute.

Quit trying to distract me from my cognitive dissonance line.
Click to expand...

Q for MFT.
 
Dammit, I'm sorry about your thread, idiot Ute students/fans, but I just have to finish this up.

The magazine Scientific American corroborated the technical aspect of this question when they asked the question slightly reworded, "If a tree were to fall on an uninhabited island, would there be any sound?" And gave a more technical answer, "Sound is vibration, transmitted to our senses through the mechanism of the ear, and recognized as sound only at our nerve centers. The falling of the tree or any other disturbance will produce vibration of the air. If there be no ears to hear, there will be no sound."
Click to expand...

I made the mistake of getting a subscription to Scientific American a few years ago before I knew that you had to have a Phd in theoretical physics and two other majors in chemistry, biology, psychology, and/or any of the other 'ology's in order to get past the first page. I take their word as God. Therefore, The Trout is right and The Spazz is retarded.

Now, back to making fun of Salty please.
 
TroutBum said:
Dammit, I'm sorry about your thread, idiot Ute students/fans, but I just have to finish this up.



I made the mistake of getting a subscription to Scientific American a few years ago before I knew that you had to have a Phd in theoretical physics and two other majors in chemistry, biology, psychology, and/or any of the other 'ology's in order to get past the first page. I take their word as God. Therefore, The Trout is right and The Spazz is retarded.

Now, back to making fun of Salty please.
Click to expand...

That's a bunch of garbage. The waves are the sound, so they are still there whether ears are there to receive it or not. A microphone is not an ear, and yet it can record or transmit the sound. If you break sound down, it is still there whether we are there to hear it or not. Stupid scientists trying to ply their hand at philosophy. Just because the nerds publish it, doesn't mean they are right. Sound is vibration, and the vibration is still there when the tree falls.
Trout, you are back to retarded, and I am right.
My word is greater than a few idiot Ute graduate scientists. Sheesh, I thought you knew that.
 
And then after he leaves after next year, the Utes can try with Lavell.
Levell still has a few good years in him doesn't he?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top