Hark! What be this? A GM application? AGAIN? Ewwww...

Who are you to interpret who is there to hear it just because you're not? It's a concept of selfish thought. Like, just because I don't hear it, no one else does.

Also, animals don't count in your agenda I guess? People are tone deaf to the sounds of birds shrieking as their house is toppled over and the frantic scampering of little creatures that see the tree crush their fellow forest mates. Not to mention, you can also feel a tree falling over by the reverberations on the ground as the roots are ripped from their place so, underground critters count too.

Sounds are heard, fret not unless they're inaudible to begin with.

Lool, then the question would be would sound that is unheard still be sound? (Like a sound is emitted but no one's there doesn't mean that the fact that the sound created was voided in its entirety. Sorry, the human race isn't as ignorant as you think.) You can compare that with anything that doesn't exist to us wouldn't exist to us at all. That doesn't me that it doesn't exist especially if you think of various anomalies rather then considering it in a contrasting YES or NO.

Scientifically speaking or not. Since science can only cover so much of what is truth and what is considered to be fiction. ((Lool, we don't even know if the validity of gravity that pulls the tree down in the first place is true. So much we don't know, yet so much we 've interpreted.))

That's the thing, our isn't everyone in the World. Also, there is no one definition in the world for any given word. You can bring up that scientific bullshit but you're only covering half of what could possibly be. All the variables you look past and only have determined, "THIS IS THIS and THAT IS THAT."

Science is nice and all but if you're truly going to argue then you should stop repeating the obvious and solidify the argument.

Also, I was never told to adhere to one ideology, one single logic, and one single philosophy. The World is meant for interpretation beyond the vast conception of 'what' truly is.


100% my butt.

That's the third time you said something that I already know. Fool, if one method isn't working, drilling it into someone's head isn't going to convince them. The only thing you're proving in the first bit is that you haven't read what I wrote before.

"Does a sound exist because it is made or because it is recognized? (Can't really correlate to.) Do we exist if no one is there to agree?"

Since existence can be defined in the form of disagreement.

Then also another question, suppose there's a deaf person, if a tree falls then it's not sound? But he knows there's sound because he could see it or feel it or even smell it. Does that mean sound does not exist because he cannot pick up the sound waves? If you said waves in general then yes, that would be a valid argument to an extent but only limiting to sound waves makes your argument attackable. (The objective is not to get attacked, cover your butt when you write.)

"I believe that we exist simply because we do, and we do not need agreement as proof. Therefore, the sound exists without anyone to hear it."

Thank you for agreeing with me and disproving what you have just written above.

~You'll be amazed how many philosophers conceive the fact of 'Existence,' many even decree that we don't exist at all, or anything else for that matter. Maybe it's true, maybe it's not. All you need to know is, if it exist, it may exist. If it does not, it could be. (Now, this is also attackable since not all things exist even if it may wish to exist but then again, how would we know? It's another black hole we can't define, it's another logic we cannot interpret as long as the answers are blurred.) Either way, there is no such thing as an 'answer' because there are millions of ways to interpret the 'answer.' It's just like math. A parabola could hit any point for an infinite amount of time. Those are all right answers. Now, try to pick one?

I know what you mean by no receiver.

Tree's can feel pain too, they bleed too. They may not hear but they can certainly feel. It isn't really relative to the concept of 'sound.'

"The deaf person would not make the wave be defined as sound because they lack the ability to interpret the frequency."
Yes then sound would be null to them, doesn't mean that it doesn't 'exist'. To the concept of what science believes it only adds insult to injury for the deaf. Yes, of course they can't hear but yes, sound is there.
The impact of the wood on the Earth would make a sound whenever there is someone to receive it, would it not? That is cause and effect. Now the equation for hearing it for another person is different.

If the questioned was posed, "If the a tree fell in a forest, would you hear it if you weren't there?" Of course the answer is no. No one is too ambiguous.

But really, let's venture back to the ideology of 'No one." Is it possible that there can be 'no one' at a given time? That's the main part that confuses me. Yeah sure the possibility is there but to some degree it's heard if there is something to effect the tree? If something is causing it to fall, there would most likely be someone to hear it. (Be it an animal or not.) Unless the tree falls on it's own?
If that's the case then yes, the fact that the whole concept is illogical for we can't decipher the lack of everyone unless everyone can be confirmed nonexistent.

((I'm trying to, if you let me. That is.))

Yes, scientist defined it, they made that definition possible. Doesn't mean I'm going to answer in the same manner as they have, nor is anyone else. Sure I get another opinion and in a that way it does make sense but there's no reason to have one single meaning at all. That'll just cause a lot of simpletons to convert and fight each other more often about their logic as well as refuse to acknowledge it.

"I won't agree to what you may have said but I'll fight to the death to protect it."


And yes, the idea is the ideology of existence in it's true nature. But I think the scientists defined that too... (Be it a theory or not.) Hmm, now what to do?