ChatterBank3 mins ago
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Khandro. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
@ Pixie "That's what i mean, lg, they feel the vibrations, which isn't the same as hearing."
Well, this is the point in which we veer in metaphysics and semantics, I think :)
What we describe as "hearing" is the process of funnelling sound waves ( compression/vibrations in the air at a range of frequencies) via the external ear canal to the tympanic membrane, which responds to the compression and rarefraction by vibrating the membrane; This vibration in turn is picked up and transmitted to the auditory nerve via the bones, fluid and hair within the inner ear/ cochlea structure, where they are translated into electrical impulses and then interpreted within the brain.
The only difference here between ourselves and snakes is that snakes do not have an external ear funnel, but in all other respects they process "sound" in a manner essentially similar to ourselves using the quadrate bone in the jaw, although their sensitivity to amplitude and the range of frequencies they can detect will differ from our own.
Well, this is the point in which we veer in metaphysics and semantics, I think :)
What we describe as "hearing" is the process of funnelling sound waves ( compression/vibrations in the air at a range of frequencies) via the external ear canal to the tympanic membrane, which responds to the compression and rarefraction by vibrating the membrane; This vibration in turn is picked up and transmitted to the auditory nerve via the bones, fluid and hair within the inner ear/ cochlea structure, where they are translated into electrical impulses and then interpreted within the brain.
The only difference here between ourselves and snakes is that snakes do not have an external ear funnel, but in all other respects they process "sound" in a manner essentially similar to ourselves using the quadrate bone in the jaw, although their sensitivity to amplitude and the range of frequencies they can detect will differ from our own.
jomofl;//sound exists without the appreciation of humans,//
Well, we can extend that to 'sentient beings'.
But anyway, I still think sound waves is more to the point. Robots are now being built, and if is necessary for them to detect the waves created by the movement of nearby objects interacting off one another, constructing an real ear is not a possibility - nor even a necessity, some other form of instrument will suffice and function in a similar manner for the purpose of the robot.
Also, the wind is silent, sound waves are only produced when it is in contact with objects.
Well, we can extend that to 'sentient beings'.
But anyway, I still think sound waves is more to the point. Robots are now being built, and if is necessary for them to detect the waves created by the movement of nearby objects interacting off one another, constructing an real ear is not a possibility - nor even a necessity, some other form of instrument will suffice and function in a similar manner for the purpose of the robot.
Also, the wind is silent, sound waves are only produced when it is in contact with objects.
jim360
"It's the recorder speaker\ear\brain combination that makes the sound isn't it?"
Well no it isn't, like I've said before. Things don't need a conscious observer in order to exist or to have made sounds. The most obvious illustration of this ( I hope) is the follow-up question: "If a tree falls in the forest and the closest person is a hundred yards away, did it make a sound in the first hundred yards?" The answer is clearly yes, because the sound had to travel between the tree and the person listening -- and, therefore, existed there even though it wasn't "heard" there.
In terms of mibn's post: "Until someone observes the tree and/or plays back the tape, the tree is in a superposition of being both erect and fallen."
Well, no. That's a Quantum-Mechanical statement and doesn't therefore apply to the world of things as large as trees. And indeed, the nature of a Quantum observation is nothing to do with consciousness either -- so another atom nearby is able to make the determination. Such as the nearby tree that the falling tree crashed into, and so on. You don't need a human to make the tree decide if it fell or not. And you shouldn't really be using Quantum Mechanics to describe the system anyway.
09:49 Mon 24th Feb 2014
Jim, I see what you're sayin' there, that is, I read you loud and clear . . .
D'oh! . . . nevermind.
"It's the recorder speaker\ear\brain combination that makes the sound isn't it?"
Well no it isn't, like I've said before. Things don't need a conscious observer in order to exist or to have made sounds. The most obvious illustration of this ( I hope) is the follow-up question: "If a tree falls in the forest and the closest person is a hundred yards away, did it make a sound in the first hundred yards?" The answer is clearly yes, because the sound had to travel between the tree and the person listening -- and, therefore, existed there even though it wasn't "heard" there.
In terms of mibn's post: "Until someone observes the tree and/or plays back the tape, the tree is in a superposition of being both erect and fallen."
Well, no. That's a Quantum-Mechanical statement and doesn't therefore apply to the world of things as large as trees. And indeed, the nature of a Quantum observation is nothing to do with consciousness either -- so another atom nearby is able to make the determination. Such as the nearby tree that the falling tree crashed into, and so on. You don't need a human to make the tree decide if it fell or not. And you shouldn't really be using Quantum Mechanics to describe the system anyway.
09:49 Mon 24th Feb 2014
Jim, I see what you're sayin' there, that is, I read you loud and clear . . .
D'oh! . . . nevermind.
-- answer removed --
LG; (Pleased you are speaking to me again :-)
I don't see there is any thing "comparative" about the silence, it is as far as my mind is concerned, complete.
What I am pointing out is that without an suitable instrument in a silent room to detect the waves - in order for the ear to process and forward to the mind - there IS no sound. If you join together your forefingers and thumbs to form a letter O, passing through that space are hundreds of radio channels - and a great deal more! All you need is to hold within that space a small transistor radio to hear them, it is not the source of the sound it is the collector of it.
I don't see there is any thing "comparative" about the silence, it is as far as my mind is concerned, complete.
What I am pointing out is that without an suitable instrument in a silent room to detect the waves - in order for the ear to process and forward to the mind - there IS no sound. If you join together your forefingers and thumbs to form a letter O, passing through that space are hundreds of radio channels - and a great deal more! All you need is to hold within that space a small transistor radio to hear them, it is not the source of the sound it is the collector of it.
@ Khandro.
I am addressing the points made, not the person making them. Your views on homosexuals still disgust me, your understanding of statistics is marginal and I think you wrong-headed in general when it comes to science.
"I don't see there is any thing "comparative" about the silence, it is as far as my mind is concerned, complete.
What I am pointing out is that without an suitable instrument in a silent room to detect the waves - in order for the ear to process and forward to the mind - there IS no sound. If you join together your forefingers and thumbs to form a letter O, passing through that space are hundreds of radio channels - and a great deal more! All you need is to hold within that space a small transistor radio to hear them, it is not the source of the sound it is the collector of it"
Of course the silence is comparative - unless you are in a soundproofed room. Even then, when you move you may well pick up the rustle of clothing, for instance, or hear your own breathing, or the beating of your heart. So, the silence is comparative. And yes, you may well get a myriad of radiowaves, microwaves and the like passing through the room that your native sensory apparatus cannot pick up ( ears/tympanic membrane/inner ear/ auditory nerve), but that is because we can only register soundwaves within a certain range of frequencies, so we have to use an instrument to detect them. You have switched off the source of those soundwaves that you can detect, hence you cannot hear them. That does not mean that those vibrations have ceased to exist.
And the range of soundwaves you can detect varies with age. Classic case in point; Some security systems target young people by emitting an alternating high frequency tone; No one over the age of 25 can hear it, but those under that age can.
I am addressing the points made, not the person making them. Your views on homosexuals still disgust me, your understanding of statistics is marginal and I think you wrong-headed in general when it comes to science.
"I don't see there is any thing "comparative" about the silence, it is as far as my mind is concerned, complete.
What I am pointing out is that without an suitable instrument in a silent room to detect the waves - in order for the ear to process and forward to the mind - there IS no sound. If you join together your forefingers and thumbs to form a letter O, passing through that space are hundreds of radio channels - and a great deal more! All you need is to hold within that space a small transistor radio to hear them, it is not the source of the sound it is the collector of it"
Of course the silence is comparative - unless you are in a soundproofed room. Even then, when you move you may well pick up the rustle of clothing, for instance, or hear your own breathing, or the beating of your heart. So, the silence is comparative. And yes, you may well get a myriad of radiowaves, microwaves and the like passing through the room that your native sensory apparatus cannot pick up ( ears/tympanic membrane/inner ear/ auditory nerve), but that is because we can only register soundwaves within a certain range of frequencies, so we have to use an instrument to detect them. You have switched off the source of those soundwaves that you can detect, hence you cannot hear them. That does not mean that those vibrations have ceased to exist.
And the range of soundwaves you can detect varies with age. Classic case in point; Some security systems target young people by emitting an alternating high frequency tone; No one over the age of 25 can hear it, but those under that age can.
Latest Posts
Body & Soul4 mins ago
Food Shortage Plan Being Drawn Up To...
News4 mins ago
News11 mins ago
Kemi Badenoch's First Approval...
News12 mins ago
