A riddle without an answer....

This is a good thread because some of us are learning to view life from the third person. Antichrist dude has perfect observation skills. There is a difference between the physical world in which we live and how any living creature may interpret what they experience. Reality is what one perceives it to be; therefore, reality is not a known standard identity, it is a variable. Even though reality is different for everyone, there are some common generalities due to common experiences. Antichrist has given many valid examples. I expect everyone to eventually concur with this concept. Later dayz boiz. ha:swing:
 
Quatum physics is the study of the smallest of matter such as atoms and their orbital particles such as neutrinos and positrons etc. Even smaller matter are made up of strings , referred to as String Theory, which enable everything to be consolidated into one mathametical equation. Einstein was obsessed with E=Mc(squared) [the speed of light]. Newton was obsessed with gravity. Another principle is electormagnetism. To join the macro-universeral laws of physics with the micro-universal laws of nature is the solution to everything called String Theory. The human condition continues to evolve. Word
 
Bungi: What is a hallucination, in your opinion plz? People have seen UFOs, ghosts, and other abnormal fantasies and delusions that do not exist. Humans are merely observers in this universe. Although hominids may alter nature, it will occur with or without us, such as the sound of a tree falling in a forest. Physics will prevail regardless of a single persons awareness or perception of it. Peace out my bio-plasmic, carbon-based species...convience yourself that you are something more...something special...something that makes your world understandable even if it takes a supernatural assumptions...the human brain may prove to be the most powerful force in the universe that can manipulate the matter around us for our exploitation. I refer to 'you' in the general sense and not you personally. Please do not misunderstand my ramblings; I am just traveling through this experience called life in my own mind. Say it!
 
a13antichrist said:
I don't think I've ever met anyone retarded enough to define sound like that. Sound is a physical phenomenon, like light. If the sun rises on a planet with no life around to see it, does it really light up the planet? Pffft. Don't be ridiculous.

If you leave a tap dripping in the sink, does it stop making a sound if you walk off and leave it? If you turn on a light an a dark broom closet, does it go dark again if you leave the house? :retard:
Click to expand...

Oh come on. Light is physical, sound waves are not. When I tree falls, it doesn't emit atoms of sound, it emits vibrations, affecting existing molecules of air, which vibrate. To a scientist, it's not technically "sound" unless any living being with sound receptacles (ears) is around to translate that wave to perceivable sound.

I think that if a tree falls in the woods, just because nothing is around to hear it, doesn't mean it doesn't make vibrations in the air. It's just a silly riddle used in part by ignorant/naive people to make themselves sound more profound than they actually are. I'm not referring to anyone here, because we happen to be discussing this like intelligent people. Anyone who wishes to be childish may flame me for my remarks. I just wanted to put in my two cents.

As for a riddle without an answer? You could call it an enigma.

dictionary.com said:
e·nig·ma
n.
1. One that is puzzling, ambiguous, or inexplicable.
2. A perplexing speech or text; a riddle.

enigma

\E*nig"ma\, n.; pl. Enigmas. [L. aenigma, Gr. ?, fr. ? to speak darkly, fr. ? tale, fable.] 1. A dark, obscure, or inexplicable saying; a riddle; a statement, the hidden meaning of which is to be discovered or guessed.

A custom was among the ancients of proposing an enigma at festivals. --Pope.

2. An action, mode of action, or thing, which cannot be satisfactorily explained; a puzzle; as, his conduct is an enigma.

enigma

n 1: something that baffles understanding and cannot be explained; "how it got out is a mystery"; "it remains one of nature's secrets" [syn: mystery, secret, closed book] 2: a difficult problem [syn: riddle, conundrum, brain-teaser]
Click to expand...
 
pc_builder said:
To a scientist, it's not technically "sound" unless any living being with sound receptacles (ears) is around to translate that wave to perceivable sound.
Click to expand...

So in fact, the question really is "what does sound sound like if you could take your ears off?" :retard:
 
Buttcrackdivine said:
...is it a riddle then???

I know it sounds retarded but is a riddle that has no answer, no solution, no logical outcome considered a riddle then or merely a saying that is meant as a teaching or something else.

Doesn't it basically achieve the same status as How many roads must a man walk before he can become a man? They both maybe wise in their existence but they have no real answers.

Also riddles involving math and logic....if they have no answers then aren't they just anomalies?





To solve or explain? doesn't that rule out riddles with no answers as not being riddles but more or less questions that lead to no where?

I know, it is pretty weak substance but i put forth the question.

What do you think?
Click to expand...


Buddhists call them Koans
 
I believe that semantics play a role in the different interpretations that we obviously have been communicating. PCBuilder gave an informative defination in which I would sumbit that this so-called enigma is only one due to the lack of understanding. Of couse, we all believe that we are correct. Therein lies a pheonomon for the next discussion tangent.
I concur that sound, as a defination, is a concept in the human mind; however, lower life forms such as squirrels and birds also recognize sound. Therefore, sound is more than a human concept. We have again come full circle. I will patiently and eagerly await the next input. ha
 
Will someone please give the defination of the word "riddle". I remember in Batman that they always solved the riddle just in the nick of time. I believe that riddles do have an answer but the answer requires abstract reasoning. The ability to derive an acceptable solution from limited resources, that is, an apparent lack of information required to solve the riddle. Clues are often given with 'riddles' so that a riddle can be solved.
An enigma is only an enigma to the uninformed. All people are uninformed about many things.
The more I learn the more I realize how little I know. ha (this quote is not mine) :swing:
 
Statements such as, "How many roads must a man walk before he can become a man?" are rethorical in nature and therefore are not scientific; hence, there is no correct answer as it reflects disassociated thought patterns. There is no relationship between two distinct concepts. Specifically, becoming a man has nothing to do with walking down a road unless speaking metaphorically. Are you saying that "roads' when used in this context are symbolic of life's experiences???

Will someone please give the defination of the word "anomalies" just for clairifation. I believe they are unexpected outcomes which often surprise and inform observers.

Metaphors allow for hidden meanings which can be quite confounding; thus, semantics must be explicit in order for the receiver to understand. Communication does not occur without understanding. Word

I hope that my ramblings are not getting on anyone's nerves. I hope that I do not appear to be a know-it-all that has it wrong. ha :swing:
 
Quantum physics applies to all matter, however its effects are to small to be noticable in the macro-world. At sub-atomic levels the effects of quantum mechanics become much more important, more specifically on objects around or smaller than 6.55 x 10 ^ -27.

Nothing is real unless it is observed has been shown many times with the double slit experiment, where a single particle of light passes through both slits, unless its path is observed, then it is forced to only pass through one.
 
tadrlz said:
Quatum physics is the study of the smallest of matter such as atoms and their orbital particles such as neutrinos and positrons etc. Even smaller matter are made up of strings , referred to as String Theory, which enable everything to be consolidated into one mathametical equation. Einstein was obsessed with E=Mc(squared) [the speed of light]. Newton was obsessed with gravity. Another principle is electormagnetism. To join the macro-universeral laws of physics with the micro-universal laws of nature is the solution to everything called String Theory. The human condition continues to evolve. Word
Click to expand...


Which flavor of string theory do you believe in?

String Theory sounds nice especially in the way that it joins all the 4 forces in one nifty package but it is so high up near science fiction realm that is renders itself completely safe against criticism because there is no way to test any aspect of it.

It throws such wild concepts at the mind that just trying to imagine them, to give them a visual reference is headache inducing. Some of the ideas put forth, however, intrigue me: such as how the other 6 dimensions shape the strings which in turn decides which string will vibrate in what way to produce what particle.

Now if they could could get their act together with one theory it would be a tad more credible. It's ironic really, String theory's claim to fame is the unification of the 4 forces yet it can't unify itself from 5 different versions.
 
Green Stickers said:
can't it be that we just don't know everything? :confused:
Click to expand...


See i have always found that to be the cowards way out. Ofcourse we as one person will never know of everything that there is to know but as a species it doesn't hurt to try to remedy that.
 
Oh man....we seem to have to intelligent individuals here. I did not expect anyone to have knowledge about String Theory. The dimensions dilemma has been solved. It can become complicated to explain especially when I am just an simple person trying to understand my surroundings, so I will not attempt to elaborate futher. I am enjoying this exchange and hope to continue. Later dayz :swing:
 
a13antichrist said:
So in fact, the question really is "what does sound sound like if you could take your ears off?" :retard:
Click to expand...

IMO, if you didn't have ears to hear with, then you couldn't hear sound as everyone else does. And I don't mean the lobes outside your head. Those aren't the ears with which we hear. With no ears, you would only feel the vibrations of the sound waves. Your own personal definition of sound would then be fundamentally different from someone who can hear.

Although, if one did not have ears, then that person would have even more serious problems. Balance for example, which we rely on our inner ear to regulate.

You, and by you I mean we, should ask someone who is totally deaf how they percieve sound. Speaking of which, I wonder if deaf people have balance problems... that is, unless the inner ear still works regardless if someone can hear sound. I don't know human anatomy, or any anatomy for that matter.
 
Hi I am going to make this as simple as i can. The inability of a single person to hear sound does not mean that sound does not exist, It only means that some people cannot hear it.
You have not seen Christiana Agarlar twat, but it does exist. You have not seen Siberia but it exist. Before the electron microscope, atoms could not be seen by any person but that does not mean that they do not exist. Whether or not people understand or have seen something has no relevance as to whether something exist. Hominids develop concepts to explain things; however, sound existed before primative man developed language. If we digress to semantics or the hominids preception of how we interpret things, then life is moot. The word "sound" is our description of what we observe; however, without language the laws of nature still exist. If someone dies, does sound still exist? Of course it does but the deceased person is no longer aware of it. Word
 
Sound exists without a direct witness. We can leave a tape recorder in the forest close to where we feel that a tree will fall. Once the tree has fallen, we can pay back the "sound" of the tree falling. Lets say that this experiment was done in a more sterile atmosphere...a tree, in a sound-proof room falls and breaks a few chairs on the way down. The tape-recorder records all this. The vibrations are recorded and interpreted by this machine into sound, which is stored and can be reproduced. The sound still exists, but our interpretation of those vibrations, and our labeling of them as sound, is delayed.

Trees make noise and sound as they fall...so long as they hit something.
 
Let's try this a different way.

What is certain is that when the tree falls, it creates sound waves in the air. Whether anybody is around to hear it or not. OK, so there's no debate about that bit.
But, Our ears translate those vibrations into sound. How can we actually be sure that those sound-waves aren't actually completely silent, and are only perceived as sound once they enter an appropriate hearing receptacle? If you close the door to an office and somethign falls over, you still hear it because the sound waves travel from in there to your ear. If you hear a loud bang miles away it's because the sound waves managed to travel that far to your ear. A tape recorder is no proof because it was designed precisely to translate those same sound waves into the same sounds our ears do.

For that matter, how do we even know that the tape recorder is recodring sounds, and not sound-wav vibration patterns? :D It could very well record in raw format, and simply reproduce the same fluctuations, irrespective of the existence or not of objective 'sound' taking place. :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top