/sci/ - Science & Math

>>2741890
I disagree!

A tree falling does not make a sound, it makes vibrations which are later interpreted as sound. Sound cannot exist without ears and a brain.

>>2741923
For fuck's sake, man, the entire point is that some people _define_ "sound" to mean "vibrations in the air and other materials" and some people _define_ "sound" to mean "what your brain interprets those vibrations as". These people don't actually disagree on anything about the world, just a definition. THERE IS NOTHING TO BE DEBATED.

All argument is semantics. Prove me wrong.

>>2741934
math

>>2741932
Wrong. I cite the double slit experiment as my proof. If there is no observer how do we know what really happened?

>>2741954
... What.

>>2741932
Well, in most cases. Some people are only reciting it because they heard it and don't actually understand the question. To come to a conclusion, but should state their terms and in doing so realize they are both correct within their predetermined definition.

>>2741954
Define observer.

does a chinese room understand chinese what the fuck is that douche talking about

go back to smoking the fucking ganji you slant eyed hippie what the fuck can a submarine swim YOU DON'T KNOW A DAMN THING ABOUT SUBMARINES YOU FUCKING TWAT

>>2741890

That´s how i´ve always seen this.

You can still talk about these things in my opinion, you just have to make the setting clear for everyone, meaning that you talk about what the definition of "sound" is for example.
This yields interesting results if you talk with someone that does not know anything about science in general. Broadens your perspective.

>>2742018

Refer to "Chinese Room paradox" (wikipedia for example).

>>2742002

This is a crucial point many young physicists seem to miss on. If we have two particles colliding under an activated electron microscope with a person looking through it and two particles colliding under an activated electron microscope with the person not looking through it, the results WILL BE THE SAME. It is the bombardment by electrons that changes the experiment, not the fact that some fag is observing it.

>"Does a tree falling in a forest make a sound?"
yes

>"Does the Chinese Room understand Chinese?"
if the AI responds to every question in an appropriate manner then YES

>"Can a submarine swim?"
yes
sepia swims in a similar manner

sage because it's a troll thread

>>2741923
sound is a sub set of vibrations
when we say sound we're referring to the vibrations in the 20 - 20,000 Hz range
a falling tree produces vibration in that range

>>2741954
even if there is an observer you don't know what really happed you just see the result
unless you interfere with the experiment by shining light on the electrons then the whole experiment changes
in that case you make an experiment from the point where you detected the electron to the observer (that's after the electron has passed the slits)
that's why you don't see the interference pattern