>>37 literally meaning "how many of this item is in zero of this item"
No, there is no literal meaning. "/" is a well defined mathematical operator. The only thing undefined is what you get when you divide by zero.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-26 18:58
So you have a pie weight A, and you have B people.
If you evenly distribute the pie by weight, how much does each person get? A/B. In general, A/B < A, however if you have fractional people, A/B > A
Dividing by 0 is like having 0 people.
So, here we have a pie of size A, and we have 0 people.
If you evenly distribute the pie by weight, how much does each person get?
Lemma: If a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, it makes a detectable sound.
A falling object will inevitably have an impact, at which point kinetic energy will be transfered into different types of energy. A minute amount of this energy is involved in an exchange of momentum, resulting in movement of the earth. This movement will create extremely low frequency sound around the planet. This sound exists, and is therefore potentially detectable, with sufficient tools.
Similarly, we have a pie that is cut, but no one is around to eat the pieces. The pieces exist, and may be larger than the whole, but they are edible given sufficient means.
Contradiction.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-26 20:13
Wrong.
sound (n.) 1. the particular auditory effect produced by a given cause; "the sound of rain on the roof"; "the beautiful sound of music"
Sound is defined by perception. So the answer is no, the tree makes no sound. Yes, the air vibrates and all that jazz, but the fact that no ears interpret the vibration means there is no sound. Don't blame me, blame the dictionary.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-27 1:55
wrong, you.
your definition is ill-suited.
sound is just a kinetic disturbance that propagates through matter as a wave.
so the answer is yes, everything makes a sound. the question is regarding the existence of something (sound) that no one is around to hear. it exists, and is perceivable, but you might not hear it.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-27 12:09
>>44 Yes. Sound does not require itself to be heard by ears to exist.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-27 13:03
DEPENDS ON THE DEFINITION:
THE SOUND AS IN "SOUND VS. NOISE" IS MEANINGLESS WITHOUT AN OBSERVER TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE WHEREAS THE SOUND AS IN "VIBRATION IN MEDIA OF FREQUENCIES FROM 20Hz to 20kHz" IS INDEED INDEPENDENT OF PERCEPTION.
I FEEL LIKE I'M EXPLANING THINGS TO NIGGERS
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-27 14:18
that's because youre a dumbass, and you think you understand what you're talking about.
it's definitely not restricted to 20hz to 20khz, thats just the range that humans can hear. other animals can hear outside of that range even, does that mean what they're hearing isnt sound? i feel like im explaining this to someone who's existence is defined by selective reading of dictionary.com
noise still has about nothing to do with this conversation. i seriously have no clue why you would bring any of that up.
and i'm rather curious as to what you would call a 19Hz wave travelling through the air? what do you think about sonar? echolocation?
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-28 7:29
infrasound you fucking bixnood!
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-28 13:00
alright, so now tell me what your definition of infrasound is.
hint: since you don't think it's sound, try not to use the word sound in your definition.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-28 13:25
you defined it in your last post shithead
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-28 22:17
so your definition of infrasound is 'a 19hz wave travelling through the air'? i'm asking for your interpretation of the definition since you clearly don't understand what sound is or what you're talking about.
you're putting up the weakest argument ive heard since i told your mom to suck my cock.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-29 2:13
lol. sound is 20Hz-20kHz just like light is 380-780nm, and not the entire EM spectrum.
there are no interpretations, looking it on the internet. you lose. get over it
"Sound is a disturbance of mechanical energy that propagates through matter as a wave. Sound is characterized by the properties of sound waves which are frequency, wavelength, period, amplitude and velocity or speed."
"Sound is perceived through the sense of hearing. Humans and many animals use their ears to hear sound, but loud sounds and low frequency sounds can be perceived by other parts of the body through the sense of touch."
"The range of frequencies that humans can hear is approximately between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. This range is by definition the audible spectrum, but some people (particularly women) can hear above 20,000 Hz."
"The human ear is sensitive to sound waves in the frequency range from about 20 to 20,000 Hz, which is called the audible range. You may have heard the term sound range, but sound waves can also be above audible range (ultrasonic) and below audible range (infrasonic). "
just google sound, go ahead. it doesn't matter how many times you say it's only 20-20k hz, it's not.
youre right about light though, since its fucking defined as the visible part of the spectrum, unlike sound, which is not defined in terms of its audibility.
if you don't get it by now, you're just stubborn.
Name:
Anonymous2006-05-29 9:42
You're all wrong. Both yes and no are correct, for the following reason:
sound1 Audio pronunciation of "sound" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (sound)
n.
1.
1. Vibrations transmitted through an elastic solid or a liquid or gas, with frequencies in the approximate range of 20 to 20,000 hertz, capable of being detected by human organs of hearing.
2. Transmitted vibrations of any frequency.
3. The sensation stimulated in the organs of hearing by such vibrations in the air or other medium.
Sound has multiple definitions. 2 says it's the vibration, 3 says it's the sensation, 1 says it's vibration capable of being heard. When a tree falls and no one hears it, 2 is satisfied but 3 is not. It's a matter of semantics; it just boils down to which 'sound' are you referring to when you ask the question.