Just relegate us now...

[Ancient Colin]

Of course, a quantum interpretation of sound would create a probablistic granularity in that wave, which (while re-introducing our cat into the equation) would point to questions about what &quotexist&quot means in this context.

[Hog]

On no other football forum could you hope to find a reference to Schrodinger's cat.

Ha!

http://scouse.forum-gratuiti.com/liverp ... -t2286.htm

[A-Ro]

Of course, a quantum interpretation of sound would create a probablistic granularity in that wave, which (while re-introducing our cat into the equation) would point to questions about what &quotexist&quot means in this context.

Exactly.

How can sound exist if there is no-one to give it a name?

[Snake]

Then it still exists.

Who says?

Schrodinger's cat?

And he was called Atom.

[Ancient Colin]

Of course, a quantum interpretation of sound would create a probablistic granularity in that wave, which (while re-introducing our cat into the equation) would point to questions about what &quotexist&quot means in this context.

Exactly.

How can sound exist if there is no-one to give it a name?

Oh, no A-Ro, I am not agreeing with you. Just questioning a pure wave interpretation.

[Snake]

Of course, a quantum interpretation of sound would create a probabilistic granularity in that wave, which (while re-introducing our cat into the equation) would point to questions about what &quotexist&quot means in this context.

Sooty would most probably have loved to join this debate if only I’d not taken steps to stop him from using my computer. It's a matter of fact that he claims to be a former mate of Mystic Paul (the World Cup Octopus who recently died in a German Tank like so many of his compatriots did 65 years ago) but I still listen to his advice (though not always take it) regarding his predictions in the Hat League.

[Peterorange]

I assume it is supposed to be a philosophical question but the scientific answer is no based on the fact that sound can only be regarded as sound if it received by a hearing instrument, like an ear say. If no instrument is there to hear then there can be no sound.

this was on QI the other day...apparently the jury is out as there is no way of testing this. According to Stephen Fry anyway and he's always right.

[Baboo]

this was on QI the other day...apparently the jury is out as there is no way of testing this. According to Stephen Fry anyway and he's always right.

See page 6 of this lengthy topic.

[GodalmingYellow]

Yes but dogs hear it so therefore it does exist, if there are no dogs around however...

Then it still exists.

Who says?

Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein and me.

[GodalmingYellow]

Of course, a quantum interpretation of sound would create a probablistic granularity in that wave, which (while re-introducing our cat into the equation) would point to questions about what &quotexist&quot means in this context.

Exactly.

How can sound exist if there is no-one to give it a name?

Names are just words invested to enable communication and description and are irrelevant to existence.

By your argument, before human's evolved, the Earth didn't exist. But patently it did.

[GodalmingYellow]

I assume it is supposed to be a philosophical question but the scientific answer is no based on the fact that sound can only be regarded as sound if it received by a hearing instrument, like an ear say. If no instrument is there to hear then there can be no sound.

this was on QI the other day...apparently the jury is out as there is no way of testing this. According to Stephen Fry anyway and he's always right.

Stephen Fry is always something, but right is not that something.

[Kernow Yellow]

By your argument, before human's evolved, the Earth didn't exist.

Nor did apostrophes.

[Ancient Colin]

If we take a Chomskian view of synactic structures &quotcoded&quot into the DNA, and then assume that the building blocks of DNA were available before &quothumans&quot, then it might be possible to argue that there were apostrophes before people ...

[Snake]

If we take a Chomskian view of synactic structures &quotcoded&quot into the DNA, and then assume that the building blocks of DNA were available before &quothumans&quot, then it might be possible to argue that there were apostrophes before people ...

A quite controversial and radical posting if I may humbly say so, because you left a gap between the end of your statement and those three dots at the end.

[Hog]

On no other football forum could you hope to find a reference to Chomsky and his theory.

Or could you ...?