[lit-ideas] Re: Wittgenstein and Grice on sounds
- From: Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 21:42:43 -0800
Donal quotes me
But we have 'defined' sound. Sound is a mechanical wave that results from the
back-and-forth motion of the 'particles' (air molecules, e.g.) of the medium
through which the sound is passing.
and comments
This is only one definition. Stephen Fry and the panel on QI addressed this
question and the answer (in Stephen's earpiece) was that sound can be regarded
in a hearer-dependent or hearer-independent way. Mechanical waves that give
rise to perceived sound only become 'sound' when they are perceived as such -
otherwise they are just mechanical waves. That is the alterative definition. To
say this mistakes sound for perceived sound is question-begging and
definitional. As light is not sight so mechanical wavelengths are not sound.
Right. What is misleading hear (sorry) is that it is /sound/ that we
/hear/. Sound is only heard when sound waves impinge on the sensory
surfaces of the ear. (I don't know what to say about having
a ringing in your ears or hearing voices.) To say, as I'm trying to,
that sound is what we hear may sound tautological—and would be if only
sensation were to count as sound. Yet, for all of that
there are sounds which no one hears, not because of a defect in the
sensory mechanisms or in the brain, but because the sound waves in
question (caused by a stridulating grasshopper) do not
reach the ears of anyone or any thing. They fall on no ears, not even a
donkey's.
*'sound* A vibration in an elastic medium at a frequency and intensity
that is capable of being heard by the human ear. The frequency of sounds
lie in the range 20–20 000 Hz, but the ability to hear sounds in the
upper part of the frequency range declines with age (see also *pitch
<http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t83.e2339&category=>*).
Vibrations that have a lower frequency than sound are called
*/infrasounds/* and those with a higher frequency are called
*/ultrasounds/*.
'Sound is propagated through an elastic fluid as a longitudinal
*/sound/**/wave/*, in which a region of high pressure travels through
the fluid at the *speed of sound
<http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t83.e2875&category=>*
in that medium. At a frequency of about 10 kilohertz the maximum excess
pressure of a sound wave in air lies between 10^-4 Pa and 10^3 Pa. Sound
travels through solids
as either longitudinal or transverse waves.' *
So say the stridulating scientists. I usually don't listen to them, but
I do here. There is nothing in the human or animal ear that resembles a
sound wave, so it might be tempting to say that the sensation is the
real thing and those waves aren't. It's a temptation that should be
avoided. Unless Berkeley was right.
Robert Paul,
trying to get the dog to stop barking
—————————————————————————————————
**How to cite this entry:*
"sound" /A Dictionary of Physics/. Ed. John Daintith. Oxford University
Press, 2009. /Oxford Reference Online/. Oxford University Press. Reed
College. 26 February 2011
<http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t83.e2840>
This alternative way of conceiving "sound" is even perhaps reflected in Robert
Paul's conclusion, "Sound is hearer-dependent if one is speaking of sensations; if one is
speaking of sound waves, not (and it is these
with which physicists have to do)."
Donal
Speaking up
London
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visitwww.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
