What Defines Sound: Perception, Frequency, or Wave Behavior?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around defining sound, exploring whether it is a perception, a physical phenomenon, or both. Participants consider various definitions and contexts, including the distinction between sound as a longitudinal wave and its perception by the ear. The conversation touches on the implications of definitions in physics and everyday language.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether sound is defined by perception or if it is simply a longitudinal wave.
  • There are multiple definitions of sound that do not agree with each other, leading to confusion about which definition is most relevant.
  • One participant suggests that sound should be defined as the propagation of vibrations, regardless of whether they are audible.
  • Another participant argues that definitions are arbitrary but should be objective and practical.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the need for a precise definition of sound in physics, suggesting it is not as critical as other terms.
  • A participant emphasizes that sound can be understood mechanically as pressure waves moving through atoms.
  • The analogy of Helen Keller falling in the forest is used to question the necessity of an observer for sound to exist.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not reach a consensus on a single definition of sound. Multiple competing views remain regarding the nature of sound and its definitions.

Contextual Notes

Definitions of sound may vary significantly across different contexts and disciplines, leading to potential misunderstandings. The discussion highlights the complexity of defining sound in both everyday and scientific terms.

kjamha
Messages
98
Reaction score
1
I am looking for a definition of sound. Does it have anything to do with what is perceived by the ear, and therefore restricted to certain frequencies? Is it even a perception or is it simply a longitudinal wave? I can find lots of physics material about sound, but I can't find a definition.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Thats the case for lots of words. Definitions are often context dependent.

From the context of the post and forum I would say that definition number one is what you want.
 
Well, there are several different words which are spelled 'sound'.

1. A sound is one type of a body of water.
2. Sound is that natural phenomenon which is perceived by the ear.
3. etc., etc.

When using a dictionary, it helps to winnow out which definition is of interest by knowing the part of speech, the context (as MP stated), etc. In English, there is no guarantee that a word will always have a single definition.
 
To be more specific, how would a physicist define sound?
 
The same way as everybody else. "Sound" doesn't have a specific technical meaning in physics (unlike "work" or "force").
 
ModusPwnd said:
From the context of the post and forum I would say that definition number one is what you want.

I disagree with #1 because the propagation of vibrations should qualify as sound whether or not it is audible to a witness. Noise, on the other hand, should require an audience because the term implies something that causes irritation.
 
Danger said:
I disagree with #1 because the propagation of vibrations should qualify as sound whether or not it is audible to a witness.

Should? Definitions are arbitrary, none of them "should" be anything.
 
  • #10
ModusPwnd said:
Definitions are arbitrary
But they should be objective.

If an experiment in acoustics "doesn't work" because the experimenter is deaf, there's something wrong somewhere!
 
  • #11
Objective? I'm not sure what that means with respect to definitions. I would agree that they should be useful and perhaps practical.

As for your situation, I would say there is something wrong - using a deaf person.

Otherwise, I have no objection to Danger's definition. I wouldn't be surprised if it was defined like that somewhere.
 
  • #12
ModusPwnd said:
Should? Definitions are arbitrary, none of them "should" be anything.

I took your suggestion and googled "define"

From Google
de·fine

State or describe exactly the nature, scope, or meaning of.


http://www.thefreedictionary.com/define

de·fine
1.
a. To state the precise meaning of (a word or sense of a word, for example).


Macmillan Dictionary http://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/define

to describe clearly and exactly what something is

Based on the definition of "define", I was hoping someone could provide the precise meaning of the word "sound". I'm thinking a physicists would probably have the most precise definition.
 
  • #13
The main reason that I consider vibrations to be sound with or without an observer is that we use the speed of sound in a medium as the fastest rate at which a signal can be transmitted through it mechanically. For instance, we have received several questions about "faster than light" information from people who figured that you can push on the end of a stick here on Earth, who's other end is on Mars, and have that push be instantaneously transmitted. The proper response is that the movement can't propagate faster than the speed of sound in wood. Ignoring the logistical problems regarding orbital mechanics, the lack of a person on Mars doesn't negate the fact that a shift of mass occurs only after a significant delay. That push is "sound" because it involves the transfer of energy along a chain of atoms.
As I was asked in high-school, by someone who I can't remember: If Helen Keller falls over in the forest, does anyone hear her?

edit: Kjamha, I just spotted your last post. Bear in mind that most definitions are not consistent among differing cliques. You will not get the same ones from different bodies of expertise.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
kjamha said:
I'm thinking a physicists would probably have the most precise definition.

They dont, probably because there isn't much need to define sound precisely. Many things do get very precise definitions in physics, but sound is not one of them.
 
  • #15
Danger's post #13 is a great description. Understand sound by what it is mechanically: a bunch of atoms slamming into their buddies.
 
  • #16
If Helen Keller falls over in the forest, does anyone hear her?
Crack me up.
( And that one went over how many persons heads... )
 
  • #17
256bits said:
( And that one went over how many persons heads... )

Apparently one less than I expected... :biggrin:
 
  • #18
I would say sound is simply pressure waves moving through atoms.
 

Similar threads

High School What sound frequencies can pass through a hole in a wall?
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
5K
Undergrad Relationship between frequency and power for sound?
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
Undergrad Can a sound wave be transverse?
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
8K
Undergrad Does two-slit sound-wave interference pattern return to original form?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Undergrad How Does Sound Behavior Change in Low Atmosphere?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
Undergrad Amplitudes of longitudinal sound waves
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Undergrad What is the speed of a shock wave?
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
High School What happens when sound wave loses energy?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Undergrad Focusing sound waves from the environment
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Resultant Frequency and Wavelength of Interfering Sound Waves
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K