I gotta say that it makes no sound.. I interpret "noone"(no-one?) as NOTHING. No forms of life whatsoever, besides the trees, so the deer can piss off for a few moments and go eat some leaves in a different forest I see it as 1+2+3=6 1 being the physical vibrations of the tree hitting the ground 2 being the way the vibration is picked up(in this case the eardrum and the brain it's connected to etc..) 3 being awareness(definitely not restricted to humans) 6 being the product of all of that, sound. You can't just get to 6.. even though you can.. but in this scenario, if you did, 6 would be infinite.. no difference between sound, light, falling tree, eardrum or a wrinkly foreskin.. cos it's all consciousness, and very illogical and pointless Edit: lol to the above posts
In my opinion using Schrodinger's cat to solve this is an act of smartassness. Yeah we " don't know " what happens but it's obvious that when a normal tree falls in a normal forest, the sound waves are created.
How do we know that the tree wasn't always in a recumbent position, and that the evidence of the fact of it falling was planted by a deity testing our faith? How do we know that the fall (if it happened) was not cushioned by angels who soundlessly lowered the tree to the ground and then vanished? And so on. Anyone can pose questions of spurious profundity, but the real enquiry, it seems to me, is this. What would we expect to happen, based on our experiences and on what we know about the laws of physics? We can then proffer an answer as to the probabilities of the tree making a sound, but in the nature of things it can't be proven absolutely. Or disproven absolutely. I think the better question is, who wants to go in the forest and have a threesome?
Hold on....so once my mate Ivory shoots his bolt up a deer silently,we get a go? Coz I'm not having Ivory's sloppy seconds no matter HOW quietly he cums!
I've always interpreted that question as unanswerable (if that's a word heh). I've also found that people will always try to answer it, and will inevitably argue about it. The thing is it's (obviously) not provable, much like many things in life. Perhaps this was the original imposer's intentions.
Right... So... This opens so many other questions... Does anything really "exist" when we aren't directly observing it? How do I know that when you leave a room you still exist? Or that when you leave a room I still exist for you? If we truly are "in the matrix" then it would be rendered in real time, and we would only see what was rendered before hand... Then comes the question if the matrix exists, then is it conceivable that we are just a computer game for someone's enjoyment? Also, if we are in fact in the matrix, does that mean if we deviate from our "expected" behavior a glitch will happen and reveal all? (A la Truman Show? )