Frances to Armando... All concrete sounds actually heard by the ears of normal humans on earth are caused by sonic waves in the air, and such waves and sounds do indeed fall to the ground by the forces of gravity. One of the objective laws of nature are found in the affects of gravity, which gravity is further found to be a force that affects all things in the world, from universes to galaxies to stars to planets to moons to asteroids to meteors and so on to the quarks of particles of atoms. By analogous extension, this law of gravity also applies to possible abstract objects as virtual effects that are found by any sense modality, to include sounds that are heard or sights that are seen. The point for me here is to contend that the laws of both virtual and actual gravity must apply even to all the works of artists, including the products of sculptors and architects. (Incidentally and if it matters, the word "sound" used above as say "noise" and below by me earlier as say "good" is ambiguous, but both are like "stable" at root, yet "sound" does tend to mean different things.)
You wrote... If the ears did not catch them, would sounds fall on the ground? > Frances wrote... > You may have a good point to make here for my consideration in > probing whether a sound global theory of architecture is > possible, but it does escape me somewhat, thus the point might be > made clearer for me. On the surface, your claim defies what > science knows about stuff, if your statement is correctly > understood by me. The natural fact and truth in physics is that > all concrete matter is actually prone to the effects of gravity > to some degree. This law of nature for normal humans includes > their visible sense of color, and indeed their sense of any > stuff. The color sensed to be felt or found in an architectural > object would therefore qualify as being virtually or actually > affected by gravity. All natural essences attributed by normal > humans, as say for example colors and shapes and textures and > odors and tastes and sounds and motions, are manifested to sense > in some corporeal substance. The objects that carry them may be > mere phenomena that only seem to be as they are actually assumed, > but they are all nonetheless indeed prone to the impact of > physical gravity. The difference is in the degree to which this > stuff will be affected by gravity and impacted on sense. This is > the real plane of facts for the whole wide world, as it is the > only aspect of the world that is given to and taken by sense, > whether humans like it or not, because humans are not > supernatural beings. It would be my contention therefore that the > depiction imagined of implied gravity in a picture or sculpture > or architecture will be essentially virtual rather than strictly > actual, and its dominance or importance may even be classed by > sense modality, but it will still impact on sense with a > gravitational force. For example, a dark dense dull color will > seem sensed visibly as heavy and down and deep, which effect is > also usually relative to another adjacent color.
