In the legal field, I know what you mean by the "it is immaterial", but isn't that notion itself dependent upon a notion of trancendence of thought, and therefore of the intelligence thinking the thought? In other words, a tree may fall, but it takes an intelligent being to be aware of the materiality (or the immateriality) of the tree fall. So how can the trancendence of the being thinking the thought, "It is immaterial if any being was aware of the 'sound' of the fall.", be immaterial?
cordially