Talk:Height: Difference between revisions

Line 17:

:::: Sorry, but I'm a little confused by your previous post; I don't understand whether you're saying that what I had just said was naive or that what you say next is naive. Because I'm confused by that, I'm not sure whether you agree with me or not. In either case, what you say next reads to me as a defense of "complexity" over "height", because many of the "heights" we use in xen are indeed measurements of multidimensional objects: prime-count vectors representing JI intervals. So that's another good point, and one that I hadn't considered before. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 14:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)

: 'I don't understand what the motivation is for using the term "height" when we already have the descriptive and in-common-use term "complexity".'

::: 'I don't understand what the motivation is for using the term "height" when we already have the descriptive and in-common-use term "complexity".'

:: It's borrowed from mathematics: [[Wikipedia: Height function]] [[User:ResonantFrequencies|ResonantFrequencies]] ([[User talk:ResonantFrequencies|talk]]) 19:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

::: It's borrowed from mathematics: [[Wikipedia: Height function]] [[User:ResonantFrequencies|ResonantFrequencies]] ([[User talk:ResonantFrequencies|talk]]) 19:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

::: Right. Complexity is a subjective concept. Height is a rigorously defined mathematical object. So complexity isn't necessarily measured by height. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 07:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

:::: Right. Complexity is a subjective concept. Height is a rigorously defined mathematical object. So complexity isn't necessarily measured by height. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 07:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

== gradus suavitatis ==

@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 :::: Sorry, but I'm a little confused by your previous post; I don't understand whether you're saying that what I had just said was naive or that what you say next is naive. Because I'm confused by that, I'm not sure whether you agree with me or not. In either case, what you say next reads to me as a defense of "complexity" over "height", because many of the "heights" we use in xen are indeed measurements of multidimensional objects: prime-count vectors representing JI intervals. So that's another good point, and one that I hadn't considered before. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 14:56, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
-: 'I don't understand what the motivation is for using the term "height" when we already have the descriptive and in-common-use term "complexity".'
+::: 'I don't understand what the motivation is for using the term "height" when we already have the descriptive and in-common-use term "complexity".'
-:: It's borrowed from mathematics: [[Wikipedia: Height function]] [[User:ResonantFrequencies|ResonantFrequencies]] ([[User talk:ResonantFrequencies|talk]]) 19:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
+::: It's borrowed from mathematics: [[Wikipedia: Height function]] [[User:ResonantFrequencies|ResonantFrequencies]] ([[User talk:ResonantFrequencies|talk]]) 19:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
-::: Right. Complexity is a subjective concept. Height is a rigorously defined mathematical object. So complexity isn't necessarily measured by height. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 07:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
+:::: Right. Complexity is a subjective concept. Height is a rigorously defined mathematical object. So complexity isn't necessarily measured by height. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 07:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
 == gradus suavitatis ==