|
|
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| = ARCHIVED WIKISPACES DISCUSSION BELOW =
| | {{WSArchiveLink}} |
| '''All discussion below is archived from the Wikispaces export in its original unaltered form.'''
| |
| ----
| |
|
| |
|
| == Pade(2,1) == | | == Cleanup and notes == |
| Have you taken a look at the Pade(2,1) approximant? I compute it as $\frac{1}{4} \frac{(r-1)(r+5)}{2r+1}$. Calculations show it beats the quadratic approximant on the interval $[1,4]$ at the endpoints of which the two approximants agree. (The two are nearly identical on that interval, with a max difference of $\approx .006$.) The approximants are fairly simple (generally simpler than the Pade(1,2) approximants). E.g. for r = 2/1 we have the approximant 7/5 (ignoring the constant 1/4). A first computation shows that this approximation spots 34EDO by comparing the approximants for 5/4 and 3/2: 25/56 and 13/16 resp. We don't get equality, but minimizing the difference m*(13/16)-n*(25/56) gives m=11, n=20 with 11*(13/16) - 20*(25/56) = 1/112, a unit fraction with denominator the LCM of the approximant denominators.
| |
|
| |
|
| - '''mattyhawthorn''' April 04, 2015, 05:08:22 PM UTC-0700
| | I cleaned up a lot of the formatting on this page. It is in a much better state now. |
| ----
| | |
| | There's some genuinely cool stuff buried in here, and I haven't really taken the time to understand all the details. |
| | I believe this material can be presented in much better ways. Not sure exactly how to go about this. A good start would maybe be to split off approximants into a more encyclopedic article rather than this essay format. The section on argent tuning is also of high interest, since it relates to what we now call the [[argent comma]]. |
| | |
| | – [[User:Sintel|Sintel🎏]] ([[User_talk:Sintel|talk]]) 00:53, 6 May 2026 (UTC) |