Talk:Tenney norm: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs) |
m Sintel moved page Talk:Tenney height to Talk:Tenney norm: per discussion |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
: Agreed. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC) | : Agreed. --[[User:Cmloegcmluin|Cmloegcmluin]] ([[User talk:Cmloegcmluin|talk]]) 19:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC) | ||
: Agreed. If "norm" is more commonly used than "harmonic distance" (for the Tenney case but also in general), then "norm" should be given priority despite Tenney calling it "harmonic distance". --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 21:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 21:00, 3 May 2025
|
This page also contains archived Wikispaces discussion. |
Move to Tenney norm
This complexity is defined as a norm, which is (mostly) a stronger condition than being a height function. In fact, the whole reason it is useful is because it is a norm, not a height. For this reason, the title should be either "Tenney norm", or "Tenney harmonic distance", because that's what it was called originally. – Sintel🎏 (talk) 18:18, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
- Agreed. --Cmloegcmluin (talk) 19:46, 30 April 2025 (UTC)
- Agreed. If "norm" is more commonly used than "harmonic distance" (for the Tenney case but also in general), then "norm" should be given priority despite Tenney calling it "harmonic distance". --Fredg999 (talk) 21:53, 30 April 2025 (UTC)