Aberrismic theory: Difference between revisions

Line 16:

Mathematically, this difference corresponds to choices of <math>\mathbb{Z}</math>-linear maps

<math>\alpha : \mathbb{Z}^3\langle\mathbf{L}, \mathbf{m}, \mathbf{s}\rangle \to \mathrm{JI}( 2, p_1, ..., p_s )/\mathrm{ker}(T)</math> (here <math>T</math> is a temperament map defined on the 2.p1....ps subgroup), determined by differing choices of <math>\alpha(\mathbf{L}), \alpha(\mathbf{m}), \alpha(\mathbf{s})</math> and subject to the constraint that <math>5\alpha(\mathbf{L}) + 2\alpha(\mathbf{m}) + 3\alpha(\mathbf{s}) = T(2).</math> ~~Technically,~~ there are two "degrees of freedom", namely the choice of temperament and the choice of where to map the scale steps. The ~~assignments~~ of scale steps to tempered intervals is chosen to improve coverage of important LCJI intervals.

<math>\alpha : \mathbb{Z}^3\langle\mathbf{L}, \mathbf{m}, \mathbf{s}\rangle \to \mathrm{JI}( 2, p_1, ..., p_s )/\mathrm{ker}(T)</math> (here <math>T</math> is a temperament map defined on the 2.p1....ps subgroup), determined by differing choices of <math>\alpha(\mathbf{L}), \alpha(\mathbf{m}), \alpha(\mathbf{s})</math> and subject to the constraint that <math>5\alpha(\mathbf{L}) + 2\alpha(\mathbf{m}) + 3\alpha(\mathbf{s}) = T(2).</math> Thus there are two "degrees of freedom", namely the choice of temperament and the choice of where to map the scale steps. The assignment of scale steps to tempered intervals is chosen to improve coverage of important LCJI intervals.

=== Example: blackdye ===

The following table shows two different temperament interpretations for the same aberrismic scale pattern blackdye (sLmLsLmLsL), under untempered 2.3.5 and Ultrapyth respectively.

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 Mathematically, this difference corresponds to choices of <math>\mathbb{Z}</math>-linear maps
-<math>\alpha : \mathbb{Z}^3\langle\mathbf{L}, \mathbf{m}, \mathbf{s}\rangle \to \mathrm{JI}( 2, p_1, ..., p_s )/\mathrm{ker}(T)</math> (here <math>T</math> is a temperament map defined on the 2.p<sub>1</sub>....p<sub>s</sub> subgroup), determined by differing choices of <math>\alpha(\mathbf{L}), \alpha(\mathbf{m}), \alpha(\mathbf{s})</math> and subject to the constraint that <math>5\alpha(\mathbf{L}) + 2\alpha(\mathbf{m}) + 3\alpha(\mathbf{s}) = T(2).</math> Technically, there are two "degrees of freedom", namely the choice of temperament and the choice of where to map the scale steps. The assignments of scale steps to tempered intervals is chosen to improve coverage of important LCJI intervals.
+<math>\alpha : \mathbb{Z}^3\langle\mathbf{L}, \mathbf{m}, \mathbf{s}\rangle \to \mathrm{JI}( 2, p_1, ..., p_s )/\mathrm{ker}(T)</math> (here <math>T</math> is a temperament map defined on the 2.p<sub>1</sub>....p<sub>s</sub> subgroup), determined by differing choices of <math>\alpha(\mathbf{L}), \alpha(\mathbf{m}), \alpha(\mathbf{s})</math> and subject to the constraint that <math>5\alpha(\mathbf{L}) + 2\alpha(\mathbf{m}) + 3\alpha(\mathbf{s}) = T(2).</math> Thus there are two "degrees of freedom", namely the choice of temperament and the choice of where to map the scale steps. The assignment of scale steps to tempered intervals is chosen to improve coverage of important LCJI intervals.
 === Example: blackdye ===
 The following table shows two different temperament interpretations for the same aberrismic scale pattern blackdye (sLmLsLmLsL), under untempered 2.3.5 and Ultrapyth respectively.