Talk:159edo: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
re |
||
Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
:::: Let's check it out then... let's try 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29 and 31... --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 15:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC) | :::: Let's check it out then... let's try 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29 and 31... --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 15:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC) | ||
::: Easy to speculate with an understanding of [[relative error]]. It's consistent in 17-limit or no-17 29-limit. [[User:FloraC|FloraC]] ([[User talk:FloraC|talk]]) 15:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:41, 7 September 2020
Okay... I have a list of the approximate errors in cents for 159edo's approximations of certain prime intervals:
- 3: -0.068
- 5: -1.408
- 7: -2.788
- 11: -0.374
- 13: -2.792
- 17: +0.705
- 19: -3.173
- 23: -1.859
- 29: -3.162
- 31: +2.134
I'm hoping that someone can make tables for Just Approximation like the ones found on the page for 94edo... --Aura (talk) 07:18, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I have 159edo's patent val for primes up to the 19 limit- ⟨159 252 369 446 550 588 650 675]. How consistent is this EDO when it comes to this group of primes?
- Easy to speculate with an understanding of relative error. It's consistent in 17-limit or no-17 29-limit. FloraC (talk) 15:41, 7 September 2020 (UTC)