Talk:Height: Difference between revisions
Cmloegcmluin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Reply to User:Cmloegcmluin |
||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
:::: 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) | :::: 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".' | |||
:: It's borrowed from mathematics: [[Wikipedia: Height function]] [[User:ResonantFrequencies|ResonantFrequencies]] ([[User talk:ResonantFrequencies|talk]]) 19:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC) | |||