User talk:Eufalesio/Moture's Extended Functional Just System: Difference between revisions
FilterNashi (talk | contribs) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
FilterNashi (talk | contribs) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
:: I assumed that since you said that the formal comma for 11 should be sqrt(243/242), I thought that this system was to be integrated with Neutral FJS. What other alternatives are there? | :: I assumed that since you said that the formal comma for 11 should be sqrt(243/242), I thought that this system was to be integrated with Neutral FJS. What other alternatives are there? | ||
::--[[User:Eufalesio|Eufalesio]] ([[User talk:Eufalesio|talk]]) 13:04, 30 November 2025 (UTC) | ::--[[User:Eufalesio|Eufalesio]] ([[User talk:Eufalesio|talk]]) 13:04, 30 November 2025 (UTC) | ||
::::to measure the complexity of a formal comma, my intuition for that is (abs(x)*log(2)+abs(y)*log(3))*abs(z) for a comma which is [x y z> within 2.3.p subgroup. for 7 the formal comma could(but not must)be sqrt(49/48) and 7/4 is n6.5, and for 13/8 it's n6 is actually better approach but i feel a little bit strange for 13/10 is a kind of fourth. i thought it might be 3rd-ish and actually 3.5 but that's not supported by most type of RoT or something like that. 17/16 could be m2 or sM1.5, m2 is good enough IMO. A4 for 23/16 is kinda forced, sM4.5 is very precise but way too complex. and i couldn't even start with the case of 29/16, it's kinda stuck between m7 and n7, A6 is not so precise at all and also too complex. so I'm a little confused. -[[User:FilterNashi|FilterNashi]] ([[User talk:FilterNashi|talk]]) 14:52, 30 November 2025 (UTC) | ::::to measure the complexity of a formal comma, my intuition for that is (abs(x)*log(2)+abs(y)*log(3))*abs(z) for a comma which is [x y z>([x/z y/z 1>actually) within 2.3.p subgroup. for 7 the formal comma could(but not must)be sqrt(49/48) and 7/4 is n6.5, and for 13/8 it's n6 is actually better approach but i feel a little bit strange for 13/10 is a kind of fourth. i thought it might be 3rd-ish and actually 3.5 but that's not supported by most type of RoT or something like that. 17/16 could be m2 or sM1.5, m2 is good enough IMO. A4 for 23/16 is kinda forced, sM4.5 is very precise but way too complex. and i couldn't even start with the case of 29/16, it's kinda stuck between m7 and n7, A6 is not so precise at all and also too complex. so I'm a little confused. -[[User:FilterNashi|FilterNashi]] ([[User talk:FilterNashi|talk]]) 14:52, 30 November 2025 (UTC) | ||
==About i degrees== | ==About i degrees== | ||
i like the idea of i degrees for irrational intervals. but that would break the consistency if the degrees can be any real number. like the example which already exists in the page, 5\13{3} can be represent without i degrees.-[[User:FilterNashi|FilterNashi]] ([[User talk:FilterNashi|talk]]) 09:32, 29 November 2025 (UTC) | i like the idea of i degrees for irrational intervals. but that would break the consistency if the degrees can be any real number. like the example which already exists in the page, 5\13{3} can be represent without i degrees.-[[User:FilterNashi|FilterNashi]] ([[User talk:FilterNashi|talk]]) 09:32, 29 November 2025 (UTC) | ||