User talk:Xenoindex: Difference between revisions

Line 25:

::::: In effect, I am looking to see a table with rows corresponding to all the EDOs between 1 and 400, with different columns in the table indicating different types of telicity, namely 3-to-2 telicity, 5-to-3 telicity, 5-to-2 telicity, 7-to-5 telicity, 7-to-3 telicity, 7-to-2 telicity, 11-to-7 telicity, 11-to-5 telicity, 11-to-3 telicity, 11-to-2 telicity. An EDO that demonstrates one of these types of telicity has a ✓ in the cell matching the telicity column in question or ✓✓ if it demonstrates multitelicity for that particular type. This is what I'm actually looking for. Later on, we can make diagrams that help us map out the structure of these EDOs based on this table. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 14:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

::::: Oh, and as for your question as to whether this chain of primes is JI primes or each respective EDO's patent val primes, given that we're working with EDOs, it follows that the 2-prime is just, though for everything else... well... let's say [[49/32]] is "r", since this interval is made by stacking two instance of [[7/4]] then octave-reducing. There's a difference between say, the [[direct mapping]] of your example interval (represented by the right side of the equation), which is the step of the EDO that most closely approximates the just interval in question, and the patent-val-based mapping of that same interval (represented by the left side of the equation), which depends on the mapping generated by stacking multiple instances of the EDO's best approximation of the patent prime interval and octave reducing. The equation tests to see if the results of both of these mappings are identical. From there, the only way I can think of to answer that is to say that you need to study the definition of "telicity" itself. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 14:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

::::: Oh, and as for your question as to whether this chain of primes is JI primes or each respective EDO's patent val primes, given that we're working with EDOs, it follows that the 2-prime is just, though for everything else... well... let's say [[49/32]] is "r", since this interval is made by stacking two instance of [[7/4]] then octave-reducing. There's a difference between say, the direct mapping of your example interval (represented by the right side of the equation), which is the step of the EDO that most closely approximates the just interval in question, and the patent-val-based traditional mapping of that same interval (represented by the left side of the equation), which depends on the mapping generated by stacking multiple instances of the EDO's best approximation of the patent prime interval and octave reducing. The equation tests to see if the results of both of these mappings are identical. From there, the only way I can think of to answer that is to say that you need to study the definition of "telicity" itself. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura|talk]]) 14:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:43, 25 January 2021 view source Aura (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, emailconfirmed 6,010 edits No edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 14:44, 25 January 2021 view source Aura (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, emailconfirmed 6,010 edits No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 25:		Line 25:
	::::: In effect, I am looking to see a table with rows corresponding to all the EDOs between 1 and 400, with different columns in the table indicating different types of telicity, namely 3-to-2 telicity, 5-to-3 telicity, 5-to-2 telicity, 7-to-5 telicity, 7-to-3 telicity, 7-to-2 telicity, 11-to-7 telicity, 11-to-5 telicity, 11-to-3 telicity, 11-to-2 telicity. An EDO that demonstrates one of these types of telicity has a ✓ in the cell matching the telicity column in question or ✓✓ if it demonstrates multitelicity for that particular type. This is what I'm actually looking for. Later on, we can make diagrams that help us map out the structure of these EDOs based on this table. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 14:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)		::::: In effect, I am looking to see a table with rows corresponding to all the EDOs between 1 and 400, with different columns in the table indicating different types of telicity, namely 3-to-2 telicity, 5-to-3 telicity, 5-to-2 telicity, 7-to-5 telicity, 7-to-3 telicity, 7-to-2 telicity, 11-to-7 telicity, 11-to-5 telicity, 11-to-3 telicity, 11-to-2 telicity. An EDO that demonstrates one of these types of telicity has a ✓ in the cell matching the telicity column in question or ✓✓ if it demonstrates multitelicity for that particular type. This is what I'm actually looking for. Later on, we can make diagrams that help us map out the structure of these EDOs based on this table. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 14:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

	::::: Oh, and as for your question as to whether this chain of primes is JI primes or each respective EDO's patent val primes, given that we're working with EDOs, it follows that the 2-prime is just, though for everything else... well... let's say [[49/32]] is "r", since this interval is made by stacking two instance of [[7/4]] then octave-reducing. There's a difference between say, the [[direct mapping]] of your example interval (represented by the right side of the equation), which is the step of the EDO that most closely approximates the just interval in question, and the patent-val-based mapping of that same interval (represented by the left side of the equation), which depends on the mapping generated by stacking multiple instances of the EDO's best approximation of the patent prime interval and octave reducing. The equation tests to see if the results of both of these mappings are identical. From there, the only way I can think of to answer that is to say that you need to study the definition of "telicity" itself. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 14:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)		::::: Oh, and as for your question as to whether this chain of primes is JI primes or each respective EDO's patent val primes, given that we're working with EDOs, it follows that the 2-prime is just, though for everything else... well... let's say [[49/32]] is "r", since this interval is made by stacking two instance of [[7/4]] then octave-reducing. There's a difference between say, the direct mapping of your example interval (represented by the right side of the equation), which is the step of the EDO that most closely approximates the just interval in question, and the patent-val-based traditional mapping of that same interval (represented by the left side of the equation), which depends on the mapping generated by stacking multiple instances of the EDO's best approximation of the patent prime interval and octave reducing. The equation tests to see if the results of both of these mappings are identical. From there, the only way I can think of to answer that is to say that you need to study the definition of "telicity" itself. Does this make sense? --[[User:Aura\|Aura]] ([[User talk:Aura\|talk]]) 14:41, 25 January 2021 (UTC)