On 3 Mar 2014, at 6:49 pm, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: > > On 03 Mar 2014, at 08:32, Kim Jones wrote: > >> >> On 2 Mar 2014, at 11:03 pm, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 02 Mar 2014, at 11:13, Kim Jones wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kim Jones B. Mus. GDTL >>>> >>>>> On 1 Mar 2014, at 7:43 pm, Bruno Marchal <marc...@ulb.ac.be> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> and I chose numbers as people are familiarized with them. >>>>> >>>>> Bruno >>>> >>>> How about music? Music is just a bunch of numbers. >>> >>> Well, you can't say that. Especially to a literally minded stubborn >>> mathematician :) >>> >>> I do agree that the relation between math and music are very deep and >>> profound though. >> >> >> Yes. Tell me: are the following equivalent statements to a literally-minded >> stubborn mathematician like you: >> >> 4 + 1 = 5 >> >> 1 + 4 = 5 >> >> 2 + 3 = 5 >> >> 3 + 2 = 5 > > They are equivalent in many senses, and not equivalent in many other senses. > > They are equivalent semantically, but then with classical semantics, all true > statement are equivalent. > I mean that if you have the truth that 4+1 = 5 then 1+4=5. That is: (4+1= 5 > <-> 1+4=5) is true. > > They are deductively equivalent in RA, PA, ZF, etc. because such theories can > prove the equivalence above. > > They are not equivalent in any procedural sense. adding 1 to 4 is not the > same thing than adding 4 to 1. It happens that the result is the same, but > the procedure is not. > > In fact "equivalent" means nothing, if you don't stipulate the relation of > equivalence applied. > > > > > > >> >> because to a lateral-thinking, alternative-seeking musical thinker like moi >> they are not. > > OK. But I need your equivalence relation.
Equivalent in the “musical sense” would mean strict invariance “to the ear”. > > > > >> You only have to perform (ie clap or tap out) 4 + 1 followed by 1 + 4 to >> see ( ie hear -> ratiocinate) that they are not equivalent in the musical >> sense. > > OK, in the musical sense, assuming "+" introduce a time delay in the claps, > they are not. “ + “ adds no time delay. All the numbers are “butt to butt”. A time delay would signify a number. Curiously, the only sonic way you can perform 4 + 1 is to differentiate these two entities somehow. We do this by making the first clap of any group loud and all successive claps soft. So 4 + 1 comes out as (F = ‘forte’ loud, p = ‘piano’ soft) FpppFFpppFFpppFF etc. Try 3 + 2 (X3) and swap immediately to 2 + 3 (X2) Comes out as: FppFpFppFpFppFpFpFppFpFpp (remember no gabs between claps. A gap is a number. Silence is structured in music.) Do it really fast and continually and then later on smoke a joint and listen to Dave Brubeck’s “Take Five” which you have kind of just prepared your neurons for. > > >> >> Give me a shout if you cannot clap these sentences accurately. > > Actually, your clap view of numbers make 1+x non equivalent with x+1 useful > for the infinite ordinals. > > 1 + omega = omega > > that is clap followed by clap clap clap clap ... is considered as equivalent > to clap clap clap ... > The "+" does not add delay, for the ordinal, unless there are an infinity, > and so: > > omega + 1 is not = to omega, > > clap, clap, clap, clap, ...., clap ≠ clap, clap, clap, clap, ...., > > That's a different rhythm indeed. > > Bruno Yes. Actually, an interesting “law” of music is that when dealing with isochronic stresses “beats” - the invisible number structure that orders all music linearly (can be explicit or virtually undiscernible depending on the music) is that STRONG is always followed by WEAK. Thus, ‘1’ is ALWAYS a strong (ie loud) beat. With a field of 3 beats (‘waltz-time’) this gets interesting because you now have FppFppFpp which when you perform it suggests a circle. The old conductors would wave their arms in a circle to conduct 3/4 time in the past. What is it, Bruno, about 3 beats to the bar that precisely, irrefutably describes to my mind a circle? K > > > > >> >> K >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Everything List" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. >> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. ============================ Kim Jones B.Mus.GDTL Email: kimjo...@ozemail.com.au Mobile: 0450 963 719 Landline: 02 9389 4239 Web: http://www.eportfolio.kmjcommp.com "Never let your schooling get in the way of your education" - Mark Twain -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
