reduced basis for MIRACLE temperament?

Is the TM-reduced basis for the MIRACLE linear temperament in the 11-
limit

{225/224, 243/242, 384/385}??

--- In tuning-math@y..., "Paul Erlich" <paul@s...> wrote:

> Is the TM-reduced basis for the MIRACLE linear temperament in the
11-
> limit
>
> {225/224, 243/242, 384/385}??

That's what I get, as well as {225/224, 441/440 and 540/539} as an
LLL reduced basis.

--- In tuning-math@y..., genewardsmith@j... wrote:
> --- In tuning-math@y..., "Paul Erlich" <paul@s...> wrote:
>
> > Is the TM-reduced basis for the MIRACLE linear temperament in the
> 11-
> > limit
> >
> > {225/224, 243/242, 384/385}??
>
> That's what I get, as well as {225/224, 441/440 and 540/539} as an
> LLL reduced basis.

Can you think of a reason anyone would want to look at LLL rather
than Minkowski?

--- In tuning-math@y..., "Paul Erlich" <paul@s...> wrote:

> Can you think of a reason anyone would want to look at LLL rather
> than Minkowski?

Not in this case; in higher prime limits Minkowski will become
increasingly difficult to compute.

May I anticipate any attempts to answer the other questions I've
asked you lately?

--- In tuning-math@y..., "Paul Erlich" <paul@s...> wrote:

> May I anticipate any attempts to answer the other questions I've
> asked you lately?

What were they? I somtimes lose track of outstanding questions, and
sometimes decide I don't want to pursue something at the moment, and
sometimes think I'll get around to it eventually anyway in the course
of the survey or whatever.

--- In tuning-math@y..., genewardsmith@j... wrote:
> --- In tuning-math@y..., "Paul Erlich" <paul@s...> wrote:
>
> > May I anticipate any attempts to answer the other questions I've
> > asked you lately?
>
> What were they?

/tuning-math/message/1570

for instance.