Hindu system - Response to Paul Erlich

Alison Monteith wrote :

<< I just have a curious desire ... to see if there
are any mathematical patterns to the Hindu system >>

And I wrote :

<< In my opinion, Hindu Classical system is the historical
system whose mathematical patterns are the nearest of
pure algebraic structure.

Taking a like-Partch matrix generated with (1 9 81 45 3 27 243)
you have the 22 srutis + 40/27 ... All harmonic and melodic
contextual relations are depending of this shaped diamond. >>

Paul H. Erlich wrote :

<< I find this highly arbitrary -- where does the 45 come from? >>

Hmm ... Paul ...

I find "highly" irrelevant (it's the less I can say) the expression
"highly" arbitrary. Has you take time to click on refered link ? Has you
take time to think that what I wrote about Hindu Classical system is not a
long numerical manipulation blended with fudge factors that I would have
adjusted to fit values.

What I wrote is pure reflect of axiomatic mathematical structure. Find
another universal axiomatic theory which has, as simple case,
justification for the list of 22 srutis given by Donald Lentz in "Tones and
Intervals of Hindu Classical Music". After, we could compare. I don't
believe that French word "arbitraire" can have a so opposite meaning to
English word "arbitrary".

You wrote :

<< Partch diamonds arise from consonance against
a monophonic tonic -- what kind of consonance do
these numbers capture? Joe Monzo and I have a more
"reasonable" explanation, found on Monz's page. >>

Where have you seen I was talking of consonance. I'm talking of coherence
in composition of intervals and of "concordance" in strict sense I give to
this term in a mathematical theory where musical structure appears as
simple case.
I think that ancient Hindu theorists have lessons of coherence to give to
actual searchers.

You have a more "reasonable" explanation of what ? It's seems easier to
give answers and explanations than to give questions and define problematics.

You work inside the acoustical paradigm. Even if about all studies are yet
made inside this paradigm, I don't reproach to you to work inside it.
However, I seek to introduce a new paradigm as complement. And you don't
facilitate my task. You give me the impression that you perceive what I
wrote as attack against your work. I seek only to define validity domain of
both approachs.

I affirm that we have to use a structural approach (as in linguistic) to
understand articulation of "sounds as sensations" and "chosen sounds as
signs". We have to distinguish sensitive aspects used in texture and
invariant aspects (in acoustical channel) used in elementary structure on
what architecture can be build.

You wrote :

<< Pierre, what harmonic and melodic contextual relations
are you speaking of? >>

It's a circumlocution I use to give an idea of what can be a gammoid
structure. But as I said to you off-list, I hesitate yet to begin more
serious talk on that. I need a debate level where suspicion of inaneness is
excluded. I'm not musician, I'm not mathematician, I know almost nothing
about theories and history, but I think I can use my neurons with critical
mind and fecondity.
If I have only language barrier, I can work even so, but if minds are
closed to outsiders ideas, I'll say simply goodbye without bitterness. I
would have only regret, for I had find here search and passion for thruth.

Now I prepared for you a "deFrench-texted" version of my webpage easier to
consult. Hoping you'll take time to look at.

http://www.aei.ca/~plamothe/erlich-hcs.htm

Pierre Lamothe

Pierre Lamothe wrote:
>
> I'm not musician, I'm not mathematician, I know almost nothing
> about theories and history, but I think I can use my neurons with critical
> mind and fecondity.

Then why ARE you here? I just want to clarify why you're posting to the
list.

> Now I prepared for you a "deFrench-texted" version of my webpage easier to
> consult. Hoping you'll take time to look at.
>
> http://www.aei.ca/~plamothe/erlich-hcs.htm

404 not found error.

--
* D a v i d B e a r d s l e y
* 49/32 R a d i o "all microtonal, all the time"
* http://www.virtulink.com/immp/lookhere.htm

David Beardsley wrote :

<< Then why ARE you here? I just want to clarify
why you're posting to the list. >>

It's simply because I've made research on scales, first as pastime, and
then with more intensity, which seems to have potential to transform
relations between musicians and technology. If members of this list find
it's not useful in this context, I'll be not frustrated. To date I have'nt
had this feedback.

Error is repaired in link.

http://www.aei.ca/~plamothe/erlich-hcs.htm

Pierre Lamothe

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Pierre Lamothe <plamothe@a...> wrote:
>
http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/13425

> If I have only language barrier, I can work even so, but if minds
are closed to outsiders ideas, I'll say simply goodbye without
bitterness. I would have only regret, for I had find here search and
passion for truth.
>

Well, the Tuning List certainly does have an "open door" policy of
late... but it seems as though everybody is going OUT the open door!
Not you, too, Pierre! Gottenhimmel!

There *have* been an awful lot of "goodbyes" around here, lately...
yes??

I think we all need one of David Beardsley's "tranquilizers."

_________ ___ __ __ _
Joseph Pehrson

[Pierre Lamothe wrote...]
>>I'm not musician, I'm not mathematician, I know almost nothing
>>about theories and history, but I think I can use my neurons with
>>critical mind and fecondity.

[David Beardsley wrote...]
>Then why ARE you here? I just want to clarify why you're posting to
>the list.

Pierre, I find your posts fascinating, and I invite you to post as
often as you wish. I read your posts always, and my only frustration
is the language barrier, which you cross very gracefully while I
know nothing of French. Keep up the good work!

-Carl

Pierre, having had much experience debating with Paul Erlich over
the past two years, I think I can assure you that he was not
attacking you in any way, just questioning the validity of one
of your procedures.

Dan Stearns and I like to think of Paul as the 'Tuning Police',
and we are both glad that he likes the job! He scours technical
posts for errors and always points them out when he thinks he
sees one, which is a good thing.

The objective is not to attack someone personally, but rather
to clear up any obvious error and to encourage further debate
about ambiguous points.

Please continue to submit your interesting posts to this list!

-monz
http://www.ixpres.com/interval/monzo/homepage.html

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Carl Lumma <CLUMMA@N...> wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/13440

>
> Pierre, I find your posts fascinating, and I invite you to post as
> often as you wish. I read your posts always, and my only
frustration is the language barrier, which you cross very gracefully
while I know nothing of French. Keep up the good work!
>
> -Carl

Je sens la meme! (damn, no circonflexe...)

__________ ____ __ __ __
Joseph Pehrson

--- In tuning@egroups.com, " Monz" <MONZ@J...> wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/13446

>
> Pierre, having had much experience debating with Paul Erlich over
> the past two years, I think I can assure you that he was not
> attacking you in any way, just questioning the validity of one
> of your procedures.
>
> Dan Stearns and I like to think of Paul as the 'Tuning Police',
>

Monz... you are a scream!
__________ ____ __ __
Joseph Pehrson

>
>[Pierre Lamothe wrote...]
>>>I'm not musician, I'm not mathematician, I know almost nothing
>>>about theories and history, but I think I can use my neurons with
>>>critical mind and fecondity.
>
>[David Beardsley wrote...]
>>Then why ARE you here? I just want to clarify why you're posting to
>>the list.
>
>Pierre, I find your posts fascinating, and I invite you to post as
>often as you wish. I read your posts always, and my only frustration
>is the language barrier, which you cross very gracefully while I
>know nothing of French. Keep up the good work!
>
>-Carl
*************

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I always thought there was room for 'pedestrians' like myself in
this amazingly fertile habitat where, unlike formal shooling,
learning is fun.

.
Dr. Can Akkoc
Alabama School of Mathematics and Science
1255 Dauphin Street
Mobile, AL 36604
USA

Phone: (334) 441-2126
Fax: (334) 441-3297

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Can Akkoc <akkoc@a...> wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/13461

>
> Ladies and Gentlemen,
>
> I always thought there was room for 'pedestrians' like myself in
> this amazingly fertile habitat where, unlike formal shooling,
> learning is fun.
>
> .
> Dr. Can Akkoc
> Alabama School of Mathematics and Science
> 1255 Dauphin Street
> Mobile, AL 36604
> USA
>
> Phone: (334) 441-2126
> Fax: (334) 441-3297

I'm always ready for a good walk... I don't know about anybody else...
______________ ____ __ __
Joseph Pehrson

Can Akkoc wrote:

> >[Pierre Lamothe wrote...]
> >>>I'm not musician, I'm not mathematician, I know almost nothing
> >>>about theories and history, but I think I can use my neurons with
> >>>critical mind and fecondity.
> >
> >[David Beardsley wrote...]
> >>Then why ARE you here? I just want to clarify why you're posting to
> >>the list.

> Ladies and Gentlemen,
>
> I always thought there was room for 'pedestrians' like myself in
> this amazingly fertile habitat where, unlike formal shooling,
> learning is fun.

Hey - I don't have any problem with having Pierre Lamothe
on the list, I just didn't understand why someone who isn't
a musican OR a theory fan would be on the list.

Still don't.

db

--
* D a v i d B e a r d s l e y
* 49/32 R a d i o "all microtonal, all the time"
* http://www.virtulink.com/immp/lookhere.htm