-----Original Message-----

From: Joseph L Monzo

>But that still seems like a circular explanation to me. The "5th" and

"4th" *don't* contain 7 and 5 steps in the

higher-degree scales such as 19, 31, etc.

(19/O)*F,f=11:8... 31=18:13...*

I believe (though that's mostly just a guess) that eight would be the only

number that has the same "(n*O)+/-f,+/-F [where "O" is 8, "f" is 3, and "F"

is 5] resulting in a(endless?) sequence of two numbers that are either prime

or a product of primes >/= f and F" property that twelve has...(?)

Dan

*This sequence:

F f

\ /

--------------

O

/ | \

O+f | O+F

/ | \

...2*O...

would be good through (most) anyone's idea of a utilitarian n-tET...