Sault's _The Keys of Atlantis_

hi Peter,

having just read it,

http://www.odeion.org/atlantis/chapter-1.html

i must say that our work has a *lot* in common!
(you might notice that i'm very fond of visual diagrams too!)
;-)

have you read the first part of my
"Speculations on Sumerian Tuning" yet?

http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/sumerian/sumeriantuning.htm

i think there's a lot there that you would find interesting.

someone wrote a detailed response to me earlier this year
about my speculations concerning the math on those tablets.
i wanted to add it to the webpage but unfortunately haven't yet,
and now who knows where it is? alas...

-monz

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> hi Peter,
>
>
> having just read it,
>
> http://www.odeion.org/atlantis/chapter-1.html
>
> i must say that our work has a *lot* in common!
> (you might notice that i'm very fond of visual diagrams too!)
> ;-)
>
>
>
> have you read the first part of my
> "Speculations on Sumerian Tuning" yet?
>
> http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/sumerian/sumeriantuning.htm
>
> i think there's a lot there that you would find interesting.
>
>
> someone wrote a detailed response to me earlier this year
> about my speculations concerning the math on those tablets.
> i wanted to add it to the webpage but unfortunately haven't yet,
> and now who knows where it is? alas...
>
>
>
> -monz

I'm looking at it right now, Joe. I'll get back to you with my
comments a little later.

Peter

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> hi Peter,
>
>
> having just read it,
>
> http://www.odeion.org/atlantis/chapter-1.html
>
> i must say that our work has a *lot* in common!
> (you might notice that i'm very fond of visual diagrams too!)
> ;-)
>
>
>
> have you read the first part of my
> "Speculations on Sumerian Tuning" yet?
>
> http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/sumerian/sumeriantuning.htm
>
> i think there's a lot there that you would find interesting.
>
>
> someone wrote a detailed response to me earlier this year
> about my speculations concerning the math on those tablets.
> i wanted to add it to the webpage but unfortunately haven't yet,
> and now who knows where it is? alas...
>
>
>
> -monz

Joe

I'm looking at one of the sample problems. The translation reads:-

"The IM.LA is 1. What is the GAM? You: put down 4 and 3,
the ratios(*15*). Multiply 4 by 3. You will see 12. Take
the reciprocal of 18, the IM.LA. You will see 0;03 20.
Multiply 0;03 20 by 12. You will see 0;40. The GAM
is 0;40. This is the method."

Can you explain this, or present it in a slightly more transparent
form? I don't understand some of the notation. What is the denary
equivalent of the value shown as "0;03 20"? Is it a transliteration
of a sexagesimal number? If so, how must I read it?

I am not going to be able to proceed unless I can make some sense of
these examples.

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Wakefield Sault" <sault@c...>
wrote:

> > "Speculations on Sumerian Tuning"
> > http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/sumerian/sumeriantuning.htm
>
> Joe
>
> I'm looking at one of the sample problems. The translation reads:-
>
> "The IM.LA is 1. What is the GAM? You: put down 4 and 3,
> the ratios(*15*). Multiply 4 by 3. You will see 12. Take
> the reciprocal of 18, the IM.LA. You will see 0;03 20.
> Multiply 0;03 20 by 12. You will see 0;40. The GAM
> is 0;40. This is the method."
>
> Can you explain this, or present it in a slightly more
> transparent form? I don't understand some of the notation.
> What is the denary equivalent of the value shown as "0;03 20"?
> Is it a transliteration of a sexagesimal number? If so,
> how must I read it?

yes, it's sexagesimal.

the usual modern convention is to use a semicolon to separate
the integer part from the decimal part of the number, then
to use commas or spaces to separate multiple pairs of sexagesimal
digits on either side of the semicolon.

so 0;03 20 base-60, in our usual base-10 format, is
(3/60) + (20/3600) = 200/3600 = 1/18, or 0.05555555...

0;40 in base-60 is 40/60 = 2/3 in base-10.

-monz

--- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "monz" <monz@a...> wrote:
> --- In tuning@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Wakefield Sault" <sault@c...>
> wrote:
>
> > > "Speculations on Sumerian Tuning"
> > > http://sonic-arts.org/monzo/sumerian/sumeriantuning.htm
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > I'm looking at one of the sample problems. The translation reads:-
> >
> > "The IM.LA is 1. What is the GAM? You: put down 4 and 3,
> > the ratios(*15*). Multiply 4 by 3. You will see 12. Take
> > the reciprocal of 18, the IM.LA. You will see 0;03 20.
> > Multiply 0;03 20 by 12. You will see 0;40. The GAM
> > is 0;40. This is the method."
> >
> > Can you explain this, or present it in a slightly more
> > transparent form? I don't understand some of the notation.
> > What is the denary equivalent of the value shown as "0;03 20"?
> > Is it a transliteration of a sexagesimal number? If so,
> > how must I read it?
>
>
> yes, it's sexagesimal.
>
> the usual modern convention is to use a semicolon to separate
> the integer part from the decimal part of the number, then
> to use commas or spaces to separate multiple pairs of sexagesimal
> digits on either side of the semicolon.
>
> so 0;03 20 base-60, in our usual base-10 format, is
> (3/60) + (20/3600) = 200/3600 = 1/18, or 0.05555555...
>
> 0;40 in base-60 is 40/60 = 2/3 in base-10.
> -monz

Got it! Thankyou, Joe. Now I can get on with reading the article.
Undoubtedly there will be more questions...