• [deleted]

  • Post #42

Karl

Thank you for that fine post.

I feel that music is (or should be) one of the foundations of physics. Quantum physicists are fond of saying that when you study quantum physics you are studying music. The problem is that most physicists do not have a true understanding of real music theory. They shouldn't feel too badly as most musicians don't either. The worst offenders in the wrong ideas of musical theory are the university music departments. Igor Stravinsky once said of university music theory departments that they are places where professors of counterpoint grope forever in regions of outer darkness. That may be a bit harsh but then Stravinsky was never known for being a gentle spirit.

I am finally getting physicists and non-physicists alike interested in these ideas. When I first wrote the Structural Resonance papers I got some heavy resistance. Fortunately I had for a friend and mentor Dr. Frederick Seitz, Fred was a former president of the National Science Foundation. He was president of the Rockefeller University when I met him. He was also on the Boards of Directors of more companies that you could shake a stick at. His help and encouragement made it all happen.

I have most of the tools I need and some of the coding written to try and be able to actually record and reproduce truly real sound. How these ideas interface with physics will need input from physicists but the postings I have been getting are very encouraging.

Tom

If you do not understand why your rating dropped down. As I found ratings in the contest are calculated in the next way. Suppose your rating is [math]R_1 [/math] and [math]N_1 [/math] was the quantity of people which gave you ratings. Then you have [math]S_1=R_1 N_1 [/math] of points. After it anyone give you [math]dS [/math] of points so you have [math]S_2=S_1+ dS [/math] of points and [math]N_2=N_1+1 [/math] is the common quantity of the people which gave you ratings. At the same time you will have [math]S_2=R_2 N_2 [/math] of points. From here, if you want to be R2 > R1 there must be: [math]S_2/ N_2>S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] (S_1+ dS) / (N_1+1) >S_1/ N_1 [/math] or [math] dS >S_1/ N_1 =R_1[/math] In other words if you want to increase rating of anyone you must give him more points [math]dS [/math] then the participant`s rating [math]R_1 [/math] was at the moment you rated him. From here it is seen that in the contest are special rules for ratings. And from here there are misunderstanding of some participants what is happened with their ratings. Moreover since community ratings are hided some participants do not sure how increase ratings of others and gives them maximum 10 points. But in the case the scale from 1 to 10 of points do not work, and some essays are overestimated and some essays are drop down. In my opinion it is a bad problem with this Contest rating process.

Sergey Fedosin

Dear Thomas,

As someone interested in both physics and music, I found your essay very interesting, and indeed eye-opening. You cover a lot of ground in different areas music theory in just one short paper, and I think this may increase the likelihood that some of your arguments escape notice. I looked at your website, and if I may make a suggestion, it would be helpful to interested persons if

a) you could include some samples that allow the listener to directly compare music according to the tempered scale against the properly tuned one.

b) you could have dedicated web pages for each of the areas in which your framework leads to a better understanding of aspects of music theory.

Finally, it seems to me that among those interested in your work may be

a) music instrument manufacturers

b) musicians, both composers and performers

c) music theorists

d) physicists

e) architects

f) physicians

g) public health officials

h) entrepreneurs and venture capitalists

And each group among this "target audience" has obviously different perspectives, backgrounds, levels of and need for understanding aspects of your work. So, if you have not already done so, you may wish to differentiate your approach towards each group. For example you might consider having sections in your website dedicated to addressing each group separately.

At any rate, your essay was very interesting, and I wish you all the best.

Armin

PS. I noticed that you designed an automatic prescription filling progam. Ha, another commonality, as I am (still) a pharmacist by profession.

    • [deleted]

    • Post #45

    Dear Tom,

    Thank you so much for your beautifully written article. So much important truth in it!

    Yes, yes, I remember our performances at St. John the Divine and in Valparaiso so well - and how the clarity of hearing or lack thereof made all the difference.

    As ever,

    Nina

      • [deleted]

      • Post #46

      Armin

      Thinks for the post.

      I am currently creating a new Web page in which I will explore many of the things you suggest. I will also put examples of some of my music and some samples of tempered and perfectly tuned music as well.

      Reading and responding to the essays here has proved to be a delightful but time-consuming enterprise.

      The prescription program was written for a psychiatrist who deals a lot with drug patients. The details required by the Feds and the prescription forms meant she was spending many hours writing out prescriptions. I was able to automate the process to satisfy both the Feds and the pharmacies and now he does the whole things in fifteen to twenty minutes. It was an interesting challenge.

      Tom Wagner

      • [deleted]

      • Post #47

      Thanks Nina

      I am slowly making progress in my notion that the underlying theory of music which, apparently few really understand, is more important to physics than formerly imagined. I am going to start putting things on a new Web page and even writing some blogs.

      I am hopefully going to prove some of the tenets of the Structural Resonance paper and that should help my project considerably.

      I am going to attempt to use the Internet and programs such as Kickstarter to get a performance ot The Wheat Remains. The work gets a lot of attention but if I submit it to Broadway producers I am told it is not for Broadway (I agree) but if I submit it to Opera companies I am told it is very lovely but it does not sound like an opera. What is an opera supposed to sound like?

      Some year ago I refused a commission from the Met for the Wheat Remains. The Met will commission a work but they will not insure that they will produce it. I do not think would have produced this work and in that case the work would be dead. Wish me luck

      Tom

      Write a Reply...