Online Opera
Skteches, scenes, arias & ditties from 'Please DO not **use Wet Paint'

online opera: minutes 100709 



Written by D. Bond

Friday, 09 July 2010 21:43 
"some people say there is a place you go to after you die, a perfect place, a place called heaven, and there you'll live forever. we are ashamed to live on a planet with such belief." [Dabo working on his opening address for the AGM] [Doba is confident, procrastinating on the rhythmic square [Boda is lolling in nocturnal bliss sublime. [Bado is feigning laryngitis planning for the AGM on course: "we come from infinite space. not from the space out there, but the space in here, and we have assimilated this world. we are bonded to this earth. BADO: don't forget to tell them resistance is futile. DABO Right! resistance is futile. [Dabo keeps scribbling Grud. now there's a good name! [Doba gets first Rhythmic Square© hopping.  tuneful. PROCEDURAL MOTIONS AND DELAYS Be it resolved the Bond Institute intensify plans on its bid to create its first gargantuan monstrosity of an opera on the grounds that the main female character is a cheap slut. First: Rev. Bado Second: Dr. Doba [Doba ponders deeply. interactivity of the RhythmBox© is critical. level measuring, trend measurements, Dabo blanks out, continues his musings: everyone is a walking opera. 
Last Updated on Sunday, 11 July 2010 00:57 

online opera: sketching 100807 



Written by D. Bond

Saturday, 07 August 2010 11:31 
great. crashed and all notes and work from the past week lost. there was some good stuff in that too. damn. here's a synopsis of the loss: sketches for a musical paper about the harmonic matrix, calculations of integer series to harmonic plane in pow2, divisions of the day from 24 hours to seconds, thoughts after watching Feynman explain quantum electrodynamics, ideas/musings about the nature of light, work in Max that took the 3d images and applied them to the fractal feedback generator, time and form workpage that divided time and stored the interval and current time together in a coll and stepped through the list triggering formal breaks, a whole week. fvck.  by way of reconstruction, in short, I have conceived of a composition, again, no beginning or end, but uses two found objects as formal consideration: the day and its division down to seconds. this is again, 24*60*60 = 1*2*3*4 * 5*3*2*2 * 5*3*2*2 [apparently someone thought about this] 2,2,2,3 2,2,3,5 2,2,3,5 = 2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,5,5 = 2^7 * 3^3 * 5^2 naturally the week, 7 is next. it sound like this: [drumbeat] 60 bpm [i work hard at this. maybe not at the right things, like selfpromotion, and finding gigs, but thought is hard to sustain. it requires solitude and concentration. the phone seldom rings, the tv disconnected [excepting sytycd], the game an exercise in hygiene. i will create this composition, to the dismay of many I am sure.]  ah yes, i wrote earlier "talk to me of god and I will talk of an 'it'. gender cannot apply, so be rid of it. i wonder why it makes us think we are divided only then to reveal the hideous truth. is it some kind of joke?" and since computers love to lull us into a sense of reliable complacency only to reveal the dark insidious truth of their unreliability, we pause now to 'save'. WTF!? phew. after a minute of frozen grinding, I, now am among "the saved" from what, I cannot surely imagine.  this would be a good place for a long mystical speculation on the number 60, its significance to early civilizations, hexadecimal systems, 1,2,3,4,5,6 all divide evenly, etc. it is also nice to note the very superstitious 108 [2^2 * 3^3} contained within the division of the day. with mind connected to the past, seeing directly the ones thinking the same, we all understand, it is arbitrary, speaking only to our own understanding of ourselves. what is time? time is the movement of sensation with respect to memory. time is also projection, or idea of future. time is rhythm and pulse. but can it ever be said that time moves?   hooray, i did not lose the 'max/msp form workpage'. something was saved before  lol 86,400.000 the second divided further into milliseconds [not nearly as mystical as before, but again speaks of modernity's preoccupation with convenience and ease.] [don't delay. answer me this: is there an ultimate frame rate?  resist these: think of the male figure. this entire structure designed to find the maturity, safety, security and time to copulate, ejecting sperm out and away. think of the female figure. the entire structure designed to find the maturity, safety, security and time to copulate, producing an egg, with womb, the site of conception. that point of contact, that sensation, occurring along the midline of the body [air, food, sex, excretion,*navel] is the one certain factor connecting all higher animal life forms [possibly greater scope]. part of my true nature is this function or action. this network of bliss is foundational in the synaptic junction of eternity. sweet, eh?  i don't fucking believe it. i just finished outlining the function of the harmonic matrix AND AGAIN IT IS LOST? brushing away dust, i triggered a 'refresh page' keyboard shortcut  horray! thanks, for the time savings os. WHAT THE HEK? I HATE THIS FEKING THING! i'm sure as fuck past thinkers didn't keep spilling ink on their pages as much as mine disappear into thin air!  Harmonic Calculus 101 FORMAL DEFINITION OF THE HARMONIC MATRIX Define the compound function: x≠ 0, +/∞ x ∈ I (integers) f(x) = { = x x > 0 { = 1/x x_{ }< 0
This connects the harmonic series to its inversion [Ma to Pa, hence the Sa series]. S = { ... 1/3, 1/2, 1/1, 2, 3, 4 ...} This can be mapped to the complex plane by the following: a+bi = ab = a^{1}b^{1} abi = a/b = a^{1}b^{1} a+bi = b/a = a^{1}b^{1} abi = 1/ab = a^{1}b^{1} All ratios r, 0<r<∞ are expressed [nonuniquely] as pairs (x_{1},x_{2}) of S by the formula r = f(x_{1}) * f(x_{2}) There always exist integers x_{1}, x_{2} such that r can be arbitrarily close to any quantity. These can be viewed as x,y pair, graphed on a line. i.e. order doesn't matter. Resulting in the following mapping of the integers (≠ 0) { ... 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8...} => { ... 2^{3 }, 2^{log2(7)}, 2^{log2(6)}, 2^{log2(5)}, 2^{2 }, 2^{log2(3)}, 2^{1}, [2^{0}, 2^{+0} ], 2^{1}, 2^{log2(3)}, 2^{2 }, 2^{log2(5)}, 2^{log2(6)}, 2^{log2(7)}, 2^{3 }... } smooth out the compound function into one logarithmic curve base 2. S(x) = 2^{(x/x)*(log2x)} S(x) = x^{x/x }where x≠0 ∈ I ∞<x<∞ [N.B. log_{2} is significant as the octave relationship, where r = {r} + [r], identifying octave and pitch class. log_{3} corresponds to the cycle of fifths, log_{5} the cycle of thirds, and so on. Naturally, these are all taken together, vis. the Prime Pyramid.] The Harmonic Matrix is defined as the plane S*S. H(S,S) = (1/x, ... 1 ... x)(1/y ... 1 ... y) H(x,y) = r = 2^{(x/x)*(log2x)} * 2^{(y/y)*(log2y)} H(x,y) = r = x^{x/x}y^{y/y} The harmonic plane has 4 distinct quadrants:  + + + y/x xy label: [O] [P]   +  1/xy x/y [M] [N] quadrant [o] & its inversion [n], x_{1} > 0, x_{2 }< 0 and x_{1} < 0, x_{2 }> 0 contain the classical lambdoma* [*known to Pythagoras, surprisingly not mentioned by Partch, rediscovered by the ___ [On the Relations of Tone. Vogel], and again by ___, and again by author, 2007. It is only obvious once someone shows it to you!] the entire quantized spectrum of all possible values for r exists within these 2 quadrants. x1,x2 ∈ℤ <=> r ∈ ℚ every ratio r can be expressed as an angle: θ= atan(r) all values of r, 0 < r <∞, are dually represented in the harmonic plane. that is, given a value for r, there exist 3 curves describing r y=r/x x<0, y = rx x>0, y = x/r or 2 curves [using the 'dirty trick' used before]: y = r/x y = xr^{x/x} there is an axis of symmetry, through points (a,a),(a,a); y=x H(x1,x2) = H(x2,x1) & axis of inversion. (a,a), (a,a); y=x H(x1,x2) = 1/H(x1,x2) Quantization refers to a stepwise level of measurement, maximum value for +/(x_{1}, x_{2}) = q/q. Summarize: H[x_{1},x_{2}] where q is the value of quantization 1≤q<∞ 1 q q^{2} 1/q 1 q 1/q^{2} 1/q 1 [aside  reduction of formula to x^{1}*y^{1} limits range 1/x to x, 1/y to y. [4 connected lambdoma]. 1 q 1 1/q 1 1/q 1 q 1
[even further afield: extension to a third dimension, resulting in a 8part cube [compare IChing trigrams], with values of q from 1/q^{3} to q^{3}: [ 1/q 1 q^{ }] [ 1 q q^{2 }] [ 1 q^{2 } q^{3 }] [1/q^{2} 1/q 1 ] [1/q 1 q ] [ 1 q q^{2 }] [1/q^{3} 1/q^{2} 1/q ] [1/q^{2} 1/q 1 ] [1/q 1 q ]  analog to the physical string values of r <= 1 are found in the upper left {(q,0),q} and right edge {q, (0,q)} r = tan(θ) r = q/qx where x is the ratio of the cut string [o<x<1. eg. the open string =1/1, 1/2 the string = 2, 31/64 = 64/33 etc. implies an inverse string when r>=1:
r = tan  quantization of the surface. a point for contrast and comparison is the quantization of matrix using vs. a smooth graph using the reals
is there one equation that covers the plane in terms of magnitude and rotation? Given x_{1},x_{2} ∈ S x_{1},x_{2 }> 0 then r is defined by magnitude = m = (x_{1}^2 + x_{2}^2) ^ 1/2 angle = θ = atan(x_{1}/x_{2}) or atan(x_{2}/x_{1}) ratio = r = m^{2} sin θ cos θ The inverse holds for x_{1},x_{2 }< 1. m = (1/x_{1}^{2} + 1/x_{2}^{2}) ^1/2 ratio = r = m^{2} sin θ cos θ In the lambdoma regions, x_{1} > 1, x_{2 }< 1. r = atan(x_{1}*x_{2}) At any level of quantization, across all 4 quadrants, the product of all r of magnitude m [0<m<∞] = 1. Please graph the function for r against θ if m=1. Oscillates between m^{2} and 1/m^{2} 
Last Updated on Saturday, 01 January 2011 19:00 
online opera: sketching 100812 



Written by D. Bond

Friday, 13 August 2010 10:02 
no matter how you slice it, the last step up the scale is always an octave leap thru a whole new universe. REPORT: sir, we built a device that maps a circular path through the harmonic matrix given various quantization levels [magnitudes]. each curve is unique. but you already knew that didn't you? "two humped camels." 2π, 0, 2π thank you god. nothing new under the sun. q> ∞, r > 1/q2 you cannot measure emptiness. this is not to say you are trying to see how much it takes to fill up a thing called emptiness, but that with measurement there is always something measured. eMinstrel or eMinstrel ? shows up with a laptop, a projector, camera, wiiremote sings forlorn poetry from ages gone by: the simplest coding of a square p=q Harmonic Matrix is the diagonal [x1, x2] = [1,q], [2,(q1)], [3,(q2)], ... [(q/2),(q/2)] ... [q2, ],[(q1),2], [(q),1]
Congratulations! Talisman Upgrade Lvl. 10. New powers unlocked. === Friday 13, August 2010 would have been an unlucky day had the talismans not been forged. ;D is the universe a 'hostile' place? 1. it is incorrect to emotionally evaluate the universe. it is not describable. it simply is. 2. this is, by definition, the most suitable, safest place for 'my' awareness to exist. if it were not so, it would be elsewhere or it wouldn't exist at all. valid retort: food. this universe has been contrived by the IT [a ridiculous term for the collective global sum total of all past generations teaching me to think] as a suitable place for experiment, inquiry, debate. do it. don't delay. all bluetoothed together i oogle & google u shall we meet? or retreat wireless boogaloo
SHOPPING LIST cigarette girl tray ornate hand mirror Scene: COMPOSER you want to see the music beforehand? but that's impossible! MANAGER I can't sell air and empty promises. I need to show the producers something, or you're fired. COMPOSER fine. you'll have something on your desk in the morning. you won't like it, but you'll have it. MANAGER by the way, we fired the orchestra. COMPOSER what?! MANAGER you claim you never needed them anyway, so now you're free to write that opera. COMPOSER [tears] you... you... can't... do that. MANAGER now reason to delay now. you've got the technology. get to it. chop chop! Manager exeunt.
 Corporate Lackey Bond expecting a pay cut [projected $100 earned for work over the next year (~3.6 cents per day), is forced to take a second job as eTroubadour. Stage name "Dorian Band" [alt: does anyone know someone hiring a person to teach adults who think they know everything a course on advanced music theory?]  DR BODA we have a perfect life already. it is quiet. why would we intentionally expose ourselves to anything of this kind? DR DABO to teach, perchance to learn. REV BADO to preach, perchance to burn. DR DOBA ... mcos(theta), msin(theta) are the points, x1, x2. using two points from Sa, we represent the entire matrix freeing us to use the third dimension as a third axis of transposition to reveal, voila: THE HARMONIC BABY RATTLE input x,y,z: {0,255} =>{1,1}=>{q,q} various mapping. PATENT THAT!  the harmonic matrix just begs to be rotated by 45 degrees. convert cartopol +3pi/4 poltocar, voila. HarmoniX TrackPads MouseX AGAIN> PATENT THAT! just one catch: not so simple if the quantization is not a square [p≠q].  Article Rant Brainstorming Have you ever wondered what is it that everyone is listening to? What is so important that people need to be connected to each other all the time? MONEY MAKING SCHEME: ONE HOUR BUSINESS MIND MUSIC MEDITATION LUNCHTIME NOW OPEN FOR BUSINESS "THANK YOU FOR USING THE PAY WHAT YOU CANCAN."
 Sunday Aug. 15 3:27 a.m. invented THE HEARTSONG pray answer me, what is the meaning of beauty? [i'm crying too much to even suggest ©]  noonish video review  Lecture by Feynmann: Law of Gravitation. it is stupid, I'm sure, to ask this, but is "inertia" the correct description? what exactly is a straight line and from what perspective is it considered? the flattest plane on earth is curved if large enough, no? what direction would a puck on an ice rink [or some other example of frictionless motion] move? there is always first the assumption of an unchanging frame of reference, an arbitrary definition, and from that measurement. alternate geometry: on a sphere a straight line is the maximum distance path that connects a point to itself, = a line segment equal to the circumference of the sphere. i can then measure distance in relation to the cycle, as a length and an angle. by what geometry then do I know the concept of 'straight line'? this may be something, but it is confusing. it must be a bad question.  I've never seen pictures in music. I recall studying music in college and the teacher put on a record [LP? remember those?] of Don Quixote by Strauss. The music played, and at some point, my classmates all laughed. I couldn't see what was so funny. The teacher explained saying this is where the Don falls off his horse. I asked the teacher about my inability to see pictures while listening to music and she recommended that I try harder, 'it will come'. It never has.  It may be heretic of me to say, but I am not concerned for 'new music', or the future of western classical art music. The fact that the orchestra has persisted as long as it has is amazing to me. but soon it will likely be dead as dodo. Orchestras may exist as museum timepieces, preserved under glass, but apart from extensive recordings and video footage, the whole field of 12tone ET music will pass as a short lived, 200 hundred year, fad. The coming revolution in music is in favour of precision, exactitude and complexity beyond the capacity of our crude tools. It is not bereft of emotion, as human interactivity is the central theme. This goes along with the synthesis of technology and human beings. With computer assisted composition, what need is there of complicated inaccurate transcription processes, notations, instrumental reproductions, when the making of music becomes spontaneous, synchronous with human gestures, accompanying our every moment? What reason is there to ever listen again to the same thing twice? Why record? Why try to save the moment of existence that is music? Some would argue for a boiling down of ideas into musical utterances, development of themes, revelation, climax, apotheoses, Demand that a musical piece be respected, repeated, Is a composition a soliloquy of abstraction, an uninterruptable exposition? or is a composition an environment of interactive possibilities, potentials, connectivity? why not a bit of both?  Hoping to experience cutting edge performances, presentations and demonstrations of new computer music by the world's leading pioneers in the field, I approached the International Computer Music Conference with great anticipation. I was greeted with a hectic paper and concert schedule spread out across Manhattan. There were a many interesting technical papers, people working in areas similar to mine, and I took some delight in seeing how my work in theory, intonation and time structures, if applied to the work of others, would solve some of the difficulties and challenges they expressed. For example, the field of 'chord distances' [imo] is completely misguided and irrationally complex; eyeball tracking technology currently mapped to glissandi and chromatic scales could become a viable musical instrument if the 'harmonic matrix' were applied; my understanding of an algorithm presented to create random musical structure was anticipated by my work in discovering the 'golden matrix'; and I learned that my whimsical musings on 'Harmonic Go' and 'Musical Chess' have true academic potential. I came away with at least 5 ideas for paper presentations to next year's conference. Expecting to be provoked with musical ideas, I found myself thinking more about the politics of art. The conference seemed to me oddly conservative. This was most obvious in the concert schedule, which focused on tape music, and acoustic instruments that may [or may not] have been electronically processed. [Honestly, solo piano music?!] Surprisingly, the dance recital included no sensors or interfaces for the dancers, offering only traditional contemporary dance performed to prerecorded works. A big buzz at the conference was the release of the iPad, and a few were to be seen in the hands of participants, but nothing about this topic was included as part of the formal proceedings. An actual wiiremote was briefly sighted on stage, and there was an electronically modified didgeridoo, but apart from that, there were no pure electronic instruments in the performance schedule, and the computer itself was almost invisible at the conference. In all, somewhat disappointing and much too 'old school' for my tastes. After 2 days of passively agonizing about the staid atmosphere, I decided I could no longer withhold releasing my own ideas, set up my laptop and put on a wellreceived, impromptu presentation to some new friends from Cornell University and IRCAM [with whom I spent the remainder of the conference discussing various topics in music]. Shortly thereafter, I learned of 'the UnConference', billed as 'an informal gathering of artists, thinkers, dreamers and other troublemakers.' Here I was afforded the opportunity to present my theory of harmony to a small group of approximately 8 people (most delighted that a Japanese Physics professor immediately understood the significance of my work, asking to photograph the equations I had written on the board. "Very interesting," he said). Later, I presented a realtime algorithmic composition to the group and demonstrated the harmonic matrix using a computer tablet as interface. At the very least, for better of worse, my ideas are now in the world! Ironically, I never managed to hear my own piece of music being played as part of the 60x60 concert series. There wasn't time, and besides I already knew what it sounded like! It will be played again, and is even now making its way around the globe. Inspiring as it was to be in New York, participate and present at the conference, my real joy came from meeting others, making new friends, holding conversations with legends in the field such as Pauline Oliveros and Miller Puckette, and discussing the technical and philosophical aspects of our art. There is a vision emerging of a new music, touched upon by Pauline in her keynote address, quite beyond the wildest imaginings of the past where bluetoothed together, we all are interconnected, participating in the construction and realization of an everevolving work with as many composers as there are audience members. What then of traditional aesthetics, notations, performance practices? I return home more convinced than ever that the ideas I am developing are new, original and important. Simultaneously creating new music, tweaking my original musical interfaces and devices, pursing performance and presentation opportunities, I am currently embroiled in the study of geometry, number theory and linear algebra in the course of writing of a technical theoretic paper on the harmonic matrix, all the while pondering the philosophical implications of discovering a method of making music that is harmonious, precise and capable of being integrated into every aspect of our increasingly technological society. I am more aware than ever how radical my work is and how challenging it may be to find acceptance in a very divisive and territorial community  not because the music is aurally difficult  it isn't  but because it is an affront to the conventional ways of thinking and acting artistically. Yet, I am not to be dissuaded from this work, neither academically or commercially. I have confidence that the public and academia will immediately understand and appreciate my work provided I can find a way to expose them to it. In a conversation, when I asked why it was so difficult to present new ideas into this visibly conflicted and divided musical community, a new friend from the conference, IRCAM composer/programmer living in New York, Leigh Smith, replied "Because the stakes are so low." Not sure that I fully agree, I concede that for the individual ego, the hope of riches or being adored as 'the next Beethoven' is a hopeless cause, but to the development of arts in general, the design, development and integration of new technology with human sensibility is an essential component of the radical transformation of human society that is currently overwhelming us. In this, we are witnessing the arising of a new art, and with it, new hope for the future. Please stay tuned... 
Last Updated on Saturday, 01 January 2011 19:14 
online opera: sketching 100817 



Written by

Monday, 16 August 2010 17:43 
I am living in a bucket of crabs. Poor saps with old, outdated, antiquated notions, those of no ambition, no understanding, seeking some personal reward when it is unwarranted, unwilling to work, listen, learn, and seeing me struggle as I do to understand, obstruct, laugh and condemn. I will never understand this. It is hardly worth my attention. But why, I wonder, do I behave this way?  Outline Harmonic Matrices: Practical Model of Harmony i. Prime Pyramid the harmonic series the prime numbers power series  base pattern log2  the octave identity log2 the tritone sqrt(2) ii. The Harmonic Matrix a. formal Definition of b. analysis iii.The Power Matrix  caught in the bucket with the others, a clever crab would make a bucket within a bucket. once inside, isolating himself, unmolested, climb to the top of his bucket, then to the top of the other, and out. QED.  I recall sitting down at the piano as an ambitious young chap thinking to myself I will compose the music of a storm. I had immense joy bashing away at the keys, imitating rain drops and thunder claps, but putting all those little dots on paper seemed hopeless. For the past 30 years I have been thinking my difficulty arises because I don't know enough about musical notation. I now realize, it is because I don't know enough about storms.  Harmonic Calculus 101  continued. FORMAL DEFINITION OF THE ITERATIVE POWER MATRIX (PYTHAGOREAN MATRIX) Recalling the Sa series, S = {... 1/4, 1/3, 1/2, 1, 2, 3, 4 ...} which can also be expressed
S(x) = 2^{(x/x)*(log2x)} or S(x) = x^{x/x }where x≠0 ∈ I ∞<x<∞ The Iterative Power matrix is given by S^{S} P(x,y) = r = 2^{(x/x)*(log2x)} ^ 2^{(y/y)*(log2y)} P(x,y) = r = x^{x/x}^y^{y/y} These values become extreme, so it is wise to limit [constrain?] the S series to between 1/2 and 2, or 1 and 2 before raising to the power. The result again is limited and the pattern can be seen. [right click for larger image] Yes, the highlighted cell is the square root of 2. Go figure. 
Last Updated on Friday, 20 August 2010 12:00 
online opera: sketching 100820 



Written by D. Bond

Friday, 20 August 2010 22:03 
I know it sounds like pseudo science, and I admit I have no real understanding of the evidence, or mathematics that form the basis of the many prevailing assumptions that are going around these days, but I simply cannot see how the universe was ever 'created', by a big bang, a god, or by any means at all. There is not much difference between the bigbang theorist and the religious faithful. Certainly more similarity than either would care to admit! the two theories are practically identical if one examines them carefully. in both cases, the individual espousing the theory takes a 'god's eye view' of their total image of reality [which may or may not be correct], reversing, condensing or erasing and then 'creating' their universe according to a belief. Some imagine a god doing something, or some theory doing something, with themselves already present, observing the action. The whole scenario is absurd in that at least three things are presupposed before the existence of anything: god [or the laws of physics], empty space [or a place to put the creation], and the observer [a.k.a holy ghost?]. The presupposed existence of these three leads to an infinitely recursive argument about their creation. There is no sense in it at all. The conclusion is drawn that the universe is mindmade by examination of its constituents. If there were no mind seeking answer to 'where did all this come from?' there would be no universe to try to understand. What is the state of the mind that inquires unceasingly into its own origination? Certainly a mind understands that it is not ever created. The observable physical facts of expansion, do not prevent relaxation, circulation or respiration, or if we are indeed witnessing a local birth, there is no reason to exempt the village or globe of universal becoming. Yet a boundary is found. In the limit of measurement with respect to the assumption of a fundamental unit, limits are always the square and inverse squares of the measuring scale. I offer a hypothesis: symmetries notwithstanding, time is not reversible. Talking of a past beginning is not meaningful.There is no '0' in time. To see a group of stars, the light I see would have to be bent past all those galaxies in the way. I live in a snowglobe lense of gravitational shells proportional to distance and for something further away, the straight line between two objects must become more and more curved to accommodate the influence of gravity. have come from further and further away. why would this imply there is any 'expansion'? doesn't this give the illusion of increased motion? Not doubting the results of measuring redshifts, but how can one be sure they are interpreting the results correctly? and why would they imply a past convergence? Distances, once measured should always be placed on a string. Here is one half of the string = twice the distance, three quarters the string, 4 times the distance. Measure out your galaxies carefully and plot them in this way. Remember, there is no absolute unit, just ratios of the assumed unit. Give me a different string and the same galaxies are mapped differently. Are we then modulating from string to string? From a high pitch to a lower one? What is the length of the string we currently use?  aha! http://www.setterfield.org/000docs/Redshift.htm#whatredshift agh. it was all going so well until he mentioned 'the Scriptures'!? [capital S]? and what's this, 'the universe stops after 'initial expansion''? dear god. it either expands or it doesn't. heavens.  it just proves my point: you find what you're looking for.  have i been violent recently? intellectually? is my insistence on precision and accuracy a violent thing? should i be more accepting of people making false claims? i expect no one to take me seriously when i examine the fundamental assumptions of science. i expect to be disbelieved without mathematical justification and scientific proof, so why should i take the claims of others with any less degree of scorn? i expect one thing for a person to earn my respect: show me something new that wasn't copied from somewhere else, and should it not contradict the known, I will respect your authority on that subject. No amount of regurgitation, no matter how voluminous or technical impresses me. The specialties are dark places where only academics dare tread. i won't pretend to know the known just because I know about it. & i won't pretend i don't know that you don't know either.  Harmonic Calculus 101 INTRO In the following, an outline for a complete theoretical framework for harmony will be established. This will serve as the basis for analysis of common practice, as well as suggest future directions for exploration. The model of harmony presented is used to expose the geometry of music, linking the abstract mathematical framework to the physical world, and vise versa. To begin, the integers are compared to the harmonic series. Harmony relates not only to pitch, but also to time.  I'm getting better at not losing a day's work. I have safeguards if only I remember I've put them in place! But surely, today's work would have been better off lost! <<copy&paste>> SAVE everything EVERYTIME everywheres ?  August 21: work worth saving! DR DOBA lectures: MECHANICS OF QUANTUM HARMONICS oscillating drone on wiiremote trigger  : 1/2+3/8  1/3 :  Review notes: Susskind Cosmology Lecture 2 Is it not possible to construct a coordinate system that changes uniformly, carrying the contents of space [expansion/contraction] with it uniformly? In this way there is no way to detect the change. In the scenario Susskind posits, of a universe changing by a scalar as a function of time, he says the coordinates of a particular galaxy don't change, i.e. the galaxies stay the same size yet space in between them grows. This is of course impossible. A galaxy positioned at a central point x,y,z has a width or thickness of x+/thickness, y+/ width, z+/ depth. Any expansion or contraction changes the coordinates of the edges even if the center is considered fixed. [this guy's brains must be leaking out his pecker] it is not reasonable to assume that metersticks or any object is noticeably different in spite of the curvature of space. as i understand scale factor, there is no factor that would ever result in a collapse or zero dimension. arbitrarily close to zero relative to some measure, but unless the scale factor is ... this is similar to the zoom function on my feedback fractal generator. 18:20 a=0 ? means the galaxies are squashed together? NO! a=0 obliterates the universe. it is a senseless scale factor. if you want to collapse things, you use a small factor .000....x or whatever and a long period of time, and still no unification can ever be said to occur. i can always scale again. i've never heard such a confused understanding. 'as A gets to 0?' what? this is improper understanding of scaling. 'as 'A' gets huge' is possible, but A can never equal 0. NEVER. 26:30  you can't think of the scale factor as the distance between. it is the rate this distance appears to change. [if he'd just use some numbered example he'd see this error] t=1 a=1.5 x=1 y=2, t=2 a=1.5, x=1.5 y=3, t=3 a=1.5 x=2.25 y=4.5 From this I can calculate velocity relative to a given point. 27:48 yes! I am at the center of the universe measuring outwards. There is no other way to see the universe. sorry. It is the universal perspective, as I'm sure will be pointed out in a moment... 'printer has demons that mixes things up and loses pages"  your printer is no different than your mind man. newtons' theorem  sweet! ok. how the scale factor changes with time. as above a is not necessarily fixed. FRW  Friedman Robertson Walker cosmology equations. 1:32 oh dear. you can't deduce the big bang by setting t=0 when t was originally where you began measuring. honestly, how do physicists live with the doublethink around relativistic transformation of distances? the whole thing still works if the galaxies are shrinking and the scale factor=1.  Sunday August 22 Lecture 3: Susskind. Stanford  Cosmology again, point out that if the scalar factor is applied to a space, then it is not completely correct to say the objects inside are 'at rest'. the fools are likely dividing by the derivative of a constant. and I don't care how many times you square it.  Model: various mappings are possible between mass and distance, and pitch and rhythm for example. assume a fixed point. assign a distance to metronome. measure the distance from fixed point. send a pulse to the object. when it receives it, it sends one back. describe the beat and pitch changes as the tempo varies.  Harmonic Calculus 101 INTRO This paper presents a complete theoretical framework for harmony. An exhaustive examination of just intonation, ratio and proportion, will be used to describe a model of relationships applicable to all relative measurements. This model of harmony exposes a geometry of music, linking the abstract mathematical framework to the physical world, and vise versa. This will serve as the basis for analysis of common practice in music, as well as suggest future directions for exploration. To begin, the integers are compared to the harmonic series.  perhaps its better to write the introduction after the paper.  what is required? length? audience?  besides the ustring is not properly defined yet! damn  a prohibitive $50 clams, no submission info. perhaps use contact info, once paper is in rough draft form: http://www.smcmnet.info/index.html  Consider the integers {n=1,2,3...} as a set of scalars of a given frequency, f, resulting in the harmonic series. [Diagram: notation in music, frequency, ratio ] Revisit the addition maths: f1 + f2 = f3 Replace with scalar multiplication. Define harmonic matrix. Introduce concept of quantization level of whole. q/q = 1  Susskind 1:00:00 it may follow only if you agree with the assumption of expansion. because that's where the age came from. groan. mind u, the numbers 1/2 and 2/3 are so beautiful in harmonic theory, I wonder if anything can be made of this ;P again, regarding the scale factor, it may be changing, but perhaps not linearly [i doubt there is any linear scale that is not ultimately a scalar], but by another scalar? 1:22  he just described the reason for spiral arms of galaxies. why not say it as such? [i haven't watched what's coming yet, but please don't introduce dark matter to fix your equation. look at it more as water going down a plugged sink how does that concentric ring view of universe with boundary of last reflection etc. fit with homogeneity and isotropy? that mass  density equation doesn't explain why the mass is distributed along a plane. one postulates a beginning and a end from their position in the center. agh. they might just as well be talking about the number of feathers on an angel's wings. 
Last Updated on Monday, 23 August 2010 14:00 




Page 9 of 12 
