pat at mamalala.org
Sat Nov 17 00:28:38 CET 2007
Mathieu Bouchard a écrit :
> On Thu, 15 Nov 2007, Ypatios Grigoriadis wrote:
>> If i may now borrow the theory and terminus Arrow of time by Arthur
>> Eddington, according to which time is the fourth dimension in space,
> Afaik, Arthur Eddington made the first English translation of Einstein.
> This is probably what got him in that 4th dimension thing, or perhaps it
> was the other way around (that he had thought of a 4th dimension concept
> and sought in Einstein's work a confirmation of it). I don't really know.
> Anyway: in some way, the past is equally hard to "postdict" as the
> future is hard to predict, but it depends on what one looks for. We are
> used to think of the past using what remains from it, but almost every
> event of the past is virtually unreachable due to having been blurred
> beyond repair. For any set of things you observe, everything else is
> left unobserved. The attention span of observers is tiny compared to
> what could become relevant to the observers later.
I'm very happy to read anything else than space-time gibbering, thanks.
>> (One could wonder: Exactly how straight is this axis? Could it bend
>> and go back? Of course! In music this is called a "reprise".)
> "reprise", "beat" and such, are just larger scale splittings of the time
> dimension in the same way that frequency separates from time. Reprises
> and beats and rhythms are full of periodic patterns, just like the sound
> waves themselves, but at a different scale, which doesn't make the
> physical ear resonate anymore, but appeal to the brain's taste for
> sequencing. Thus a beat may have frequencies like 4 Hz and 2 Hz and
> 0.333 Hz in it (whatever is roughly in that range), whereas larger-scale
> song structures may have frequencies like 0.1 and 0.01 Hz. You could
> call rhythm and song structure a third dimension of music.
More information about the Pd-list