[PD] tabread4~~

[Patrice Colet]

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.