Is there a right and wrong in music? Eduard Heyning needs to study Alain Connes

I had contacted a music composer, Eduard Heyning, who did his master's thesis on Pythagorean alchemical music but in reality was promoting the wrong music mathematics of Plato! So I pointed out his mathematical error, Eduard Heyning, and his first response was to disclaim his master's thesis! His next response is now to say:

I have a problem with the negativity that seems to underlie much of your writing, your fight of what you think is truth versus lies. In music, there is no right or wrong. If you would really identify with Orthodox Pythagoreanism, you could never enjoy Ravel being played in equal temperament.

What is not realized is that music theory is the origin of Western mathematics which is then a "supply side" system as a total philosophy, promoted by Plato. So as math professor Luigi Borzacchini stated, this is a deep "cognitive bias" in perception of thinking - and as he states, due to the wrong music theory, there is a "deep pre-established disharmony" that drives the "evolutive principle" of Western science! Does math professor Borzacchini reject Western science? No!

He simply embraces this truth, with its deep paradoxical implications, and with his book Plato's Computer, argues that our future will inevitably be some kind of artificial intelligence take over by machines. This is, of course, exactly what I discovered, right after my master's thesis, was done, as the corroboration of my research: The Actual Matrix Plan based on the "music logarithmic spiral." haha. So I knew at that moment my master's thesis was spot on but I still did not realize that my math was still wrong, regarding the music theory. I knew there was a contradiction but I was not sure how.

This was my response to Eduard Heyning:

 Eduard - Do you think Fields Medal math professor Alain Connes is wrong about the math? He can enjoy Chopin, which he practices playing at home, yet he knows the truth of the music theory as being noncommutative! haha. I recommend you study his overview of noncommutative math. Then go back to the music theory. Thanks for the feedback, drew

Geometry and the Quantum arXiv:1703.02470v1 [hep-th] 7 Mar 2017

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.02470

by A Connes - ‎2017 - ‎Cited by 5 - ‎Related articles

Mar 7, 2017 - The ideas of noncommutative geometry are deeply rooted in both physics, with the predominant influence of the discovery of Quantum Mechanics, and in mathematics where it emerged from the great variety of examples of “noncommutative spaces” i.e. of geometric spaces which are best encoded ...

The 4-dimensional spin toroid from noncommutative phase - of Alain Connes - see the connection to Chinese music theory below

So I went over the error I had pointed out in Eduard Heyning's master's thesis about the Pythagorean Comma. But this error is so deeply rooted - that even Nobel Physicist Brian Josephson who told me, at first, he didn't understand music theory well enough to comment on my research, later said that I did not understand music theory!! haha. This is how deep the mathematical cognitive bias is of symmetric mathematics. A Fields Medal is a lot harder to get than the Nobel Prize - so I defer to Alain Connes. Even though the Josephson Junction is being utilized to prove the spin 1/2 phonon ether source of reality! Just last night I emailed Nobel physicist Josephson the latest corroboration of this claim, in the journal Nature, no less. As I just previously blogged.

 So a regular reader of this blog wanted me to post the link to the Chinese music tuning scale - of Chinese philosophy professor Patrick Doran. As I had sent Eduard Heyning before - the Pythagorean Comma in the Chinese music scale is defined differently - or I should say, the same as Sir James Jeans, the quantum physicist, defines the Pythagorean Comma in Science and Music.

With the exception of B#, or the ditonic comma,[10] ratio 531441/524288, Table 11.2 shows that the Chinese and Pythagorean progression of ratios are identical,

And so this error is documented to go back to Aristotle at least! But it can be inferred from Philolaus himself as Boethius realized.

(9:8)« = 531441:262144 (531441 : 262144 — 2 : 1) : : 531441 : 524288 Having correctly derived this ratio, Boethius makes much of the difference between the two terms involved, noting: "For the comma is that [interval] by which six tones exceed the octave consonance,

So Professor Borzacchini realizes this deep cognitive bias is rooted in music theory!

These remarks raise the question of the difference between the ancient Pythagorean ‘musical’ perception as displayed in the Pythagorean idea of ‘linear number’ in Boethius [Philolaus] or in Nicomachus, and the modern ‘geometrical’ perception of the linear numerical magnitudes.

 But what was really lost, that the Chinese retained, is the truth of noncommutative phase of music theory. And it is Fields Medal Math Professor Alain Connes who rediscovered this secret. So Connes uses the same geometric irrational magnitude assumption in music theory with the fifth defined just as 3 to the 12th power and the octave defined as 2 to the 19th power. But Connes realizes that the cause of this discrepency (the Pythagorean Comma as it is typically defined as 531,441/524,288 is actually noncommutative phase!!)

 a “universal scaling system”, ... this discrete scaling manifests itself in acoustic systems, as is well known in western classical music, where the two scalings correspond, respectively, to passing to the octave (frequency ratio of 2) and transposition (the perfect fifth is the frequency ratio 3/2), with the approximate value log(3)/ log(2) ∼ 19/12 responsible for the difference between the “circulating temperament” of the Well Tempered Clavier and the “equal temperament” of XIX century music. It is precisely the irrationality of log(3)/ log(2) which is responsible for the noncommutative [complementary opposites as yin/yang] nature of the quotient corresponding to the three places {2, 3,∞}. - Alain Connes

Now look at how the real Pythagorean Comma is defined - as Sir James Jeans defined it in Science and Music: 3/2 raised to the 12 power. NOT just 3 raised to the power of 12. And so the octave is not 2 to the 19th power but rather only 2 to the 7th power. Why? Because with 2 to the 19th power and 3 to the 12th power, then the power of the 2 is already evenly divided into itself instead of being a ratio that is noncommutative to 3.

 


We can corroborate this again - the reason the ratio of
531441 : 262144 is not the real Pythagorean Comma: pdf link


 

And so Alain Connes realizes that in fact music theory is summarized as 2, 3, infinity at a zero point in space. What does that mean? It is a triple spectral definition. That means at a zero point in space you have a zero point in time with infinite frequency but at the same time you also have the frequency of 3 and 2. Which means you also have 3/2 as the wavelength for 2/3 frequency and 2/3 as the wavelength for 3/2 frequency. For example the above pdf tries to pull the same "bait and switch" lie by leaving out one of the three factors. The ratios as pitch, the frequency and the geometry as wavelength. So the author states that 2:3 is the same as 3:2 but clearly 3/2 is C to G while 2/3 is C to F and they are not the same in relation to the fundamental pitch! Despite both being a Perfect Fifth in pitch, they have noncommutative phase as frequency and wavelength:




So in fact these "wavelengths" are subwavelengths of zero space - which is to say they are reverse time or antimatter wavelengths in respect to the fundamental pitch of 1 with the frequency being superluminal momentum. Or that G=3=F at the same time, as listening to music. Instead the author of the pdf, tries to ignore that the original scale creation was based on irrational logarithms of 9/8, not just 3/2 squared as the Pythagorean claim of Philolaus. In other words, OJ Abdounur is trying to argue that 3/4 was used from 2/3 doubled because it was just closer to the octave and a simpler ratio, like a child dropping an octave to sing the same note. But the problem with that claim is that the Perfect Fourth is not the root tonic - and so dropping an octave changes to relation to the fundamental pitch from a fourth to a fifth!! 
 

And also Abdounur doesn't realize that the fourth is constructed as the harmonic mean so that the Fifth is actually also geometric mean squared and the octave is also geometric mean squared. Philolaus used 9/8 as his fundamental pitch based on the fifth squared and subdivided back into the octave with the fourth as the harmonic mean. So the fourth has to be 4/3 as the frequency, not just a "ratio" as 3:4. So he does note, above, that the solution proving the whole tone as 9/8 could not be subdivided with integers, with the above proof, was known in antiquity (from Archytas). But he does not realize that Philolaus before Archytas already constructed the scale as based on 9/8 from the geometric magnitude definition of "x." So the Octave is geometric mean squared and each note is the 12th root of the geometric mean squared.

 

Not dependent on wavelength as physical matter. Keep in mind that C to F in the same octave is the Perfect Fourth, created from 2/3 the subharmonic as the Perfect Fifth, C to F. So again it is noncommutative phase.

“To put the same thing in another way, we have just identified the frequency ratio 1.5 with the interval of a [perfect] fifth, although our table gave the value as 1.4983. The difference is only small – 1.13 parts in a thousand – but by the time we have taken the twelve steps needed to pass completely around the clock-face, it has been multiplied twelvefold into the difference of 13.6 parts in a thousand, which represents the aforesaid difference in pitch of almost a quarter of a semitone. When this is allowed for, the true clock-face is that shown in fig. 55; it extends to infinity in both directions and all simplicity has disappeared.” Sir James Jeans book Science and Music, (Dover Publications, 1968), p. 166

 So this means Western music theory is a lie and so it is wrong. Point blank. The truth is actually noncommutative phase.

 So you have 8 to the 6th power and 9 to the 6th power (531441) as the secret of the Ditonic Comma as the fake Pythagorean Comma due to geometric mean. From Euclid and earlier from Philolaus and Archytas as 8 to the 6th compared to 9 to the 6th which assumes that the starting root tonic "frequency" as the 1 is 8 to the 6th which is already from assuming the Perfect Fifth is squared!

Six epogdoic intervals are greater than one duple interval. Let A be one number. Let B be the epogdoic of A, let C be the epogdoic ... A is 262,144, B is 294,912, C is 331,776, D is 373,248, E is 419,904, F is 472,392, G is 531,441 ; and G is more than double A....The extremes of an interval spanning six tones are in the ratio (9 to the 6th):(8 to the 6th) = 531,441:262,144 (see 8 Euclid Sectio Canonis proposition 9). 

So 8 to the 6th is half of 2 to the 19th. And so the "root tonic" or "fundamental pitch" was assumed to be 8 to the 6th power which could then be cancelled out against the 9/8 denominator. From "approximating square roots in antiquity" pdf, Jordan Bell:

 

But the 9/8 was first derived only by a divide and average of 3/2 squared and then halved as a symmetric "arithmetic mean" as 9/8. The whole point being that 9/4 can not just be halved back into the octave since in fact 3/2 is noncommutative phase with the octave!! Again this error goes back to Philolaus:

Philolaus identified the komma [531441 : 524288 aka the Ditonic Comma] with the unit, 1

Which is to say that the root tonic was now defined as a geometric mean as a materialistic wavelength! But Alain Connes provides the reason why this typical definition of frequency is wrong:

There is behind the scene, there is a square root and when you take a square root there is an ambiguity and the ambiguity that is there is from the spin structure....Finite space which is there is essentially the simplest finite space which has dimension zero, as far as the [frequency] spectrum is concerned...."

And so the music producer who asked me to provide the link to the Chinese music tuning, based on philosophy Chinese specialist Dr. Patrick Edwin Moran:

They seem to have decided to put the differences to good use. If the equivalent of "do mi mi, mi so so" sounds different in the equivalent of their key of C and their key of E, then that is a useful thing because the feeling that goes along with those sounds is different. That is similar, but much richer, than our practice of having some songs written in major keys and other songs written in minor keys.

 http://users.wfu.edu/moran/Cathay_Cafe/template.html  

That's the actual Chinese music tuning link. The Chinese used pitch pipes - not materialist "wavelengths" - so they ONLY used 2/3 or 3/4 for the tuning as noncommutative phase against infinity or zero as the root frequency/time fundamental pitch. This google book preview confirms what I am saying about the Chinese tuning

full pdf download of the book So you find the SAME toroid that Alain Connes uses but to explain Chinese music theory. Only the author is not away of the noncommutative phase secret.

Early Chinese Work in Natural Science: A Re-examination of the Physics

Needham tries to claim that the Chinese "octave" was simply just not evened up with the fifths and so remained as 262144 and so just needed to be multiplied up to be canceled out. No - the Chinese never "name" the original root tonic as the F that then generates the C as the next note in the scale.  In other words, as is correctly pointed out - you can not just multiply the octave as 262144 by itself in order to cancel out its difference with the Perfect Fifth. Instead the Perfect Fifth is noncommutative to the wavelength as frequency so that 2/3 and 3/2 are different pitches relative to the octave. They are both the Perfect Fifth but with noncommutative geometry to the fundamental pitch.

This analysis of Chinese music tuning instead claims that the ratio between the octave is the
531,441/524,288 except for the scale that starts on the Perfect Fourth subharmonic! So all the other scales use 3/4 for the Perfect Fourth but the scale that starts on the Perfect Fourth uses a tuning that is slightly different.  And so this is the same issue as what the Tonnetz Toroid tuning system uses - the "direction" of the Perfect Fifth or Perfect Fourth then "changes" what the actual "mean" is used.

But the issue is actually that the Chinese did not use any "mean" at all - they simply used the 2/3 and 3/4 principles to construct the scale without ever trying to make the "wavelength" of the octave and fifths line up as a single "wavelength" or geometric magnitude limit.

  However, in the 1980s, China did discover bone flute of 8,000 to 9,000 years old.
Excavations in 1986 and 1987 at the early Neolithic site of Jiahu, located in Henan Province, China, have yielded six complete bone flutes. Fragments of approximately 30 other flutes were also discovered. The flutes may be the earliest complete, playable, tightly-dated, multi-note musical instruments.
Tonal analysis of the flutes revealed that the seven holes correspond to a tone scale remarkably similar to the Western eight-note scale that begins "do, re, mi." This carefully-selected tone scale suggested to the researchers that the Neolithic musician of the seventh millennium BC could play not just single notes, but perhaps even music.

and

 The seven holes produced a rough scale covering a modern octave, beginning close to the second A above middle C. There is evidence that the flute was tuned: a small hole drilled next to the seventh hole had the effect of raising that hole's tone from roughly G-sharp to A, completing the octave.

 and

  But something that is remarkable, is many of the bone flutes found throughout the world are tuned to the pentatonic scale. Many claim that these flutes are between 40,000 and 60,000 years old.