Canonical extension: Difference between revisions
From Xenharmonic Reference
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| (65 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Technical}} | |||
Consider a regular temperament on a JI group. | |||
* A strong [[extension]] of said temperament on a larger JI group is '''canonical''' if it is the most efficient (accurate and low-complexity) strong extension of the temperament to the larger subgroup, among all extensions to that larger subgroup. This is a more informal concept which is decided by using heuristics and qualitative judgments. | |||
* Such an extension is (more strongly) '''structurally induced''' if the commas tempered out by the temperament induce the presence of the added basis element(s). Any sub-extension (i.e. whose JI group is between the base JI group and the original extension's JI group) of a structurally induced extension is also considered structurally induced. Structural inducing has the following sub-concepts that can be defined formally: | |||
** Suppose the base temperament tempers out a comma that is a product of powers of consecutive [[square-superparticular]]s with nonzero exponents. A strong extension is '''endoparticular''' if it additionally tempers out the individual square-superparticulars. | |||
** Such an extension is '''paraparticular''' instead if it instead tempers out a square-superparticular ''adjacent'' to the square-superparticulars in question, or '''exoparticular''' instead if it instead tempers out a square-superparticular ''not adjacent'' to said square-superparticulars. Paraparticular and exoparticular extensions are generally ''not'' considered structurally induced. | |||
** {{adv|If the commas of the extension are not necessarily superparticulars but nevertheless involve one or more [[wikipedia:arithmetic progression|arithmetic progression]]s in the harmonic series, the extensions are similarly called ''endoarithmetic'' and ''para-arithmetic''. Endoarithmetic extensions are considered structurally induced.}} | |||
== Examples == | |||
{{Problematic}} | {{Problematic}} | ||
=== Endoparticular extensions === | |||
We repeatedly use the identity | |||
<math>\frac{k}{k - 1} = \mathrm{S}(k)\frac{k + 1}{k}, \ \mathrm{S}(k) := \frac{k^2}{k^2-1}.</math> | |||
==== Porcupine ==== | |||
The extension Porcupine = 5-limit[250/243] → 2.3.5.11[S10, S11] is endoparticular: we have | |||
<math> | |||
\begin{align} | |||
\frac{250}{243} &= \bigg(\frac{10}{9}\bigg)^3 / \frac{4}{3} \\ | |||
&= \bigg(\frac{10}{9}\bigg) \bigg(\frac{11}{10}\bigg)^2 \mathrm{S}(10)^2 / \frac{4}{3} \\ | |||
&= \frac{\frac{10}{9} \cdot \frac{11}{10} \cdot \frac{12}{11}}{\frac{4}{3}} \cdot \mathrm{S}(10)^2\mathrm{S}(11) \\ | |||
&= \mathrm{S}(10)^2\mathrm{S}(11), | |||
\end{align} | |||
</math> | |||
and indeed, 2.3.5.11 Porcupine can be ''defined'' by tempering out S10 and S11. | |||
{{ | ==== Kleismic ==== | ||
For Kleismic = 5-limit[15625/15552] → 2.3.5.13[S25, S26], we have | |||
<math> | |||
\begin{align} | |||
\frac{15625}{15552} &= \bigg(\frac{25}{24}\bigg)^3 / \frac{9}{8} \\ | |||
&= \bigg(\frac{25}{24}\bigg) \bigg(\frac{26}{25}\bigg)^2 \mathrm{S}(25)^2 / \frac{9}{8} \\ | |||
&= \bigg(\frac{25}{24}\cdot \frac{26}{25} \cdot \frac{27}{26}\bigg) \mathrm{S}(25)^2\mathrm{S}(26) / \frac{9}{8} \\ | |||
&= \mathrm{S}(25)^2\mathrm{S}(26). | |||
\end{align} | |||
</math> | |||
==== Diaschismic ==== | |||
For Diaschismic = 5-limit[2048/2025] → 2.3.5.17[S16, S17] we have | |||
<math> | |||
\begin{align} | |||
\frac{2048}{2025} &= \bigg(\frac{16}{15}\bigg)^2 / \frac{9}{8} \\ | |||
&= \bigg(\frac{16}{15}\bigg) \bigg(\frac{17}{16}\bigg) \mathrm{S}(16) / \frac{9}{8} \\ | |||
&= \bigg(\frac{16}{15}\bigg) \bigg(\frac{18}{17}\bigg) \mathrm{S}(16)\mathrm{S}(17) / \frac{9}{8} \\ | |||
&= \bigg(\frac{17}{16}\bigg) \bigg(\frac{18}{17}\bigg) \mathrm{S}(16)^2 \mathrm{S}(17) / \frac{9}{8} \\ | |||
&= \mathrm{S}(16)^2 \mathrm{S}(17). | |||
\end{align} | |||
</math> | |||
==== Würschmidt ==== | |||
For Würschmidt = 5-limit[393216/390625] → 2.3.5.23.47.49[S46, S47, S48, S49] we have | |||
<math> | |||
\begin{align} | |||
\frac{393216}{390625} &= \bigg(\frac{16}{15}\bigg)^2 / \bigg(\frac{25}{24}\bigg)^3 \\ | |||
&= \bigg(\frac{48}{45}\bigg)^2 / \bigg(\frac{50}{48}\bigg)^3 \\ | |||
&= \bigg(\frac{46}{45}\cdot \frac{47}{46} \cdot \frac{48}{47}\bigg)^2 / \bigg(\frac{49}{48}\cdot \frac{50}{49}\bigg)^3 \\ | |||
&= \bigg(\frac{46}{45}\cdot \frac{47}{46} \cdot \frac{48}{47}\bigg)^2 / \bigg[\bigg(\frac{49}{48}\cdot \frac{50}{49}\bigg)^2 \bigg(\frac{49}{48}\cdot \frac{50}{49}\bigg) \bigg] \\ | |||
&= \mathrm{S}(48)^2 \bigg(\frac{46}{45}\cdot \frac{47}{46} \cdot \frac{49}{48}\bigg)^2 / \bigg[\bigg(\frac{49}{48}\cdot \frac{50}{49}\bigg)^2 \bigg(\frac{49}{48}\cdot \frac{50}{49}\bigg) \bigg] \\ | |||
&= \mathrm{S}(48)^2 \bigg(\frac{46}{45}\cdot \frac{47}{46}\bigg)^2 / \bigg[\bigg(\frac{50}{49}\bigg)^2 \bigg(\frac{49}{48}\cdot \frac{50}{49}\bigg) \bigg] \\ | |||
&= \mathrm{S}(47)^2\mathrm{S}(48)^4\mathrm{S}(49)^2 \bigg(\frac{46}{45}\bigg)^2 / \bigg(\frac{49}{48}\cdot \frac{50}{49}\bigg) \\ | |||
&= \mathrm{S}(46)^2\mathrm{S}(47)^4\mathrm{S}(48)^6\mathrm{S}(49)^2 \bigg(\frac{49}{48}\bigg)^2 / \bigg(\frac{49}{48}\cdot \frac{50}{49}\bigg) \\ | |||
&= \mathrm{S}(46)^2\mathrm{S}(47)^4\mathrm{S}(48)^6\mathrm{S}(49)^3. | |||
\end{align} | |||
</math> | |||
=== Other endoarithmetic extensions === | |||
=== Paraparticular extensions === | |||
* Kleismic = 2.3.5.13[S26, S27] → Catakleismic = 2.3.5.7.13[S26, S27, S28] | |||
=== Canonical but non-structurally-induced extensions === | |||
* | * 5-limit Meantone = 5-limit[81/80] → Septimal Meantone (12 & 19) = 7-limit[81/80, 126/125] | ||
* | * 5-limit Tetracot = 5-limit[20000/19683] → Add-13 Tetracot = 2.3.5.13[20000/19683, 512/507] | ||
== | == Conjectures == | ||
*{{adv|Conjecture: There is at most one S-expression for a comma in a given extended subgroup. As a corollary, an endoparticular extension of a temperament tempering out one given comma to a given extended subgroup is unique if it exists.}} | |||
* {{adv|Stronger conjecture: An endoparticular extension for a given temperament of any rank and a given extended subgroup is unique if it exists (regardless of the choice of comma basis).}} | |||
Latest revision as of 04:15, 24 February 2026
This is a technical or mathematical page. While the subject may be of some relevance to music, the page treats the subject in technical language.
Consider a regular temperament on a JI group.
- A strong extension of said temperament on a larger JI group is canonical if it is the most efficient (accurate and low-complexity) strong extension of the temperament to the larger subgroup, among all extensions to that larger subgroup. This is a more informal concept which is decided by using heuristics and qualitative judgments.
- Such an extension is (more strongly) structurally induced if the commas tempered out by the temperament induce the presence of the added basis element(s). Any sub-extension (i.e. whose JI group is between the base JI group and the original extension's JI group) of a structurally induced extension is also considered structurally induced. Structural inducing has the following sub-concepts that can be defined formally:
- Suppose the base temperament tempers out a comma that is a product of powers of consecutive square-superparticulars with nonzero exponents. A strong extension is endoparticular if it additionally tempers out the individual square-superparticulars.
- Such an extension is paraparticular instead if it instead tempers out a square-superparticular adjacent to the square-superparticulars in question, or exoparticular instead if it instead tempers out a square-superparticular not adjacent to said square-superparticulars. Paraparticular and exoparticular extensions are generally not considered structurally induced.
- If the commas of the extension are not necessarily superparticulars but nevertheless involve one or more arithmetic progressions in the harmonic series, the extensions are similarly called endoarithmetic and para-arithmetic. Endoarithmetic extensions are considered structurally induced.
Examples
This page or section is a work in progress. It may lack sufficient justification, content, or organization, and is subject to future overhaul.
Endoparticular extensions
We repeatedly use the identity
Porcupine
The extension Porcupine = 5-limit[250/243] → 2.3.5.11[S10, S11] is endoparticular: we have
and indeed, 2.3.5.11 Porcupine can be defined by tempering out S10 and S11.
Kleismic
For Kleismic = 5-limit[15625/15552] → 2.3.5.13[S25, S26], we have
Diaschismic
For Diaschismic = 5-limit[2048/2025] → 2.3.5.17[S16, S17] we have
Würschmidt
For Würschmidt = 5-limit[393216/390625] → 2.3.5.23.47.49[S46, S47, S48, S49] we have
Other endoarithmetic extensions
Paraparticular extensions
- Kleismic = 2.3.5.13[S26, S27] → Catakleismic = 2.3.5.7.13[S26, S27, S28]
Canonical but non-structurally-induced extensions
- 5-limit Meantone = 5-limit[81/80] → Septimal Meantone (12 & 19) = 7-limit[81/80, 126/125]
- 5-limit Tetracot = 5-limit[20000/19683] → Add-13 Tetracot = 2.3.5.13[20000/19683, 512/507]
Conjectures
- Conjecture: There is at most one S-expression for a comma in a given extended subgroup. As a corollary, an endoparticular extension of a temperament tempering out one given comma to a given extended subgroup is unique if it exists.
- Stronger conjecture: An endoparticular extension for a given temperament of any rank and a given extended subgroup is unique if it exists (regardless of the choice of comma basis).
