Canonical extension: Difference between revisions

From Xenharmonic Reference
Line 17: Line 17:
\frac{250}{243} &= \bigg(\frac{10}{9}\bigg)^3 / \frac{4}{3} \\
\frac{250}{243} &= \bigg(\frac{10}{9}\bigg)^3 / \frac{4}{3} \\
  &=  \bigg(\frac{10}{9}\bigg)^2 \bigg(\frac{11}{10}\bigg)\mathrm{S}(10) / \frac{4}{3} \\
  &=  \bigg(\frac{10}{9}\bigg)^2 \bigg(\frac{11}{10}\bigg)\mathrm{S}(10) / \frac{4}{3} \\
  &= \frac{10}{9} \cdot \frac{11}{10} \cdot \frac{12}{10} / \frac{4}{3} \cdot \mathrm{S}(10)^2\mathrm{S}(11) \\
  &= \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),
  &= \mathrm{S}(10)^2\mathrm{S}(11),
\end{align}
\end{align}

Revision as of 19:04, 4 February 2026

This page or section is a work in progress. It may lack sufficient justification, content, or organization, and is subject to future overhaul.
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. 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 prime(s). It 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 not necessarily considered structurally induced.

Examples

Endoparticular extensions

5-limit Porcupine -> 2.3.5.11 Porcupine is endoparticular: we have

250243=(109)3/43=(109)2(1110)S(10)/43=1091110121143S(10)2S(11)=S(10)2S(11),

and 2.3.5.11 Porcupine indeed tempers out S10 and S11.

Other examples:

  • 5-limit Kleismic -> 2.3.5.13 Kleismic
  • 5-limit Diaschismic -> 2.3.5.17 Diaschismic
  • 5-limit Würschmidt -> 2.3.5.23.47.49 Würschmidt

Paraparticular extensions

  • 2.3.5.13 Kleismic -> 2.3.5.7.13 Catakleismic

Canonical but non-structurally-induced extensions

  • 5-limit Meantone -> 7-limit Septimal Meantone (12 & 19)
  • 5-limit Tetracot -> 2.3.5.13 Tetracot

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).