Me pregunto cuantos de Uds pueden hacer una integral de verdad como esta, de manera mental. Sin usar calculadoras?
Que tanto del OpenMusic es procesos matematicos complejos o es solo aritmetica aleatoria disfrazada de operaciones matematicas como una (hipotesis de Riemann, o un calculo Estocastico?).
Hi yes I only ask me if the programming inside math in OM is only chaos arithmetic or is more complex?
Thanks in advance!
Dear tor99,
Programing math in some computer language (except mathematica) involves some “translation” and adaptation in this given langage. OM is based on common lisp. I am sure you will find some documentation on the web.
You can start with this (you should have a minimum knowledge of commom lisp):
A lot of mathematical packages can be found here:
https://www.cliki.net/mathematics
Best
K
Hi, thanks a lot!
I’m very interested in Common Lisp since time ago, indeed I get intermediate level in Common Lisp in 2012, but since then I have it forgotten I was or am using Python.
But yes I will start with OM, then passing to Common Lisp (Math and other Music software in Common Lisp), a lot of time to resolve it.
Hi,
Computers can’t deal with the overwhelming majority of mathematical structures literally/directly, they can only deal with discrete proxies of these. There’s a lot computers can do, there’s a lot they can’t either.
As a side note, when it comes to complex systems human brains aren’t in much better shape either. North of 4 or 5 variables it all usually goes berserk.
All the best,
AntĂłnio
… mathematical structures literally/directly, they can only deal with discrete proxies…
Interesting. By “literally”, do you mean the actual “thinking”, or “reasoning” around problems we conceive as something mathematical? Or some precise formulation of that reasoning - like algebra expressions etc?
Hi Anders,
By “literally” I meant mathematical structures in their proper domains, e.g. differential forms on real manifolds. Implementation is almost always indirect and reductive. Algebraic expressions, on the other hand, are rather cosy. For instance, the integrals (of polynomials) in the screenshot above can easily be implemented that way.
I steered away from making philosophical claims on the nature of mathematics and standard computation. It’s a fascinating subject, though.
All the best,
AntĂłnio
Interesting topic. Although the math you are talking about is far beyond me, leaving that to you and other math-heads, like Karim and others here.
However, interested in the possibilities of programming languages like lisp’s abilities to do abstract and meaningful problem-reasoning (questioning? trying solutions?) about things we don’t know what is *)
Are you familiar with Sussman+Abelson books SICP and SICM (“Structure and interpretation of Computer Programs”, and “Structure and interpretation of Classical Mechanics”). Do the tools they develop - using Scheme - fit in to the types of problems you describe?
*) in my case Lisp (Scheme) came about while researching ethnomusicology (however unsuccessful, stopped researching, started composing… ), trying to make sense of (what people like us would call) music where known musical theory and representation stops making sense. Inspired by language research
Hi,
I heard of those books but never read much less studied them. Finite-element and other methods do make for powerful tools, but they’re intrinsically limited. Machines over integers handling a would-be machine over reals — classical picture of nature — leaves much to be desired. A great textbook on this very issue is Complexity and Real Computation (Steve Smale et al, Springer.)
All the best,
AntĂłnio
