| LearnJazzPiano.com archives: Philosophy | |
| SolArt -- 11/16/2005, 07:09:49 -- #21086 | |
| What is existence? | |
| Think about this, if there was no cosmos, not even a vacuum, Mathematics would still exist, as it isn't a life form. And music is actually a form of mathematics. | |
| flicklers -- 11/16/2005, 10:43:54 -- #21090 | |
| Huh? Mathematics is an artificial game played by humans so how would it exist were there no one? And music to be realized requires the air (or something) to vibrate. Music and mathematics have some things in common and often appeal to the same people and musical notes have some arithmetic relationships but "music is actually a form of mathematics"? No doubt I've completely missed your point but thanks for posting it Off Campus. I'd propose this new room as a fine place to move the god thread instead of censoring it. | |
| SolArt -- 11/16/2005, 18:25:31 -- #21115 | |
| Mathematics is no artificial game, it is all about relationships & numbers, there is nothing man-made about it, it is THERE. Man/alien/etc can discover it's secrets. Musical notes have TONS of math in them (think of the overtones, etc). I should have said music/music theory csn be construed as arranged aural mathmatics, at least in part. | |
| 101 Montunos Afro-Caribbean instruction | |
| Scot -- 11/17/2005, 12:59:21 -- #21153 | |
| The laws of physics exist whether we can define and/or use them or not. Knowledge of these laws in human culture only exist after discovery, but that doesn't mean the laws, relationships, and basic truisms aren't still there. Heck, we're discovering new bits of knowledge every day in the realm of mathematics as it relates to matter and energy | |
| SolArt -- 11/17/2005, 15:36:46 -- #21164 | |
| Exactly. | |
| SolArt -- 11/17/2005, 15:48:41 -- #21165 | |
| ...and if they're there (mathematics,etc), they EXIST. | |
| Jamie Cullum: Twenty-Something | |
| JL -- 11/17/2005, 18:18:25 -- #21172 | |
| "The laws of physics exist whether we can define and/or use them or not." True, but they don't exist (IMO) if nothing else exists, as SolArt originally posited. The laws of gravity, for example, certainly existed and were in effect before Newton got beaned by the apple, but "if there were no cosmos, not even a vacuum", could these laws still be said to exist? What would they apply to? After all, it seems our particular physical world of laws and relationships is one of many possible scenarios, i.e., there could theorertically have been different kinds of universes created, w/ different properties, tendencies, etc. So without the existence of ANYTHING, how can we say which laws and systems would still independently exist a priori? | |
| Bonzo -- 11/18/2005, 04:01:48 -- #21181 | |
| No cosmos and no vacuum: the laws of gravity still exist, but because m=0 there is no gravity. Physics describes the relationship between in this case M,g and F. Another example to illustrate this: Pi describes the relationship between the circumference of a cirkel and the surface of it. Without a cirkel being present the relationship itself still exists. Even with different universes and different parameters the relationships will be there. | |
| 7 -- 11/18/2005, 04:09:02 -- #21182 | |
| If Bird had lived would he have jammed with Hendrix? | |
| 101 Montunos Afro-Caribbean instruction | |
| SolArt -- 11/18/2005, 11:16:04 -- #21188 | |
| Probably not! | |
| 7 -- 11/18/2005, 12:44:48 -- #21193 | |
| Because .... ? | |
| SolArt -- 11/21/2005, 16:12:41 -- #21314 | |
| It just seems like an oil & water mix! | |
| Jamie Cullum: Twenty-Something | |
| Scot -- 11/23/2005, 04:03:39 -- #21385 | |
| Maybe it appears he wouldn't, but who really knows? Both of them might want to bend a little to make some kind of crazy kind of "purplehazeology" or something like that :) | |
| Barry -- 11/26/2005, 12:45:42 -- #21499 | |
| Actually, Miles Davis was keen on working with Hendrix and vice versa. They both had a great respect for one another and unfortunately, Hendrix's untimely death meant that it never happened. That would have been one hell of a record I'm sure! Back to the original statement from SolArt. It is undoubtedly true that the mathematics of music would exist if we did not, but would it have any intrinsic value? Is there any point to music other than the emotional and physiological responses that it provokes in humans. Maybe music without people is like the aformentioned pi without a circle. The rule exists but has no meaning as it never has a any reason to be applied. I have often wondered if we ever meet other intelligent life forms (who can hear) would they have any appreciation of our music? Would they have their own music and would it resemble ours in any way? Is the science of music literally universal or are our musical rules only relevant to us because of our uniquely human aural perceptions? | |
| 7 -- 11/26/2005, 14:10:15 -- #21504 | |
| The laws of physics relating to the relationship of the fundamental to the octave, fifth, and fourth are immutable. Consequently there is a high probability that the pentatonic scale and I-IV-V chord changes would exist in amy type of music on any planet. And whether or not Bird would've wanted to hang with Hendrix, I'll bet that Hendrix would've definitely wanted to hang with Bird. I also think that if Bird had lived and NOT kicked heroin that he would've experimented with LSD. "Bird on Acid" now that would've been some recording! | |
| 101 Montunos Afro-Caribbean instruction | |
| SolArt -- 11/26/2005, 18:26:21 -- #21517 | |
| "I have often wondered if we ever meet other intelligent life forms (who can hear) would they have any appreciation of our music? Would they have their own music and would it resemble ours in any way? Is the science of music literally universal or are our musical rules only relevant to us because of our uniquely human aural perceptions?" If they can hear in our frequency range I say they would DEFINITELY have an appreciation for it. Music is not called universal for nothing! If they've managed space flight or radio etc communication I'm sure they probably would have their own music. The science of music is literally universal. Overtones show in them strongly octaves, 5ths & thirds; plus the smorgasbord of the other intervals much quieter higher up. The scales may of course be unique, similar to oriental scales. Animals can hear our music as well, birds for one really respond to it, just ask someone with pet birds & you'll be amazed! My sister used to have a wonderfully entertaining parakeet who could say a few words, & who could laugh. He was my #1 fan in those days. It was great the way he'd get appreciative of the music & start to wolf whistle; & when the music climaxed he was just flapping around & rapidly going back & forth on his perch! Very funny, but that's how I discovered birds are keen on music! So I'm sure aliens would be too, that is if they can hear. | |
| SolArt -- 11/27/2005, 18:04:24 -- #21560 | |
| Away in the deep unknown of space, suns, planets etc exist. They're material, like us. "They" don't care one whit about us, if we even exist to see them or not, I would say. Gee, where was I 100 years ago? Life is a mystery indeed. | |
| pnowanabe -- 11/28/2005, 12:23:29 -- #21582 | |
| There is a story about a man who had a contact with an ET intelligence from a world about 36,000 light years away. This alien didn't come by space craft, but was in a projected mental state. The alien listened to Holst's Planets and conveyed to the man that he didn't like the Mars movement but very much liked the Venus movement. This was a highly spiritual being and probably didn't like the Mars movement because of it's more aggressive nature. | |
| Jamie Cullum: Twenty-Something | |
| 7 -- 12/22/2005, 22:33:23 -- #22456 | |
| This interesting philosphical question hit me as I was contemplating my navel: Should text alignment be preserved? It seems as if we are being encouraged to give our opinion on this weighty issue every time we post a message here. In general, I would say "yes". Preserving the heritage of our forbears for the sake of posterity is a worthy endeavour. However, I would not be so narrow-minded as to insist on such preservation should it involve preventing innovators from realizing their true potential in the grand scheme of things. However I believe there is a limit to what should be preserved. If one is to do so merely for the sheer fear of never losing anything, that amounts to a pack-rat mentality which indiscriminately collects worthless and redundant objects adding to this already over-cluttered planet. Yet that which is truly precious (such as text alignment) deserves to be held in esteem and cherished, as these things attest to the beauty and wonder of life on Earth. | |
| auntie -- 12/23/2005, 13:48:50 -- #22495 | |
| Your opinions notwithstanding, the decision as to whether or not text alignment should be preserved is a rather personal and private matter. On many occasions I feel a deep need to have my text aligned, yet for the most part I am quite satisfied to leave it alone. I suppose as you grow older these desires for alignment decrease, while those younger and more hot-blooded might feel the need to get aligned up to several times a day. In any case, this issue is entirely subjective and as long as it only occurs between consenting adults, the less said the better. Auntie | |
| pnowanabe -- 12/23/2005, 19:42:44 -- #22509 | |
| I just wanted to write a quick note here in the philosophy section about my belief in the significance in the Master Jesus. Although he was born on March 15 (and not Dec.25) some 2000 years ago, I think that it is very important for everyone to remember the birth of this great being, because everyone-in one way or another- has been touched for the better by him. I don't believe that he was the one and only son of God, but rather a very advanced intelligence not originally from this Earth--a being referred to as a Cosmic Avatar. Whose appearance is extremely rare in the annals of world history. Other Avatars who have come to Earth are Moses, Buddha, Krishna, Confucious, Patanjali and the Lord Babaji, to name a few. I believe that he travelled to the East--to Tibet--where he recieved some secret initiations into mudra yoga(the ancient science of using hand signs) and mantra yoga(the ancient science of using chants said in Sanskrit). These initiations enabled him to levitate--in which he could walk on water because the body is very lite--and perform other feats in which a normal individual obviously couldn't perform. But the main mission of Jesus--a Master of yoga by the way--was to arrange for his own death at the precise Cosmic moment so that he could perform a Karmic manipulation in which he could take the negative Karma of mankind upon himself and by doing this he relieved mankind of having to suffer through a dire catastrophe that was due in those days. There is no such thing as forgiveness of sins, especially from a Karmic point of view. Karma is the all pervasive law of the universe which is "as you sow, so shall you reap". This catastrophe would have set mankind's evolutionary progress back for thousands of years. And this is the true and primary Mission of the great individual whose birthday we are soon to celebrate. His teachings were also part of God's Cosmic Plan, but were actually secondary to the main reason that Jesus came to this Earth. Hope you all have a great Christmas and let's not forget the real "reason for the season." | |
| 101 Montunos Afro-Caribbean instruction | |
| wdennissorrell -- 12/23/2005, 20:53:42 -- #22510 | |
| And all this time I have been a dyslexic agnostic, spending my time wondering if there really was a dog. | |
| 7 -- 12/23/2005, 23:04:57 -- #22511 | |
| We can thank Jesus for the Spanish Inquisition, the Crusades, the bloodbath of the conquest of the Americas, burning "witches" at the stake, the persecution and needless death and torutre of Jews and all other religions all over the world, the excommunication of Galileo, the Scopes trial, etc etc etc. Religion is NOT philosophy, it is dogma. If you want to start a "Religion Room" here, then do so. This is the Philosophy Room. Christians need to attempt to ram their beliefs down the throats of others with the mistaken conviction that they are doing them a service. Fanatics of any ilk do nothing but disservice to mankind. pnowanabe, I respect your opinion on many issues but please try to refrain from sullying these forums with your unfounded religious beliefs. I hope that Scot will censor both your post and mine. | |
| casparus -- 12/24/2005, 01:02:00 -- #22515 | |
| pnowanabe--Why do you believe all this? | |
| Jamie Cullum: Twenty-Something | |
| pnowanabe -- 12/24/2005, 11:45:58 -- #22522 | |
| 7, Yikes. I'm entitled to my opinion and you're entitled to yours, but why the hostility? You can state your point without the underlying hostility, you know. I just want to say that I'm not a Christian, but do have a tremendous respect and reverence for the great spiritual figure Jesus. I'm not trying to ram anything down anyone's throat, if you didn't like the post you could have simply stopped reading and went on to another section. Now, if I came to your home, welcomed myself in, and made you listen to my beliefs at gunpoint, then I might be ramming it down your throat. You're like one of those people that bitch and complain about a show on tv, and all that they had to do was to turn the channel--imagine that. But, quite frankly I really don't care what you say about me, I'm far from being a fanatic--but you are totally wrong in your opinion that Jesus is to blame for all the wars and crusades that this world has had to endure! It isn't the fault of Jesus that greed, hatred and evil dwells in the hearts of barbaric men, who would use any excuse in the book to hate, injure or kill their brothers. If they didn't use religion as an excuse to exercise their hatred, then it would be a war for land, or food, or to kill another person because they look different, or talk different, have different color of skin or they wanted that pair of Nike shoes for themselves and so killed the person to get it. Jesus can not be held responsible for the ignorance of men-period. He brought a wonderful spiritual teaching to this world--one of service, of love and of healing--he can not be blamed for the murder of the crusades or any other war done in his name. That point you should really think about, because you are totally incorrect. And as far as you think that this is not the proper room for this post----I suppose that your ridiculous post on the contemplation of your navel is more appropriate. Yeah-------right. | |
| Michel Le Grand -- 12/25/2005, 14:18:44 -- #22539 | |
| Il vaut mieux utilizer un "preservatif" si on veut preserver "text alignment". N'est ce pas? | |
| jmderay -- 12/30/2005, 10:31:15 -- #22611 | |
| Million Dollar Homepage | |
| For sure it's not philosophy, but that story made me think for a while ;-))) how to become very rich with a simple idea in a little time !! Has anyone heard of that man, Alec TEW, student of 21 in Wiltshire, South of England, whose idea was simple : he has made a webpage with 1 million pixels, and he sells each pixel 1 dollar, he has so far sold 920 700 pixels. The idea was to pay the university fee, and now he is about to become millionaire in dollars. Cybercasinos and other big clients wanted to be seen on the page !! He's also got many job offers for this incredible idea. When you think about how many years we have to work to get 1 million dollars, that becomes philosophy ;-)) (Scot if you feel like putting an ad for LJP, some place remain available ;-)) http://www.milliondollarhomepage.com/ | |
| 101 Montunos Afro-Caribbean instruction | |
| Scot -- 12/31/2005, 18:58:43 -- #22638 | |
| Hmm, maybe I should do that here? :) | |
| MStrain -- 01/18/2006, 06:25:30 -- #23195 | |
| Maths, music and perception | |
| A few points on the Maths and music debate. I agree that the constructions and rules of maths are immutable, but they are an abstract construct formalised by humans to describe the universe that we exist in and the extrapolations that can be taken thereof. Without intelligence 'maths' would not exist, however, the relationships it describes (being abstract notions themselves) are not dependent on our awareness. Music, as pointed out earlier, can be described in mathematical terms (maybe not easily) if it is viewed entirely from an acoustical point of view. The appreciation of music is again something completely different. Musical sounds are only pleasant from a human perspective; we enjoy perfect fifths and thirds, but disharmonious sounds are painful to listen to. The act of listening involves the sounds themselves, our physiology and and our experience. In fact music is not inherently beautiful (in a mathematical sense) as the modern scale is based on equal temperament, allowing the circles of fifths and thirds to co-exist in one tuning by slight modification of their ratios. The modern scale is not perfect mathematically (and it is impossible to force the perfect ratios into one scheme) but it sounds good to us. The difference between mathematical perfection and musical practicality has been a philosophical debate for centuries; the book 'Temperament' by Stuart Isacoff does an exellent job of charting the history and mathematical roots of this subject. So in conclusion, I agree that the subjects mathematics describes are inherent to our universe, but contend that both the formalisation of mathematics is a human construct (clearly limited by the parameters of our own existence) and that music although describable in mathematical terms to a certain extent is not inherently beautiful of itself but requires our perception of it. | |
| tune -- 01/31/2006, 12:17:46 -- #23648 | |
| on second thought | |
| Hey, that Nixon and Truman would of made a hell of a jam. | |
| Jamie Cullum: Twenty-Something | |
| SolArt -- 03/26/2006, 08:13:23 -- #25613 | |
| "I am that I am." | |
| These words always hold a profound interest for me. I think of them as this; I exist that I exist, or so that I exist. In other words there is no point in a void, it makes no sense whatsoever, THEREFORE we have existence, the universe. May we so bold as to state the opposite of a void IS God? | |
| SolArt -- 08/30/2006, 03:36:26 -- #29549 | |
| Heritage | |
| I have a riddle which bugs me. It concerns the population of the earth. As you know, each of us comes from 2, our parents. And they come from 2 also, so they came from 4. And so on & on. So just like the old adage of if you double a penny every day you'll soon be a millionaire. So we come from billions of ancestors, right? So how can it be that the population of the earth was less then? It seems to contradict the common sense which is that of course the population will keep rising into the future as people more than replace them selves. | |
| 7 -- 08/30/2006, 09:11:13 -- #29551 | |
| Dude, Put the crack pipe down. | |
| SolArt -- 08/30/2006, 10:46:40 -- #29552 | |
| Well, 7, Can you explain this mathematical mind boggler adequately? Missing some cells? | |
| 7 -- 08/31/2006, 09:10:21 -- #29564 | |
| The only mind that's boggled here is yours. | |
| Whacky -- 08/31/2006, 09:16:01 -- #29565 | |
| A whole note gives birth to two half notes, The two half notes each give birth to two quarter notes, The four quarter notes each give birth to two eighth notes The eight eighth notes each give birth to two sixteenth notes, and so ob and so on Now apparently there was Adam & Eve and they had three sons...but hey, where did everyonelse com from? I shudder to think about it | |
| Ultimate Latin Songs sheetmusic book | |
| SolArt -- 08/31/2006, 09:20:17 -- #29567 | |
| Unboggle it for me then. So let's hear your explanation on this seeming paradox. I know it sounds ridiculous but it seems to have some validity as well. Time is also involved of course. Any other opinions LJP members? Lets discuss this. It is pretty deep indeed. | |
| SolArt -- 08/31/2006, 09:22:40 -- #29568 | |
| Good humor Dr., and welcome! Have you a serious answer? | |
| wdennissorrell -- 08/31/2006, 10:23:08 -- #29571 | |
| The problem with this train of thought is quite simply most sets of parents and grandparents have more than one offspring. Zero population growth is achieved when, on average, couples have exactly two children. If the average is greater than two then the population will increase, if the average is less than two the population will decrease. If you would, count the number of cousins that you have. The odds are substantial that you have more cousins than grandparents. Grandparents are shared amongst many cousins. The way you are assessing the numbers permits separate grandparents for each grandchild which in most cases exagerates the total number of grandparents. These differences will change exponentially as generation accumulate. I hope this helps. Peace out! | |
| Whacky -- 08/31/2006, 12:14:38 -- #29573 | |
| I stick with my vow never to issue another serious answer (although I think the one I gave had some merit) | |
| SolArt -- 08/31/2006, 14:43:09 -- #29575 | |
| When a couple has two children they usually have children themselves before the parents die, etc., so population goes up and therefore zero population growth is NOT achieved. So the parents do not only replace themselves in such a hypothetical case. So the first part of your response is inaccurate. The second part however is true! But still if you go ONLY for yourself you have practically an infinite number of forefathers it would seem! (1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, etc.) Maybe the farther you go back there comes a time when your forefathers weren't humans yet! | |
| Sandy B -- 11/14/2007, 14:24:18 -- #38382 | |
| Piano players happy and well adjusted I have met. | |
| Has anyone else thought that piano players, pianist, the pros too, seem so much happier than people who do not play piano? Are we dreamers? Does the music keep us happy? People call me "Sunshine" people and I tell them the piano playing keeps me happy. Sandy B | |
| Ultimate Latin Songs sheetmusic book | |
| Scot -- 11/15/2007, 13:37:00 -- #38400 | |
| Well, music (the arts in general) is universal and by being involved with it, a person's boundaries between what's possible and what's not possible are a lot further away than people who are not in the arts, and that leads to a lot more breathing space for the soul. That is a good way to be happy! | |
| sid -- 11/23/2007, 09:55:33 -- #38516 | |
| I have a friend who's an anaesthetist. I asked him why he chose that specialisation after going through medical training, when he could have been any kind of surgeon or physician. He said he noticed early on that the anaesthetic person was the only one who got to sit down in the operating theatre, and since he intended to have a long medical career, getting the weight off his feet from the start seemed like a good idea. Something similar relates to the position of pianist in the band. I suppose drummers also have the luxury of the seated posture but - well - they are drummers and we all know what THAT means... So my theory is that pianists are happy because they don't stress their bodies by standing all the time. sid | |
| 7 -- 11/23/2007, 11:27:40 -- #38518 | |
| I always stand when I play, I feel it gives more stage presence. I don't know what that might say about my overall happiness level, though. I feel that my happiness tends to be related more to external factors such as the quality of musicians that I'm playing with, the amount of money I'm getting paid, the number of pretty girls in the room and the amount of alcohol I've ingested (I guess the last one is an internal factor). I've never heard of that religion "anatheist" before. Does their faith mostly revolve around the position of their posterior? | |
| sid -- 11/23/2007, 12:04:03 -- #38521 | |
| Take my advice, Jeff, and sit down while you play. Otherwise you'll burn out. Of course, as Neil Young said, it might be better to burn out than fade away. But personally I'm in this for the Long Haul. sid | |
| 7 -- 11/23/2007, 22:56:16 -- #38532 | |
| To paraphrase the great Andy Capp when asked why he always drinks standing up. "When you're drunk it's a lot easier to sit down when you're standing up than what it is to stand up when you're sitting down." Now you're not gonna tryt to talk me out of drinking too, are you? | |
| Scot -- 11/27/2007, 13:00:12 -- #38585 | |
| The only problem I had when playing standing up is that I'd get too close to the keyboard. After a year long gig of doing that six nights a week I developed terrible tendonitis in my left shoulder that took months to heal up. I fixed the problem by putting a 2x4 in front of the keyboard stand legs, forcing me to back off a bit, but... that experience has tainted my feeling about standing up and playing gigs. | |
| Ultimate Latin Songs sheetmusic book | |
| Whacky -- 11/27/2007, 21:33:24 -- #38590 | |
| I did it for years too - The problem I had was always standing on my left foot so I could work (and chase) the pedal with my right. I would be in pain after about an hour into each gig. That combined with moving heavy crap around for 30 years, my back is in pretty bad shape...but having said that, I can't sit at a piano for very long either. | |
| 7 -- 11/27/2007, 22:19:33 -- #38592 | |
| I got my bad back from humping my acoustic spinet all over Europe to gigs (this was long before even the DX7 hit the scene). My lower back still kills me once in a while, but I get much less problems with my back from playing standing up (rather that sitting down for hours at the keys or computer). The problem of the left leg taking all the weight so that the right can work the pedal becomes less of a problem if you use the pedal only when absolutely necessary. I find many songs that I do don't require pedal at all. | |
| Whacky -- 11/28/2007, 07:19:08 -- #38595 | |
| Well I like to step on the pedal when I play lots of fast notes :) You're right about sitting though. I think I switched to standing on my pop gigs because standing was easier on my back. Standing also helped me to stay engaged (awake) when playing simple tunes I had played thousands of times before. - crowd pleasers like Twist & Shout, Louie Louie, etc - once we started those I would shift into autopilot, which would trigger a hypnotic state of mind and if I wasn't careful R.E.M. (not the band) | |
| 7 -- 11/28/2007, 09:34:41 -- #38596 | |
| I also like to do little dance steps and the occasional twirly (which you can't do sitting down). | |
| Whacky -- 11/28/2007, 11:45:46 -- #38599 | |
| ya know - I do the twirly thing now and then myself - and chasing the pedal with my foot can be a muse for the audience too :) | |
| Copyright © 2005 by Scot Ranney. All rights reserved. | |
| Click Here for more information about performances and clinics. Click Here to sign up for Scot's music announcements. | |