Jean Abou Samra <[email protected]> writes: > Le 18/01/2023 à 01:08, David Zelinsky a écrit : >> As another professional number theorist and musician (though not a >> composer), I also find this use of "irrational" to mean "non-dyadic" >> very grating. But I once said as much on the Music Engraving Tips >> facebook group, and got summarily shot down as ignorant and elitist. >> The argument, such as it was, held that this is about *music*, not >> *mathematics*, so there's no reason to adopt mathematicians' quirky >> terminology. This left me rather speechless, so I gave up. However, if >> I ever have reason to discuss this type of meter, will always call it >> "non-dyadic". > > > > An interesting argument, given that “irrational” *is* “quirky” mathematic > terminology in the first place ... > > Cheers, > Jean
No, it's really not quirky. A "rational" number is a ratio of two integers. An irrational number is one that cannot be so expressed. The word "ratio" comes from Latin for calculation. The common english usage of "rational" meaning sensible presumably stems from the ancient Greeks view that only rational numbers make sense. But the mathematical definition is really more fundamental. More rational, one might say :) -David
