Rodney

To Brant: I don’t understand the question; but I think it is not germane to my thoughts, which concern development in the individual mind and not over history.

I'll just say here what I said on another thread: ----- To toot my own horn here a bit, I believe that the essay mentioned in my signature significantly builds on Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology in these ways: 1. I offer an alternative explanation to that of Ronald Pisaturo and Glenn Marcus, which as far as I know is the only currently recognized Objectivist theory on the topic, of how number concepts arise in the human mind. 2. I account for the fact that mathematical development occurs mostly parallel to the rest of conceptual growth, by pointing up a new connection between the two realms. 3. I tie “imaginary” and “complex” (two-dimensional) numbers to reality in a different way than Pisaturo and Marcus. 4. I show how I used this understanding to independently stumble upon “hypercomplex” (multidimensional) numbers, which I had never heard of but which are part of higher mathematics. This shows not only the correctness of my thinking, but also the power of philosophy to inform and direct the special sciences. It’s a good answer to the views of “Dragonfly” (“Calopterix splendens”), Daniel Barnes, “Next Level,” and others, who believe that philosophical thought must continually look and bow to what they call “science” regardless of the topic. Normally I would dive into the message boards with my views, but I put in a lot of deep thought about mathematics to arrive at them, and decided not offer these ideas for free! -----

To toot my own horn here a bit, I believe that the essay mentioned in my signature significantly builds on Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology in these ways: 1. I offer an alternative explanation to that of Ronald Pisaturo and Glenn Marcus, which as far as I know is the only currently recognized Objectivist theory on the topic, of how number concepts arise in the human mind. 2. I account for the fact that mathematical development occurs mostly parallel to the rest of conceptual growth, by pointing up a new connection between the two realms. 3. I tie “imaginary” and “complex” (two-dimensional) numbers to reality in a different way than Pisaturo and Marcus. 4. I show how I used this understanding to independently stumble upon “hypercomplex” (multidimensional) numbers, which I had never heard of but which are part of higher mathematics. This shows not only the correctness of my thinking, but also the power of philosophy to inform and direct the special sciences. It’s a good answer to the views of “Dragonfly” (“Calopterix splendens”), Daniel Barnes, “Next Level,” and others, who believe that philosophical thought must continually look and bow to what they call “science” regardless of the topic. Normally I would dive into the message boards with my views, but I put in a lot of deep thought about mathematics to arrive at them, and decided not give away these ideas for free!

Elizabeth, since you are starting out with such promise, I’d like to try influencing you a bit with the following. I find that my own musical goals are different from those of anyone I’ve ever encountered. I go for something I call “the rhetoric of melody,” and the main reason I love Franz Lehár so much is that he seems to have utterly mastered it. It is an elusive quality, hard to describe; but it manifests itself in an apparent ability to make tunes that say exactly what one wants them to say on an almost verbal level, as if it were speech. Such melodies often seem to have sprung from the deepest wells of human experience itself. I’ll give you an example. Listen to the nameless piece of music that starts this clip. In Lehár’s score, it is simply headed “Polonaise,” and it opens Act 2 of The Merry Widow: As you listen to this dance tune, notice specifically the melody notes, how quickly they come and how deftly they speak. This is my ideal, and it is the hardest thing in music to achieve! (By the way, I also love the song it introduces, which tells the legend of Vilja, the “fair woodland sprite” with whom a wandering “huntsman” falls in love. Even though this singer takes it a bit too slow!) If it leaves you cold, that is OK. We all have a different mix of artistic values. Just thought I would try.

I agree completely. The piece is too "notey" to have lyrics in places; but the main theme could be made into a lovely song.

Jonathan, It sounded pretty good. But I have a PC and no extra money. Another annoying thing about my software is that I cannot do a fade on any single note--there have to be multiple notes so each can be made softer than the last. However, I can at least do an end-of-song fadeout by editing the mp3 in another program.

Michael, Sounds like a very interesting procedure. I've found myself doing something similar by clearing some space just above the tenor range so that the melody or other line could be distinguished. It works great, and seldom does it make the music sound thinner--as I sometimes fear since I often go for the "fat" sounds. I would note, however, that in pop music you may not want clarity and separation, but a huge amorphous wash of sound such as Phil Spector used. Some records sound better that way--or maybe you get used to hearing them that way, and so you hate a cleared-up remix! I wonder how it would sound if you simply cleared up the pitch where the melody happened to be at any given moment, so that the other sounds would always be silent where the melody note was, but nowhere else--rather than clearing out a fixed space for the tune to move around in? I should try that some time.

I liked this one so much I wrote a review on your AcidPlanet page! And look at the current hit parade for Classical--I'm just above you! 2 Bizet: petit mari, petite femme!.. F Lemore Classical 2 / 27 10/10 03.23.07 3 Toy shop ABSYNTH AND ORANGE Classical 2 / 21 10/10 03.13.07 4 Horizons (Air No. 28-band) knuxie35 Classical 6 / 44 10/10 03.24.07 5 Adagio cantabile - Piano PianoPlayer Classical 1 / 281 10/10 09.14.05 6 Oh Danny Boy Sir Suicide Jockey Classical 4 / 317 10/10 12.29.05 7 Golliwogg's Cake Walk ABSYNTH AND ORANGE Classical 0 / 19 10/10 03.15.07 8 The Sheepherder ABSYNTH AND ORANGE Classical 1 / 8 10/10 03.15.07 9 Dancing Snow ABSYNTH AND ORANGE Classical 1 / 9 10/10 03.14.07 10 Jimbo's Lullaby ABSYNTH AND ORANGE Classical 1 / 10 10/10 03.13.07 11 Doctor Gradus ad Parnassum ABSYNTH AND ORANGE Classical 1 / 12 10/10 03.12.07 12 Gaia - Antartica faune Classical 0 / 6 10/10 03.25.07 13 Chopin Nocturne Op.9 No.2 ABSYNTH AND ORANGE Classical 2 / 28 10/10 12.01.06 14 the Ghost of Meldrum Hall Funeral Breakfast Classical 0 / 12 10/10 03.26.07 15 Halley's Comet Rodney Rawlings Classical 1 / 7 10/10 03.28.07 16 Waltz for Piano and String Orchestra PalePower Classical 0 / 63 10/10 09.13.06 17 nessun dorma VP6 and vp7 michael kennedy operatic tenor Classical 0 / 12 10/10 02.08.07 18 Toccata Albert Syeles - Classical Classical 0 / 83 10/10 03.04.07 19 Medieval Dance... version 2 AcousticHeart Classical 0 / 70 10/10 02.28.07 20 Schubert - Impromptu in E-Flat Major (Piano) Eddie Classical 0 / 72 10/10 07.26.05 21 Organ Long Loop Abstract meta loops Classical 0 / 13 10/10 12.13.06 22 A musical thought. The Deadly Kind Classical 0 / 86 10/10 03.18.07 23 Orchestral Colors in the Wind Kevin Fletcher Tweedy and KSO Classical 0 / 55 10/10 03.11.07 24 The River Flows Joseph C Raineri Classical 1 / 190 10/10 03.17.07 25 Hell or Heaven Funeral Breakfast Classical 0 / 15 10/10 03.14.07 [There are 4 more pages below this. Don't ask me how it works!]

You might have something there. I know for a fact that many people find me quite annoying.

Thanks for saying that. I suppose I could try writing a conventional score, but what orchestra's music director would be willing to go to the great expense of trying it out?

Thank you. One complaint I have with my present system is lack of fine control over dynamics, but I suppose I could try what you suggest. (What are "mediums"?)

This piece is a musical paean to Halley’s Comet—the feeling of the once-in-a-lifetime expectation and approach of the comet, its spectacular and beautiful show, and its eternal farewell. (Because many people never live long enough to see it twice.)

Thanks. I do think music attached to an interpretation is often more effective, which is why I wrote the musical. Yes, I think your sense of my intention is accurate. But I had never thought of it in those terms. In the play, it ties in with the idea of human progress viewed from a long-range perspective. OK, I will.

I use Rhapsody, which is abandonware that has been replaced by Finale. I also have Finale, but it is so poorly designed and documented that I find it unusable. I got Rhapsody for free from a flautist in an ensemble that once performed my wind band piece Anthem. And at this point, I cannot afford to buy new software or hardware (I now have no hardware but my laptop, and that's what this was arranged and partly composed on). I'll look into FL Studio though. Thanks!

Heavens no! I'm not a performer. I do play guitar some, but I use it mainly as a compositional aid. But thank you for thinking that I could have a show! (Actually, I have performed a lot as a magician. Perhaps that is what you mean!)

This is an instrumental of a song from a musical I wrote called THE WATCHER ON THE SHORE. (Other tunes from it can be found on my Profile page at Rebirth of Reason. I may put some up here later.) It is meant to evoke the sense of a "new order of things" that periodically occurs after long stretches of time in human affairs. The listener may think of any revolutionary change while listening. Though I am sure of the quality of the tune, my cheap software does not allow me full resources to arrange the tune as I would like.

Very nice indeed. I write a different sort of melodies, but I should get someone like you to arrange one of my tunes!

I meant of course an intellectual response. For other posters, the reason I don't respond is a combination of time constraints, dislike of the tone adopted, and the conviction that hope lies in reaching young minds that are starting from scratch rather than trying to persuade old, closed minds. Why do I sometimes do it? Well, assuming they fail to persuade you, by interacting with opponents you can learn something and arrive at a much deeper grasp of the truth.

DB * n - ;-) - ! = DB * 1 - DB = 0

Because I believe myself extremely well attuned to her writing and thinking style. What do others think here?

Apart from the bad science, another thing that should concern us is the slowdown, and even reversal, of economic and technological progress that is proposed by environmentalists as the solution. Should we even think about doing such a thing, knowing that it will make us unable to deal with an asteroid that may one day be detected hurtling toward Earth? It's considerations like this that confirm my belief about the true motive of the environmentalist leaders.

--except of course that mine is the correct one! Readers may think that such a difference is insignificant, but accumulation of such errors about AR's meaning abets the nonsense of the old guard, and to a large extent constitutes it as well.

By "reading" I meant interpretation.

Your reading is mistaken. I'm quite sure that this is a compression of: Man exists as man, and must survive as such.

Bob, if Rand is off her rocker, then so am I. (See my present signature message for proof of my craziness.) But I find the thinking so poor in your posts that I do not mind! Nor do I feel the urge to respond. You, and others, truly represent the old guard, which will die off (some sooner than others). It is young minds we pin our hopes on, and it is young minds we are reaching. Now, off to bed (with you)!