Messages

[-GET RID OF THE GRAND PIANO SOUND FONT]

-2nd layer chords in measures 6, 9-11, and 13: Can these chords be physically played? Yes. However, I think it would be kinda difficult to fit these stretches in realistically.

I kinda disagree. The thing about large chords is that it's up to the pianist to decide what they can do. Like, I have big hands, so I can easily play a tenth, but those with small hands will have to make them broken chords. There is nothing wrong with either approach; it's up to the pianist to decide what they will do, so the role of the arranger could be argued to minimal. I mean, your point is valid, but I wouldn't edit it if it were me.

-GET RID OF THE GRAND PIANO SOUND FONT

Also this. Perhaps your referencing the musx. file or whatever, but, to my knowlege there is no "right" piano sound font to use. I know that Deku used a different sound font from the rest of the site and it made no difference.

But I agree with the rest of your comments. Clean this up Latios!

But overall, it's a good arrangement. You are certainly taking steps in the right direction I think.

OK, if I'm understanding correctly, you need to notate it like this;

http://cmapspublic.ihmc.us/rid=1JQJ346N5-9C92VG-19WC/12-8.png

Remember that 12/8, 6/8 and 9/8 is just dividing each beat into three quaver (or quarter-note) pulses, so you need to show each where each pulse is. Hope this helped.

Hurray for everyone! Looking at some of the submissions and they're all excellent! Wondrous work everyone!

Bernie: "CLIMATE CHANGE IS OUR BIGGEST ENEMY BECAUSE IF WE DON'T ACT NOW OUR CHILDREN WILL INHERIT AN UNINHABITABLE PLANET." I don't even think most climate change models predict this lol. Unless the change skyrockets to an average of one degree per year (which it won't) I'm pretty sure my children will live on a habitable planet.

You are technically correct, but the fact of the matter is that the tipping point is just over the horizon, so, in effect, if we don't act now, we may as well be giving our children an inhabitable planet. Of course, the actual effect will be an uninhabitable planet (by our standards of living) for our great-great grand children, which, it could be argued, are still our children. In essence, unless Climate Change is acted upon, our descendants will inherit an inhabitable planet.

Of course Sander's is using hyperbole and family appeal to persuade his audience, but all politicians do this. Personally, I find his use of persuasive devices more succinct and amiable than that of Donald Trump, for example.

[British-American]

I...I don't know what to say...The evidence is clear

If I am not Australian I must be...Oh god no...

I must be...

American

or worse

British

or worse still

British-American

At least this explains my internal conflicting desire to both drink tea and throw it in the ocean.

So the nearest object which we have seen redshift is the Virgo Supercluster;

Virgo  z=.0037      Distance = 52 Mly

Obviously, even though its red shifted the light will take 52 million years to reach us, so your question remains valid. To my knowledge, I can't answer this question, but it's a really excellent question. I'll ask my physics teacher and see what he thinks.

The only answer I can possibly give is that the objects closest to us are being blue shifted, since they are travelling towards us. If the Universe started contracting, one would assume it would do this all at once (can the contraction of space time have a speed over its distance across the universe??), so the galaxy's blueshift would be greater since not only gravity is affecting it but also the contraction of the Universe. But since (I assume) the speeds and blue shifts of our closest galaxies are congruent with out gravitational equations, then it mustn't be contracting, since we can see and explain its speed due to gravity. (I assume that physicists would take the expansion of the Universe into account when calculating these things)

I would say 'just trust physicists,' but this is so contradictory to my everything ever that I would literally explode.

The request was 6 days ago. I do not think this request has even begun to be patient.

^This is a most random thought of the moment.

So for my physics exam in a few weeks I have to explain some of these things (especially the second question), so here's my answers to my knowledge. This may not help and may be better suited for me improving my physics mark
1. We don't know. There is an unproved hypothesis that the Big Bang was the result of collision of two other universes in the multiverse, but this has many assumptions and consequential questions that it don't make sense right now.

O' MIGHTY WALL OF TEXT

2.The Universe is expanding because we can see it. This is known as Hubble's Law which, numerically is; velocitygalaxy = Hubble's Constant x Distance away (v = Ho.d for you algebraic peoples). We know this because of the Doppler effect. So you know how when a police car drives towards you it's tone goes up in pitch, while when it travels away it goes down in pitch? This is the Doppler effect in action.

So here's the tricky part; sound travels in a wave which has a wavelength which is measured as the distance between two places of equal displacement from the mean position of the wave (basically the distance between a wave's highest point and the next highest point is its wavelength). OK, so let's imagine you are standing at a point and a car is travelling towards you like so;


Car(1)                                              You

The car emits a sound wave which travels at a certain speed (x). Let's assume that this is the maximum displacement for the wave (it's highest point)


Car(1)  x(sound wave)                        You

The car will continue to emit the wave and eventually it will emit the highest point of the sound wave again, hence making the wavelength (point y).

Car(1)       y              x                       You

However, if the car is moving towards you, it will emit this second displacement closer to point x relative to you. So point y will move with the car before it's emitted since it hasn't been emitted yet. Where else can it be? However, point x will not move in this situation since it's already been emitted

      Car(1)       y        x                       You

So we can see that the distance between y and x has decreased, hence the wavelength has decreased. Given that a wave's wavelength must be inversely proportional to it's frequency (due to the wave speed equation), this means the frequency has increased. As musicians, we know that if the frequency increases, the tone must increase as it does. The opposite is true for if the car was moving away from you; the distance between two points of the same wave displacement will be greater since the car has moved away from its original point, so the wavelength must be longer hence the frequency must be lower.

This same affect happens in light, since light is a wave (sort of). This is what we see in space; the galaxies' light is being 'redshifted,' which means that their light has greater wavelengths and lower frequencies. Hubble found this and made his law accordingly. What the law also shows is that the further away a galaxy is, the greater speed it has, which suggests that the galaxies are accelerating away from us. This is because they are being carried by the expanding spacetime. So if the spacetime was not expanding or at least slowing down in its expandsion, we would expect this acceleration not to exist. However, it is there since we have been observing it for decades now and Hubble's Law remains true. When it is refuted by new, credible evidence then I'm sure you'll hear about it.

[close]

3. I'm confused by this question. How would a particle accelerator occur naturally in a singularity? It doesn't; we built it. Or do you mean "How would a singularity exist in a particle accelerator?" I don't know the answer to this question. I could bullshit some answer about E = mc^2 and the mass of particles, but I do not think that would be either correct or advantageous to this question.

Or alternatively fun with calculus!

Assuming the equation is y = ((x-2)^2) - 3
Then dy/dx = 2(x-2)
Which expands to dy/dx = 2x - 4
Let dy/dx = 0, since at the vertex the gradient will be 0 as it is a turning point.
Hence, 0 = 2x - 4
Rearranges to 4 = 2x
Therefore x = 2

As an Australian I can confirm most of these facts. Except people still have guns, it's just regulated so that crazy people don't have guns.

Let's just ignore the shooting that occurred at Parramatta on Monday...

Nah fuck it, it was a police station, they have guns. It just further proves the point.

So I've passed the audition phase of the acceptance to study Composition at UWA (University of Western Australia). Just have to pull the numbers in my exams to get into Uni.

Still don't know if I want to study this next year, but all doors are still open, which is nice.

Nope. The Australian Liberal party is like Republican Party-lite; except when Abbott was in. They usually form a coalition with the National party, which is like the hillbilly party.

Our lefty party is Labor, which is mostly unionists. Greens are the far left party.

And that, children, concludes our lesson into Australian Politics. Next time we shall learn about "The Sacking," and the day we could not find our Prime Minister.

Turnbull seems pre good. He supports gay marriage and the idea that climate change exists (which a MASSIVE step in the right direction), but not until after the next election, next year. Him and Bishop (Deputy PM) could do some amazing things. Or some shitty things. I guess we'll find out.

He is a bit arrogant at times, but when your part of the Liberal party, that really comes with the trade

[Abbott's gone! ABBOTT'S GOOOOONNNNEEEEEE]

Abbott's gone! ABBOTT'S GOOOOONNNNEEEEEE

Don't need you any more

Abbott's goooonnee! ABBBBOOOOTTTTTTT'''SSSS GOOOORRRRRNNNEEEE

Get your arse right outta that doooorrrrrr

Please excuse the obnoxiousness of this post

OK, here's a thought. In bars 2 - 7 and 18 26 (and more), you have the melody in the right hand with arpeggios, with very little in the left hand. For the sake of simplicity, rather than have the right hand do all the work, could you have the arpeggios played by the left hand (either by jumping or transposing the arpeggio's down)? As a pianist looking at this piece, that is the first thing I would do.

Also, bars 34 - 38, is missing notes on beats 2 and 3, which could be easily put into the left hand.