The Double Quotient Inverse Frequency discrete spectral noncommutative time Alain Connes music phase

OK I took out all the HTML image data code text. thanks. Also added some quotes
The Pythagorean discrete ratios are either 2 to the m divided by 3 to the n OR 3 to the m divided by 2 to the n, and since exponentiation is noncommutative therefore the noncommutative discrete "double quotient" ratios are MORE DENSE as a "continuum" than the real numbers! Since it is 3/2 to the 12th against 2 to the 7th then it is assumed that as a commutative logarithm the exponentials can be just added together. But when you divide back into the same octave scale then the exponentials are noncommutative due to the inversion. This is the secret point of Alain Connes - that time is no longer measured from spatial wavelength but due to quantum physics "time" is now measured as inverse frequency of light from quantum noncommutativity.
OK so there's absolutely no record of your Ph.D. thesis or you getting any music Ph.D. on the interwebs - and it would be recorded somewhere. You repeatedly keep misspelling noncommutativity and noncommutative and also commutative. So "communitative" is not the correct spelling. Rather you wrote: "noncommunicative and irrational, whereas we know that the intervals set out in the Pythagorean principles are communicative and rational."
You misspelled it in two different ways in two different responses. Clearly you're not versed with the topic.
Thirdly your claiming "secret" sources as second hand evidence. That is not valid in an academic argument or any kind of valid evidential argument. Fourth your claiming that because Alain Connes gave his music lecture privately therefore I could not know the subject. I disagree. Connes published his music lecture and he's repeated the SAME lecture precisely at more than two different locations at more than two different times.
Finally you keep claiming Alain Connes makes claims but you are not quoting Alain Connes at all while I actually provided the quotes of Alain Connes.
So for all those reasons your argument simply does not have any validity. I tried to give you as much attention as possible. Clearly you're just biased towards a certain perspective against the evidence stating otherwise.
I appreciate you sharing your views as this only inspired me to research Alain Connes more and clarify my own views. haha.
I know of the Connes lecture you're referring to as there are two or three versions of it posted on youtube and linked on his website also. I first discovered Connes in 2001 in his book "Triangles of Thought." He is discussing orchestration and how a conductor reading a score is then transposing different clefs as different spacetimes but they are all phase harmonized. So that is his view of equal-temperament having a higher dimension of time that is a cubic noncommutative time.
So the source of the one is the light that has mass from quantum frequency directly proportional to momentum.
So it resonates directly back to the noncommutative math so that there is resonance with a negative frequency such that 2/3 as C to F undertone is allowed as the "hidden" or spectral invariant - going on behind the scenes. The music melody is thus BEFORE the "scale" that creates a zero point in spacetime.
I have give you the quotes and details - it's just a matter of you studying it and realizing what he is stating about how the DISCRETE numbers are MORE DENSE than the continuous line. So Connes is "redefining" what "distance" as "length" means.
This is Connes point also that the noncommutative spectral frequency with time is BEFORE any coordinate system of a unit because the 2/3 and 3/2 overlaps as a nonlocal "double quotient" ratio of the future and past overlapping.
So this is Basil J. Hiley's point also - that it is ONLY in quantum ALGEBRA as a PROCESS of time that the noncommutative truth is revealed - and there is no need to rely on a visual geometry that attempts to contain infinity with a symmetry.
So this also explains that as Connes points out all of science has been based on commutative algebraic geometry thus far - and therefore considers noncommutative math to be a "nuisance" So gravitational entropy as the gravitational potential is the noncommutative source of reverse time negentropy that powers the Sun as Schroedinger points out - through quantum entanglement creating fusion - but also powers life on Earth!!
And Connes again:
"But the inverse space of spinors is finite dimensional. Their spectrum is SO DENSE that it appears continuous but it is not continuous.... It is only because one drops commutativity that variables with a continuous range can coexist with variables with a countable range."
Basil J. Hiley confirms that there is NO NEED to use the commutative probabilities in quantum physics and it's better to just maintain the noncommutative math as the entangled photon Weak measurements empirical prove.

[voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang]

So to summarize Connes' noncommutative quantum nonlocal music claim from the discrete Pythagorean ratios: the exponential uses 3 to the 19th and 2 to the 12th while the inverse logarithm uses 2 to the 1/19th and 3 to the 1/12th. That's what makes them noncommutative as the irrational number. Because the Pythagorean ratios are noncommutative as the Perfect Fifth with C to F as 2/3 and C to G as 3/2, therefore the 7 as the note integer of the 12 note scale is also noncommutative for the exponentiation. If you study quantum physics you'll see Conne's making the same point about the "inner automorphisms" of the Dirac Operator whereby the discrete diagonals of the matrices are noncommutative. The Pythagorean music exponentiation is noncommutative since the powers have to be inverted as a fraction that is therefore 3-dimensional as a noncommutative quantum sphere using the imaginary number. I'll let Connes explain as he does best in his first version of this music lecture:
So if we take the 2-sphere, if we take the round sphere, its spectrum this time is very very simple. It is also formed by integers, exactly as in the case of a string. But these integers appear this time with a certain multiplicity, that is to say it's not exactly integers. It is more exactly the root of J(J + 1). ...The shapes on the sphere are different, the sound we hear is the same. [Isospectral but not isomorphic]. And that is what we call spectral multiplicity, that is to say that in the spectrum, what will happen is that we will have the same value, but it will happen multiple times. I will come back to this for the musical shape, that, we will see that later....
when you make music, in fact, it is not at all integers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
etc., as frequencies which are used ? Absolutely not, these are the powers of the same
number, the powers of the same number, that is to say we have a number q. And we
look at the numbers qn, that is what counts, because it is the relationships between
frequencies that count. And the wonder that makes piano music exist, called The
harpsichord well temperated, etc., it is the arithmetic fact that exists, which means
that if we take the number 2 to the power of a twelfth, if you take the twelfth root
of 2, that’s very, very close to the nineteenth root of 3.
See, I gave those numbers. You see that the twelfth root of 2 is 1.059..., etc. The
nineteenth root of 3 is 1.059... Where does 12 come from ?
The 12 comes from the fact that there are 12 notes when you make the chromatic
range. And the 19 comes from the fact that 19 is 12 + 7 and that the seventh note
in the chromatic scale, this is the scale that allows you to transpose. So what does
it mean ? It means that going to the range above is multiplying by 2 and the ear is
very sensitive to that. And transpose is multiplication by 3, except that it returns to
the range before, i.e. so it is to multiply by 3 / 2, that agrees.
Well, that’s the music, well known now, to which the ear is sensitive, etc. Okay.
But... there is an obvious question ! It is "is there a geometrical object which range
gives us the range we use in music ?". This is an absolutely obvious question.
If you look at what is going on, like these are the powers of q, you notice that the
dimension of the space in question is necessarily equal to 0. Why ? Because earlier,
I had shown you its limits. ...So I had shown you earlier that the objects had a range that
looked like a parabola when they were of dimension 2.
When an object is larger, it will be a little more complicated than a parabola.
For example, if it is in dimension 3, it will be y = x to the 1/3, okay, but here, it’s not at
all a thing that is round like a parabola like that...This is something that pffuiittt !
that gets up in the air like that. And what it tells you is that the object in question
must be of dimension 0. So you say to yourself, "an object of dimension 0, What does
it mean ? etc. Well...What I hope one day is that we will find the noncommutative sphere in Nature and
one will be able to use it as a musical instrument and it will be a wonderful instrument because it will never detune." (Connes, 2011)
So the paranormal quantum biology claim is that our body-mind-spirit IS that noncommutative sphere musical instrument in Nature that will never detune, as long as we know to properly play it and listen to it.

[voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang]

So in my previous research I pointed out that the Pythagorean Comma has a slightly different value as 3/2 to the 12 approximating 2 to the 7th as Sir James Jeans defines it in his book on Music. Whereas the usual definition of the Pythagorean Comma assumes the logarithmic conversion of 3/2 against 2 into 3 to the 12th approximating 2 to the 19th. So because it is based on multiplicative as listening that is an exponential growth factor then the conversion of "halving" of the ratios back into the octave has to invert the exponentials as being noncommutative! This is why is it then 3 to the 1/19th approximating to the 2 to the 1/12th. And this is why the discrete Pythagorean noncommutative ratios are MORE DENSE than the irrational number continuum. The noncommutative ratios are a "double quotient" as the noncommutative cross multiplication or "inner automorphism" of the matrix math.

[voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang]

The 12 comes from the fact that there are 12 notes when you make the chromatic
range. And the 19 comes from the fact that 19 is 12 + 7 and that the seventh note
in the chromatic scale, this is the scale that allows you to transpose. So what does
it mean ? It means that going to the range above is multiplying by 2 and the ear is
very sensitive to that. And transpose is multiplication by 3, except that it returns to
the range before, i.e. so it is to multiply by 3 / 2, that agrees.
Well, that’s the music, well known now, to which the ear is sensitive, etc. Okay.
But... there is an obvious question ! It is “is there a geometrical object which range
gives us the range we use in music ?”. This is an absolutely obvious question.
If you look at what is going on, like these are the powers of q, you notice that the
dimension of the space in question is necessarily equal to 0. Why ? Because earlier,
I had shown you its limits. So I had shown you earlier that
the objects had a range that looked like a parabola when they were of dimension 2.
When an object is larger, it will be a little more complicated than a parabola.
For example, if it is in dimension 3, it will be y = x to the 1/3, okay, but here, it’s not at
all a thing that is round like a parabola like that (AC draws a parabola in the air).
This is something that pffuiittt ! (AC makes the gesture of an exponential in air.)
that gets up in the air like that. And what it tells you is that the object in question
must be of dimension 0. So you say to yourself, “an object of dimension 0, What does
it mean ? etc. Well.”

[voidisyinyangvoidisyinyang]

and spectra”, given at the Collège de France, on October 13, 2011