3 ms·

In music, consonance is stable, dissonance is unstable. “ Notes that sound good together when played at the same time are called consonant. Chords built only

In music, consonance is stable, dissonance is unstable. “ Notes that sound good together when played at the same time are called consonant. Chords built only of consonances sound pleasant and "stable"; you can listen to one for a long time without feeling that the music needs to change to a different chord. Notes that are dissonant can sound harsh or unpleasant when played at the same time” - https://www.earmaster.com/music-theory-online/ch05/chapter-5-3.html#:~:text=Chords%20built%20only%20of%20consonances,played%20at%20the%20same%20time https://www.earmaster.com/music-theory-online/ch05/chapter-5.... Orbital resonances tend to be unstable: “Orbital resonances greatly enhance the mutual gravitational influence of the bodies (i.e., their ability to alter or constrain each other's orbits). In most cases, this results in an unstable interaction, in which the bodies exchange momentum and shift orbits until the resonance no longer exists” — https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_resonance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_resonance Try curiosity over judgement.

t8sr 3y ago
But you said orbital resonance between two planets will eject a third from its orbit. Just... no. A physicist would never make a claim like "an orbital resonance between Earth and Venus would disrupt Mercury" without a study to back it up. As an aside, it is the the fact that you say things like this with confidence really sets me off - people who do know what they're talking about are careful to point out speculation. Our intuitions don't map so well to borderline non-newtonian complex interactions. Only a fool would claim otherwise. You can't just show up to another field and use your observations and a wikipedia page to make good points. I'd be happy to recommend astrophysics literature if you want. Your uses of words "stable", "unstable" and "consonant" and "dissonant" are the key here - I have no idea what "stable" means in music theory, and I don't think you'd know what I mean when I say "metals", because every field has its own jargon. But I'm not trying to make a point about music, whereas you are trying to make a point about astrophysics. Fine - but you can't expect to be understood or paid attention to if you don't learn the jargon and the underlying physics.
- dr_dshiv 3y ago
  Always looking to learn jargon and physics. Please share more. I’m eager to learn.

t8sr 3y ago

But you said orbital resonance between two planets will eject a third from its orbit. Just... no. A physicist would never make a claim like "an orbital resonance between Earth and Venus would disrupt Mercury" without a study to back it up. As an aside, it is the the fact that you say things like this with confidence really sets me off - people who do know what they're talking about are careful to point out speculation. Our intuitions don't map so well to borderline non-newtonian complex interactions. Only a fool would claim otherwise. You can't just show up to another field and use your observations and a wikipedia page to make good points. I'd be happy to recommend astrophysics literature if you want. Your uses of words "stable", "unstable" and "consonant" and "dissonant" are the key here - I have no idea what "stable" means in music theory, and I don't think you'd know what I mean when I say "metals", because every field has its own jargon. But I'm not trying to make a point about music, whereas you are trying to make a point about astrophysics. Fine - but you can't expect to be understood or paid attention to if you don't learn the jargon and the underlying physics.

dr_dshiv 3y ago
Always looking to learn jargon and physics. Please share more. I’m eager to learn.