Talk:Logarithm

message: Okay, I'm a "noob" at editing Wikipedia pages (this is my second attempt in 15 years).  So here goes:
In the "Particular bases" section of the Logarithm page, it says:
". . . in music theory, where a pitch ratio of two (the octave) is ubiquitous and the cent is the binary logarithm (scaled by 1200) of the ratio between two adjacent equally-tempered pitches in European classical music; . . ."
If you look at the Wikipedia definition of "Cent (music)" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cent_(music), and the Wikipedia definition of "Binary logarithm", it appears that there has been a transcription error between these two definitions [Cent (music) & Binary logarithm] and the Logarithm article, which may need to be harmonized.
Based on my music theory classes in college, a cent is 1/100th of the pitch ratio between two adjacent equal-tempered pitches (a interval of a semitone or half-tone) in European music, and 1200 cents make an octave - not a half-tone.  
So should the above quoted text in the Logarithm article read: ". . . and the cent is the binary logarithm (scaled by 100) of the ratio between two adjacent equally-tempered-pitches in European classical music; . . ."?
Or would another way of re-writing this be better?
Or am I completely mistaken?
TimeriderTech (talk) 01:10, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's more screwed up than you indicate.  It should perhaps say ". . . in music theory, where a pitch ratio of two (the octave) is ubiquitous and the cent is the binary logarithm (scaled by 1200) of the ratio between two pitches; . . .".   Any two pitches, not two notes nominally 100 cents apart.  On the other hand, this is still a bad way to define "the cent" where it means "the interval measured in cents".  Please try to rewrite it to make more cents. Dicklyon (talk) 01:17, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's just overly specific. The number of cents between any two pitches is 1200x the binary logarithm of their ratio. There is no reason to specify that the two pitches in question be adjacent. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:21, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: What you say is correct.  But it's hard to incorporate it into a sentence that says "the cent is". Dicklyon (talk) 03:24, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: What's wrong with my proposed simpler replacement for the incorrect quoted text above: "the number of cents between any two pitches is the binary logarithm (scaled by 1200) of their ratio" ? —David Eppstein (talk) 07:13, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing wrong with that.  I interpreted your "It's just overly specific" as a suggestion to make the smaller change like I first said, with "the cent is".  An alternative using would be "The cent is 1/100 of the difference of logarithms between two pitches a semitone apart" or something like that, where now the log base doesn't even matter.  It's exactly the same problem discussed at length on Talk:Decibel, between trying to say "the decibel is" or trying to say how many decibels a ratio corresponds to.  The standards agencies take the former approach, but I'm not saying I like it.  Dicklyon (talk) 14:36, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cent scale 

message: Jacobolus surprisingly reverted an edit that removed a verbatim copy of a line two lines above that line. I'm re-reverting it after [Discussion] with him. MüllerMarcus (talk) 20:21, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No, please do not make excellently accessible featured articles less friendly to novice readers without consensus, and please don't engage in edit warring. The explanation is not "redundant", and the line you call "*identical*" is self evidently different. Please look again more carefully, and try to put yourself in the shoes of a non-technical reader. –jacobolus (t) 20:39, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

text: I made the text a bit more explicit. Does that help? (As always, anyone should feel free to keep working on this who thinks they can improve on it.) –jacobolus (t) 00:58, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: that really helps a lot! Thank you for spending time on this, and sorry for the confrontation. MüllerMarcus (talk) 12:21, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Redundant formula in section on Taylor series