What would some of those philosophic implications be?
Also, this link asks if music notation is Turing complete, not music itself. Is out method of writing musc turing complete or is the music itself turing complete? What about something like maqam or other microtonal systems? Or temperament beyond the twelve-tone temperament we know and love?
Good find though, that's a very interesting question...
IANA-Philosopher, but if music, geometry, and logic could each encode all the same things, and we have a musical "sense," for its rules and symmetry, it's reasonable to speculate that music is an artifact of patterns and theorems that appear in these other areas, and where we don't have an matching rule in one area, it implies one should exist in the other.
It's stuff like the machine learning kit that produced a new AC/DC song (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpEVsDN84Hc), meaning that machine learning has discovered an algorithm for producing outputs from rules effectively hidden in the band members heads.
The function the ML model discovered that produces theorems in the domain of plausible AC/DC songs isn't as useful to us as the one that produces plausible fluid dynamics models, but the possibility that the properties (or category) of that function might contain other analogies and isomorphisms to geometric figures, graphs, and other objects may imply that when we listen to music or compose, it our minds could just be in effect, "doing math," - and whether we in fact do anything that is "not math," either.
High level, I suspect this may have been what Hofstadter, Dennett, and Searle were on about.
Also, this link asks if music notation is Turing complete, not music itself. Is out method of writing musc turing complete or is the music itself turing complete? What about something like maqam or other microtonal systems? Or temperament beyond the twelve-tone temperament we know and love?
Good find though, that's a very interesting question...