<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div><br></div><div>On 2 Aug 2017, at 00:34, Don Morrison <<a href="mailto:dfm@ringing.org">dfm@ringing.org</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default"><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Pip Dillistone <<a href="mailto:tuftyfrog@gmail.com">tuftyfrog@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">> With Bristol below and Double Dublin above you get a 2-3</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">> differential with 2 and 3 both hunt bells:</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">> </font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">> <a href="https://complib.org/method/32289?accessKey=f8fac86bb06c104f84fdb9201f26a7ea0bef08c6">https://complib.org/method/32289?accessKey=f8fac86bb06c104f84fdb9201f26a7ea0bef08c6</a></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">The Composition Library, via this link, says this method is asymmetric. Given the rule for generating it I'd naively thought it would have the usual, palindromic symmetry. What happens to break that? Presumably there must be some other, but still related and succinct, way to describe its reverse?</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">-- </font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">Don Morrison <<a href="mailto:dfm@ringing.org">dfm@ringing.org</a>></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">"Great theories don't simply appear in someone's head as if by magic,</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">but take time to blossom. The so-called 'eureka' cry is more an</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace">exclamation of mental relief than a cry of sudden revelation."</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="courier new, monospace"> -- Marcello Gleiser, _The Dancing Universe_</font></div><div style="font-family:"courier new",monospace"><br></div></div></div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>ringing-theory mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:ringing-theory@bellringers.org">ringing-theory@bellringers.org</a></span><br><span><a href="http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/listinfo/ringing-theory">http://lists.ringingworld.co.uk/listinfo/ringing-theory</a></span><br></div></blockquote><br><div>Sorry, this is my mistake in transcribing the method — as far as I can tell it should indeed be palindromic. </div><div><br></div><div>I chose to define "over" to mean "the 2nd is over the treble in this particular row". Since the path of the 2nd is determined by the rule from the outset, this made the most sense to me at the time. It's remarkably fiddly to work out what to do when the 2nd is dodging with the treble, and it's here that I've made the mistake — just after the halfway point there should be a 34 instead of a 14 in the notation, for example. </div><div><br></div><div>Pip</div></body></html>