[r-t] What's the meaning of a method havingaparticularfalsecoursehead

[Philip Earis]

I think some perspective is needed...how many of the rung treble-dodging
major methods are actually false in the plain course?  Are there any?!
Can someone come up with a decent method which is false in a course (but
not in a lead)? 

Perhaps Richard Smith can trawl through his database (and while he's
doing it, I'm still interested in the number of rung asymmetric-section
methods)...





-----Original Message-----
From: King, Peter R [mailto:peter.king at imperial.ac.uk] 
Sent: 28 April 2005 08:48
To: ringing-theory at bellringers.net
Subject: RE: [r-t] What's the meaning of a method
havingaparticularfalsecoursehead

A question that I'm sure you can answer. Given the previous discussin
about the use of the "A" FCH. It appears that (under one definition) it
covers methods which are false against the plain course (ie all methods)
as well as those which are false within the plain course (not currently
considered quite pc but we are talking mathematical constructs here not
arbitrary rules). The other point of view is that it should only cover
those methods false in the plain course. How would proponents of the
first point of view like to distinguish between the two points of view?
It does seem to me that this is important. If I am looking at a table of
methods I would like to see some indication of whether or not the method
is false in the plain course or not. Having every method labelled "A"
falseness doesn't help me.

Peter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ringing-theory-bounces at bellringers.net 
> [mailto:ringing-theory-bounces at bellringers.net] On Behalf Of 
> Richard Smith
> Sent: 27 April 2005 16:55
> To: ringing-theory at bellringers.net
> Subject: Re: [r-t] What's the meaning of a method having 
> aparticularfalsecoursehead
> 
> 
> Andrew Johnson wrote:
> 
> > Is the table of the 'groups' of false course heads available online?
> > Some of the groups are mentioned in Wilfred Wilson's book 'Change
> > Ringing', but that list isn't complete.
> 
http://www.ex-parrot.com/~richard/major/falseness/groups.html

Richard

_______________________________________________
ringing-theory mailing list
ringing-theory at bellringers.net
http://bellringers.net/mailman/listinfo/ringing-theory_bellringers.net

_______________________________________________
ringing-theory mailing list
ringing-theory at bellringers.net
http://bellringers.net/mailman/listinfo/ringing-theory_bellringers.net

DISCLAIMER:

This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use of the addressee only and may contain confidential, privileged or copyright material. It may not be relied upon or disclosed to any other person without the consent of the RSC. If you have received it in error, please contact us immediately. Any advice given by the RSC has been carefully formulated but is necessarily based on the information available, and the RSC cannot be held responsible for accuracy or completeness. In this respect, the RSC owes no duty of care and shall not be liable for any resulting damage or loss. The RSC acknowledges that a disclaimer cannot restrict liability at law for personal injury or death arising through a finding of negligence. The RSC does not warrant that its emails or attachments are Virus-free: Please rely on your own screening.