[r-t] Re: Decisions

Robin Woolley robin at robinw.org.uk
Sun Jan 2 09:23:31 UTC 2005

Graham - thanks for your request!

I have no strong views either way on Methods - but I've been interested in
extension for about 15 years. The current decision is unworkable for two
reasons: (G)B1 -  the work of Richard Smith has partly demonstrated this as
has the impossibility of proving that indefinite extensions do not exist for
large in in every case. Also, anyone who cannot understand 'classical'
extension will certainly have great difficulty in understanding the current
decision ab initio. I think that I also have demonstrated that there are
occasions when an interpretation can be put on the decisions that the MC
hadn't anticipated.

Therefore, I propose:

Replace decision G with its previous version as obtaining at 1st May 2002,
with certain additions:

To each of the notes (i) starting 'Wherever...', add a sentence of the form
'If the first such place is found in position 'X' of the parent, then the
last possible extension route is SXy' (The effect of this is to re-introduce
the interpretation aids extant in 1971/2 but omitted since)

Add a sentence to give effect to the (necessary) tie-breaker. The form of
words can be decided but the effect must be:
    i) Extensions at the next lowest stage always take precedence. An
example of the effect of this is to allow Roker S. Royal.
   ii) Competing extensions at the next lowest stage - choose the one which
gives more extensions.

These changes will re-confirm the decision as it was believed to be by, for
example, Roger Bailey in 1995.

I have no philosophical objection to modal extension, but I believe that
static/expanding should take precedence over extension by other modes. As
everyone knows, the laws of Cricket in the 1960's and 70's had a series of
'experimental laws'. This could be done in the case of modes. Does anyone
apart from members of the MC like these?

I have put on my website at www.robinw.org.uk/decision.doc a copy of my
thoughts (in friendly Word6 format) on the formulaic part of the extension.
Please feel free to look at
it and sent your (polite) comments.

Best wishes


More information about the ringing-theory mailing list