[r-t] Changes to decisions again

[Philip Earis]

By permutations, I mean each bell sounding once and only once in every
row.  That's fairly obviously implied, even if it is not stated.  

I've no objections to people ringing 'cylindrical', tunes etc. I just
don't think you can describe it using the same framework as conventional
change-ringing. I guess you could say it falls outside my reduced
requirements for change ringing of 'true permutations'. 

Jump changes are entirely different, and could be categorised easily.

Anyway, there's never been any cylindrical rung, ever.  This is
something that David Brown allegedly gave up on as it was too weird.



-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Smith [mailto:richard at ex-parrot.com] 
Sent: 23 January 2006 13:48
To: ringing-theory at bellringers.net
Subject: Re: [r-t] Changes to decisions again

Philip Earis wrote:

> "It also allows cylindrical.  "Any sequence of true
> permutations" does not require all the permutations to
> involve all the bells..."
>
> Eh?! It does in my mind. I think we're using a different definition of
> permutations...

Well, people talk about permutations of r objects form a set
of n objects -- that's what nPr is.  But even if you ignore
that, do you agree that 123456 is a permutation and so is
12345678?  If so, what is to stop the ringers of 7 and 8
from stopping for a beer break during a peal?

RAS

_______________________________________________
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.