# [r-t] Stedman Doubles derivative

grahamfeeney at bulldoghome.com grahamfeeney at bulldoghome.com
Mon Feb 12 15:46:22 UTC 2007

```Hello All

I think that the lesson I've learned is that a principle can start in more
than one place and that I have to be careful with place notation.

Thanks to all.

Graham

On Mon, 12 February, 2007 3:39 am, edward martin wrote:
> Yes it is indeed.
> As originally published in The Bell News, John Carter gave the figures
> of both Doubles & Triples side by side
>
> Incidentally, if we take Graham's preferred PN
> On all odd numbers, if x is the highest number of bells involved, then
> Carter's  can be set out as being:
> 3.x.1.3.5.3.5.3.1.x.3.1
> This PN will  maintain reverse plain hunt coursing order on all numbers
> For example Caters would run:
>
>
> 123456789
> 213547698  3
> ------------------
> 125374968  x
> 152739486  1
> 512374968  3
> 153279486  5
> 513724968  3
> 157329486  5
> 517234968  3
> 571329486  1
> ------------------
> 753192846  x
> 573918264  3
> 537192846  1
>
>
> I don't think that the online collections will recognise any rotation
> of PN, thus Carter's is there but as  x.3.1.3.x.1.3.5.3.5.3.1
>
> mew
>
>
>
> On 11/02/07, rchat <rchat at allton.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> Graham,
>>
>>
>> It is Carter Doubles:
>>
>>
>> Carter: 5.3.1.3.5.1.3.5.3.5.3.1.5.3.1.3.5.1.3.5.3.5.3.1.
>> Yours :       3.5.1.3.5.3.5.3.1.5.3.1
>>
>>
>> Just starting from a different place (2 divisions of Carter given
>> above)
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ringing-theory-bounces at bellringers.net
>> [mailto:ringing-theory-bounces at bellringers.net] On Behalf Of
>> grahamfeeney at bulldoghome.com Sent: 11 February 2007 11:46
>> To: ringing-theory at bellringers.net
>> Subject: Re: [r-t] Stedman Doubles derivative
>>
>>
>>
>> I've been on Visual Method Archive.  I am not used to MicroSyril
>> notation, so I've just written it out longhand:
>>
>> 3.5.1.3.5.3.5.3.1.5.3.1  The single can go in at the first six.
>>
>>
>> VMA says its unrung.
>>
>>
>> It does not seem to be listed on http://www.methods.org.uk in
>> Principles
>> Doubles.
>>
>>
>> It looks a bit like Reverse Stedman and has some similarity to Carter.
>>
>>
>> I'll try the webmaster.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>> Graham
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>

```