[r-t] Methods [was Grandsire/New Grandsire, etc]

Don Morrison dfm at ringing.org
Sat Jul 19 01:06:01 UTC 2008

On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Mark Davies <mark at snowtiger.net> wrote:
> To me a change is a permutation from one row to another, where each bell
> only moves at most one place.

You are a reactionary preserver of the status quo, trying to stifle
innovation :-)

Consider the following gedankenexperiment:

You are standing outside a tuneful little six in a tidy village church
yard, conversing with a non-ringing friend. The bells begin to ring.
You carry on your conversation so you can't listen in close detail to
exactly what is being rung, just to the overall sound of the ringing.
The band is ringing a touch of Cambridge. Your friend asks "hey, is
that that change ringing stuff you're always telling me about?" You
would, I think, answer "yes." And you might add "and good, too" if it were.

Now imagine the band is ringing a touch of Cambridge Treble Jump.
I suspect you'd still answer "yes, and good, too".

Now imagine the band is quite advanced and well practiced, and can
actually ring Alan Winter's Cylindrical well, and is doing so. I
suspect you'd still answer "yes, and good, too".

Still, even if you don't go far enough, I do think your Norwich Axiom
approach would be an improvement over the current Byzantine approach
that virtually forces itself to be tweaked by modifications nearly

Don Morrison <dfm at ringing.org>
"I don't understand why people are frightened of new ideas. I'm
frightened of the old ones."                -- John Cage, _Silence_

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list