[r-t] Multi-extent 5-part Surprise Minor

Alexander Holroyd holroyd at math.ubc.ca
Thu Aug 30 09:01:11 UTC 2012

Perhaps even easier to ring would be 4 separate 5-part blocks (not 
individually true, of course), each with one overwork, so only 3 changes 
of overwork in the peal.  I don't see any particular reason why this 
should not exist.

Again, a fantastic achivement!

On Thu, 30 Aug 2012, John Warboys wrote:

> On Wed, 29 Aug 2012, Alexander Holroyd wrote:
>> Can it be done with only four changes of backwork per part?
> I haven't attempted to do this because of the additional restrictions
> it imposes, but I'll have a look at it as I appreciate it would be
> quite neat and would make it simpler to ring.  I also intend to look at
> bobs-only options, but these will inevitably mean fewer methods in a
> 5040 and a longer length to get all 41 in.
> _______________________________________________
> ringing-theory mailing list
> ringing-theory at bellringers.net
> http://bellringers.net/mailman/listinfo/ringing-theory_bellringers.net

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list