[r-t] Gangnam (or whatever) etc.
richard at ex-parrot.com
Wed May 14 08:50:43 UTC 2014
Robin Woolley wrote:
> The 1440 printed at p109 of the Diary gives a true 2880 to Gangnam as might
> be expected intuitively - so the footnote to the comp. is (not yet) false. As
> Graham John seems to be saying, one needs an even number of extents
> 'packaged' to obtain a true comp. - an odd number won't do.
I would be extremely interested to see a proof that there is
no true multi-extent composition of Gangnan with an odd
number of extents. Are you sure it's true?
More information about the ringing-theory