[r-t] Time to vote?
Dale Winter (Gmail)
moikney at gmail.com
Thu Jun 4 00:31:38 UTC 2015
slightly unusual request:
One of the math research institutes at Brown University (ICERM) asked Emily Russell (ringer, applied math postdoc and incidentally married to me) to put together a basic math and ringing video. It’s mostly aimed at high school students, so probably isn’t news to anyone on this list. Emily would, however, like to to include a short clip showing some bells going, preferably with reasonably good ringing and sounding OK.
The annoyance is that the university if very aware of copyright stuff, so wants a clip together with written permission from the owner to use it in the video.
Does anyone have something like this they’d be willing to share? Or know someone who does?
Very many thanks,
> On Oct 24, 2014, at 5:29 PM, Richard Smith <richard at ex-parrot.com> wrote:
> Graham John wrote:
>> I don't understand point 3. " The current restriction should be modified,
>> such that certain types of rotations may be separately named, but others may
>> What types of rotation are there?
> At one level, they're all the same: they take changes from one and put them on the other end. But the effect is not the same, and you might choose to allow rotations that have certain effects to have distinct names, but not allow them to be separately named in the general case.
> For example, you might decide that where a rotation preserves the path of the primary hunt (as does the rotation from Grandsire to New Grandsire, or from Arlesey to Helen), the rotations should be allowed separate names. But you might decide that in the more general case (e.g. Glasgow to Glasgow-snap-start) they should not.
> It's not an intrisically unreasonable position to hold, though to me it feels like it is introducing another special case of the sort the current Decisions are overly full of.
> ringing-theory mailing list
> ringing-theory at bellringers.net
More information about the ringing-theory