[r-t] another ringing maths paper

[Giles Blundell]

> From: Alexander Holroyd <holroyd at math.ubc.ca>

>
> People might find this paper amusing:
> http://arxiv.org/abs/1602.08073

(snip)
>
> I should point out that there is nothing here that would be regarded as
> hugely novel to the ringing theory community.  Many people on this list
> could probably have solved this problem if they tried.  (snip again)
>
> cheers, Ander
>
>

If I've understood Ander right, he's saying that the referenced paper is
saying that some mathematician has worked out from scratch something that
ringers have known (and have proved) for years.

This is not the first time this has happened. I am neither a mathematician
nor an academic, but doesn't this mean that there is a piece of work to be
done to identify original mathematical thought which ringers have already
done, and make it available to current mathematicians? That way, ringers as
a whole could claim the credit which was rightly theirs - and, more
importantly, working mathematicians could get on with new work rather than
re-inventing the wheel - or move straight to the practical application of
the wheels that ringers have already invented.

Cheers

Giles
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://bellringers.net/pipermail/ringing-theory/attachments/20160702/31f17d32/attachment-0002.html>