[r-t] Long lengths of Bristol Surprise Major

[Richard Smith]

Mark Davies wrote:

> Fabulous achievement, Andrew. Is this close to the practical limit for the 
> method, do you think?

Sadly it's one of those questions where gut instinct is all 
we've got.  I'm not even aware of a valid theoretical basis 
to use to get an upper bound on the longest possible touch 
of a method.

I recall Rod Pipe telling me that he and Peter Border 
believed the longest length should be a nice, round fraction 
of the extent.  I forget the forget the value Rod suggested; 
possibly it was 2/3 (i.e. 26800).  But whatever it was, it 
was ruled out before Andrew's most recent contribution, 
which now rules out 3/4 (i.e. 30240).

Whilst I'd like to believe the longest possible length is a 
round number, I don't actually think it's likely to be the 
case.

RAS