[r-t] Extension

Robin Woolley robin at robinw.org.uk
Wed Mar 22 06:10:25 UTC 2017

Hi All,

A few more thoughts on Extension

At least Roddy has cleared up what might be called the 'Chinese 
memories' w.r.t. Beverley. Just as a matter of interest, do you still 
have a note of the extensions with which you came up?

It was interesting to note that someone one remarked about some methods 
not having extensions. Not all people are parents, of course, so why 
should any given method be a parent of extensions but, on an historical 
note, those who set up the original scheme were surprised in the other 
way - that so many methods did have extensions. I do not understand why 
anyone would have a problem of a method with no extensions all though I 
have heard it said, in jest, I hope, that no new method should be 
allowed unless it is indefinitely extendible.

When we discussed indefinite extension years ago, some people believed 
it was possible to prove this quality. Now the same are rolling back 
from this. My view is that, since ringing takes place on small numbers - 
no peal has been rung on more than 22 last time I looked - an extension 
of a method going to 10 and terminating must be of more practical use 
than an extension starting at 28 and increasing by 24 each time - there 
are some! After all, not all parents become grandparents!

Tidying up on a few comments. PRK - the point about the 5-6 places in 
Cambridge S8 is that it is not 'new' work, just some old work repeated 
in a different place. Truly 'new' work would be something like Stedman 
whole turns introduced from nowhere - like that odd point in 
London#3S10. He is not the first not to believe in the concept of 
Extension and he won't be the last.

Alan Reading can be quite re-assured that, in the original work on 
Extension more than 60 years ago, Superlative at all its stages - #1, #2 
and Maximus did not comply with the formulae. The problem was that they 
had been rung before formal work on Extension was begun. (As was Plain 
Bob & Grandsire). It was also pointed out then that any formula would 
come up with 'sub-standard extensions'. As MBD is saying, you can't 
account for Human nature!

By the way, there are, of course, a set of sequences based on 
Lincolnshire S8, including Swindon S10.

There really is nothing new under the sun!

Best wishes

More information about the ringing-theory mailing list