[r-t] Principles
Graham John
graham at changeringing.co.uk
Mon Jul 4 21:20:36 UTC 2011
Simon wrote:
> For example: 34x34.18.56x56.18
> The work of 1,4,5,8 is not the same as the work of 2,3,6,7.
And this demonstrates the impossibility, doesn't it. For 1,4,5 & 8 to do the
same work in the first half as 2,3,6 & 7 in the second, the place notation
would have to be the same. And if it was, it would be a principle with a
division of half the length (as is the case with Simon's example of x18x18).
However, as Chris has pointed out, you can have a differential where the
work of half the bells is the mirror image of the other half - Stedman
Doubles Winked Differential Royal being an obvious example.
Graham
More information about the ringing-theory
mailing list