If you've ever played with only 20 people, and each of them has played with only half that number other than those you have played with, and this relationship is repeated for those others, it takes only 10 jumps to exceed the population of the world. So, Walshaw numbers must of necessity be very small for all of us!
Having said that, very regrettably, I don't know mine. Perhaps Mr Walshaw should publish his list, and we can start tracking them down!o) Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jack Campin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [abcusers] what's your Walshaw number? > After meeting Richard Robinson at the Newcastleton festival the > weekend before last and playing a few tunes in the same sessions > (there can't have been many Scottish tune sessions featuring two > clarinets before) it occurred to me that probably most people on > this list have played with somebody else on it at least once. > > In mathematics and computer science, this sort of relationship is > measured by your "Erdos number". Paul Erdos co-authored papers > with a phenomenal number of people. Erdos has Erdos number 0. > If you co-authored a paper with Erdos, you have Erdos number 1. > Your Erdos number is 1 + the minimal Erdos number of anyone you > co-authored a paper with. > > In the ABC world, Chris Walshaw is the obvious zero point. > > I've played with Julian Goodacre who has played with Chris, so > I have a Walshaw number of 2. That means Wil Macaulay and > Richard Robinson both have Walshaw numbers no higher than 3, but > perhaps they're lower by some other path. > > Anyone else know theirs? To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
