Well the shopping is all done now, I do like to do it in good time, and the tree was up a few days ago. Points West want me to be really "festive"; when I find out what that means perhaps I'll have a go. However when they are so relentless it's easy to see that the Puritans may have had a point.
Grumpy, moi? No.
Merry Christmas to all, peace, goodwill etc. Normal service resumed in the new year (maybe). Busy, busy, busy.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Go Wild in the Country
(observ8n)
i c u
i .
u c me
u .
we . . .
u x no me
i wil x hrt u
.
u r cool
u rn & jmp
ur frenz r ther
find cheez
bye
i c u
i .
u c me
u .
we . . .
u x no me
i wil x hrt u
.
u r cool
u rn & jmp
ur frenz r ther
find cheez
bye
Friday, December 07, 2007
Chalk Mark in a Rainstorm
Oh Lord why have you abandoned me?
You have cast me aside.
Why do you allow my enemies to prosper?
They have influence and power.
Where are you hiding?
I looked to the hills but I did not see you there.
I went to the end of the motorway but I did not find you.
I wander along the hedgerows and you are not there.
I do not see you in your temple.
I know you are there, but you are not here. I cannot hear you.
You have cast me aside.
Why do you allow my enemies to prosper?
They have influence and power.
Where are you hiding?
I looked to the hills but I did not see you there.
I went to the end of the motorway but I did not find you.
I wander along the hedgerows and you are not there.
I do not see you in your temple.
I know you are there, but you are not here. I cannot hear you.
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Ch-ch-changes
It's right to stutter over this word. Not all change is for the better but all change is scary hard work.
But it has to be done. Even if you can't see what the result will be.
The theme of this evening was change. Looked for, resisted, uncertain, and too difficult. And particularly when it doesn't end up in paradise.
Doesn't make you want to do it, does it?
But it has to be done. Even if you can't see what the result will be.
The theme of this evening was change. Looked for, resisted, uncertain, and too difficult. And particularly when it doesn't end up in paradise.
Doesn't make you want to do it, does it?
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Don't Make Promises (You Can't Keep)
1000 years of monasticism.
500 years of paternalism.
200 years of Dissent.
A decade of evangelism.
20 years of incomprehension.
20 years of blindness.
10 years of wilful blindness.
30 years of avoidance.
15 years of dementia and false hope.
How many years of terminal decline?
500 years of paternalism.
200 years of Dissent.
A decade of evangelism.
20 years of incomprehension.
20 years of blindness.
10 years of wilful blindness.
30 years of avoidance.
15 years of dementia and false hope.
How many years of terminal decline?
Sunday, December 02, 2007
The Song Remains the Same
In the absence of winning a ticket to the real thing, went last night to see Whole Lotta Led at the Fleece. (Still might win a ticket?)
The vocalist was not Robert Plant, and didn't quite have his vocal range - but he had his style and his heart and he sang blues and rock with passion and power. 9/10. Since I've Been Loving You was fantastic.
The bassist played a wonderful No Quarter and the drummer played Moby Dick like you've never seen. He could have played all night, and I think he wanted too. Both 9/10. Maybe that's harsh.
But the guitarist was astonishing. No-one is Jimmy Page, but this is as near as you could want. He was ferocious, tender and exciting. The players may change but the song remains the same. Off the scale.
And if the song is good enough and still relevant, the song can remain the same. Only if the song is dated does it need to change. But which songs should remain the same and which need a new riff? A 12-inch remix? A live version? (We can always use a live version.)
No D'yerMak'er, alas. To lament it would be to quibble, to ask too much.
Everything that's small has to grow. And it has to grow!
The vocalist was not Robert Plant, and didn't quite have his vocal range - but he had his style and his heart and he sang blues and rock with passion and power. 9/10. Since I've Been Loving You was fantastic.
The bassist played a wonderful No Quarter and the drummer played Moby Dick like you've never seen. He could have played all night, and I think he wanted too. Both 9/10. Maybe that's harsh.
But the guitarist was astonishing. No-one is Jimmy Page, but this is as near as you could want. He was ferocious, tender and exciting. The players may change but the song remains the same. Off the scale.
And if the song is good enough and still relevant, the song can remain the same. Only if the song is dated does it need to change. But which songs should remain the same and which need a new riff? A 12-inch remix? A live version? (We can always use a live version.)
No D'yerMak'er, alas. To lament it would be to quibble, to ask too much.
Everything that's small has to grow. And it has to grow!
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Dinosaurs
You can imagine the sort of comment the early mammals made while waiting for the comet to strike.
"I don't mind them being so big and stupid, but why do they have to eat all the fruit? There'll be none left when they've finished."
And the dinosaurs saying "When we've gone you can eat what you like. Until then, leaves and branches was good enough for my grandfther and it's good enough for me." (The dinosaurs are too stupid to put it so coherently, but hey that's artistic licence for you.) And of course they were bigger, if not faster, so it was difficult to shove them out of the way.
But these days not only do the dinosaurs eat all the fruit but they uproot all the trees and they don't give you space to plant any more. So not only will the next generation not have any fruit to eat but they wouldn't know what it was if you gave it them.
Saturday, October 27, 2007
Mathematics
Define F(N), the factor-sum of N, on integer N, as the sum of the proper factors of N. Formally F(N) = Σi, i divides N, i = 1 to N-1.
Further define Q(N), the quotient-factor of N, Q(N) = F(N)/N.
In common usage:
Q(N) = 1, N is perfect
Q(N) < 1, N is deficient
Q(N) > 1, N is abundant.
Previously existing result:
N is perfect if N = 2^n x (2^(n+1) - 1), provided (2^(n+1) - 1) is prime.
It is not known whether all perfect numbers are of this form.
Preliminary results:
If P is prime, F(P) = 1 and Q(P) = 1/P. Clearly, for e, there exists N s.t. that Q(N) < e.
Primes are maximally deficient.
If N = P^n, where P is prime, F(N) = (P^n - 1)/(P - 1), Q(N) = (N-1)/N(P-1)
For particular P, Q(P^n) tends to 1/(P-1) as n tends to infinity.
In the case P = 2, F(2^n) = 2^n - 1 and Q(2^n) tends to 1.
Integers of the form 2^n are minimally deficient.
Question: Are there other N such that F(N) = N - 1?
If N is abundant, any multiple of N is abundant with greater factor-quotient. (See following lemma; more fractions are added when a multiple is derived.) Formally, if M divides N, then Q(N) > Q(M).
Lemma
For all n, there exists N s.t. Q(N) > n. (Abundancy increases without limit.)
Proof
Q(N) is the sum of fractions of the form 1/n. Since Σ1/n diverges (well-known result), Q(N) is unbounded.
Therefore it is possible to define N is abundant-S if Q(N) >= S and assert that there exists an infinity of abundant-S numbers, whatever the value of S. For instance, 120 is abundant-2 (the smallest such).
Question: Find for each integer N, find the smallest M such that Q(M) ³ N
Further Result:
Since the sum of the odd fractions can also be shown to diverge[1], there is also an infinity of odd abundant-S numbers. The first odd abundant number is 945 and the smallest odd abundant-2 number is believed to be 1 018 976 683 725, which has Q-value 2.0107.
Define N is super-abundant if Q(N) > 1 and Q(N) > Q(n) if N > n. (Informally, a new record is set.)
The first super-abundant number is the first abundant number, 12. Q(12) = 1.33. (The record-holders that are not abundant are 2, 4 and 6.) The set of super-abundant numbers has infinitely many members. (A record-holder will be beaten by any multiple, from result above.)
Question: Find the super-abundant numbers.
[1] The proof is similar to that of the full series. Consider the series 1/3 + 1/5 + 1/7 +1/9 ... If we successively group 1, 3, 9, 27 ... terms ie 1/3 + (1/5 + 1/7 + 1/9) + (1/11 + ... + 1/27) + ... it is clear that the series is greater than 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 +1/3 ... and therefore diverges (slowly).
It has been necessary to replace some symbols unsupported by this font by words in the above.
Further define Q(N), the quotient-factor of N, Q(N) = F(N)/N.
In common usage:
Q(N) = 1, N is perfect
Q(N) < 1, N is deficient
Q(N) > 1, N is abundant.
Previously existing result:
N is perfect if N = 2^n x (2^(n+1) - 1), provided (2^(n+1) - 1) is prime.
It is not known whether all perfect numbers are of this form.
Preliminary results:
If P is prime, F(P) = 1 and Q(P) = 1/P. Clearly, for e, there exists N s.t. that Q(N) < e.
Primes are maximally deficient.
If N = P^n, where P is prime, F(N) = (P^n - 1)/(P - 1), Q(N) = (N-1)/N(P-1)
For particular P, Q(P^n) tends to 1/(P-1) as n tends to infinity.
In the case P = 2, F(2^n) = 2^n - 1 and Q(2^n) tends to 1.
Integers of the form 2^n are minimally deficient.
Question: Are there other N such that F(N) = N - 1?
If N is abundant, any multiple of N is abundant with greater factor-quotient. (See following lemma; more fractions are added when a multiple is derived.) Formally, if M divides N, then Q(N) > Q(M).
Lemma
For all n, there exists N s.t. Q(N) > n. (Abundancy increases without limit.)
Proof
Q(N) is the sum of fractions of the form 1/n. Since Σ1/n diverges (well-known result), Q(N) is unbounded.
Therefore it is possible to define N is abundant-S if Q(N) >= S and assert that there exists an infinity of abundant-S numbers, whatever the value of S. For instance, 120 is abundant-2 (the smallest such).
Question: Find for each integer N, find the smallest M such that Q(M) ³ N
Further Result:
Since the sum of the odd fractions can also be shown to diverge[1], there is also an infinity of odd abundant-S numbers. The first odd abundant number is 945 and the smallest odd abundant-2 number is believed to be 1 018 976 683 725, which has Q-value 2.0107.
Define N is super-abundant if Q(N) > 1 and Q(N) > Q(n) if N > n. (Informally, a new record is set.)
The first super-abundant number is the first abundant number, 12. Q(12) = 1.33. (The record-holders that are not abundant are 2, 4 and 6.) The set of super-abundant numbers has infinitely many members. (A record-holder will be beaten by any multiple, from result above.)
Question: Find the super-abundant numbers.
[1] The proof is similar to that of the full series. Consider the series 1/3 + 1/5 + 1/7 +1/9 ... If we successively group 1, 3, 9, 27 ... terms ie 1/3 + (1/5 + 1/7 + 1/9) + (1/11 + ... + 1/27) + ... it is clear that the series is greater than 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 +1/3 ... and therefore diverges (slowly).
It has been necessary to replace some symbols unsupported by this font by words in the above.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
On the Road Again
I've been catching rays
On motorways
Listening to tunes
In afternoons
A big 90 is a trip to the north.
Now a quick return for one of two calls from Chesters.
On motorways
Listening to tunes
In afternoons
A big 90 is a trip to the north.
Now a quick return for one of two calls from Chesters.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
A Team Player
Not every chess team has one, but those captains who have access to one prize them highly; they have some rather rude names, but one polite one: The Draw Specialist.
They are usually in the older age bracket. In their youth they may have been unpredictable, exciting, volatile, with wild attacking games, imaginative sacrifices and disastrous opening strategy. Now they have one opening against each of the two major opponent's moves, e4 and d4, generally obscure, stodgy and devastatingly simple, which they routinely wheel out. The Caro-Kan, say. Or something vaguely sound but which no-one has heard of, let alone plays anymore. The Chigorin Defence to the Queen's Gambit. As White they play something sound and strategic (ie c4 or d4 or both) so that no tactical surprises can occur while they are watching other people's games.
Some play Nimzovitch over-protection; make sure everything is solidly protected and wait for something to happen. Defend doggedly until the opponent over-reaches and offer a draw while he is shell-shocked at the defensive technique. Some just seem to be lucky, or clearly offer a draw too soon, at the psychological moment. "Perhaps I should have played for the win, but I didn't see it coming through."
The captain respects them, though. They play Board 2 or 3. The top boards will play their interesting theoretical stuff and that will go one way or another. But one of the opposition's threats is carefully neutralised, so that the bottom boards, playing down one, have that extra edge to give them the win. Three wins at the lower end and a draw on board 2 will do. They sacrifice their interesting ideas to the team's victory.
It does depend of course on the rest of the team doing their job, of course. But they have great (if misplaced) faith.
And when the rest of the team all lose, honour is upheld. Five and half against is not a whitewash. Today two and a half for - and someone drew a game he should have won, surely? (thought that in earlier weeks, too). Nearly there.
Three games, three draws; two solid and one rather lucky. One third of the whole team's game points (one half before today!). At least it's better than last season which started with four straight and appallling defeats (and the one where the play wasn't too bad came up against Mighty Megan, who exploits older men's weaknesses to an extent that a £200-per-hour lapdancer would be proud of).
A team player.
They are usually in the older age bracket. In their youth they may have been unpredictable, exciting, volatile, with wild attacking games, imaginative sacrifices and disastrous opening strategy. Now they have one opening against each of the two major opponent's moves, e4 and d4, generally obscure, stodgy and devastatingly simple, which they routinely wheel out. The Caro-Kan, say. Or something vaguely sound but which no-one has heard of, let alone plays anymore. The Chigorin Defence to the Queen's Gambit. As White they play something sound and strategic (ie c4 or d4 or both) so that no tactical surprises can occur while they are watching other people's games.
Some play Nimzovitch over-protection; make sure everything is solidly protected and wait for something to happen. Defend doggedly until the opponent over-reaches and offer a draw while he is shell-shocked at the defensive technique. Some just seem to be lucky, or clearly offer a draw too soon, at the psychological moment. "Perhaps I should have played for the win, but I didn't see it coming through."
The captain respects them, though. They play Board 2 or 3. The top boards will play their interesting theoretical stuff and that will go one way or another. But one of the opposition's threats is carefully neutralised, so that the bottom boards, playing down one, have that extra edge to give them the win. Three wins at the lower end and a draw on board 2 will do. They sacrifice their interesting ideas to the team's victory.
It does depend of course on the rest of the team doing their job, of course. But they have great (if misplaced) faith.
And when the rest of the team all lose, honour is upheld. Five and half against is not a whitewash. Today two and a half for - and someone drew a game he should have won, surely? (thought that in earlier weeks, too). Nearly there.
Three games, three draws; two solid and one rather lucky. One third of the whole team's game points (one half before today!). At least it's better than last season which started with four straight and appallling defeats (and the one where the play wasn't too bad came up against Mighty Megan, who exploits older men's weaknesses to an extent that a £200-per-hour lapdancer would be proud of).
A team player.
Thursday, October 04, 2007
Abundance
Find the next number in the sequence:
2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 60, 120 ...
I believe I know the next three but there seems to be a big gap later on so I'm doubtful whether 840 really is on it. And is there really nothing between 2520 and 27720 (assuming these are on it)? Research continues.
A slightly easier related (provably expanded?) sequence goes:
2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 20, 24, 30 ...
Edit: Discovered an error in the top sequence. To be updated later.
2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 60, 120 ...
I believe I know the next three but there seems to be a big gap later on so I'm doubtful whether 840 really is on it. And is there really nothing between 2520 and 27720 (assuming these are on it)? Research continues.
A slightly easier related (provably expanded?) sequence goes:
2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 18, 20, 24, 30 ...
Edit: Discovered an error in the top sequence. To be updated later.
Friday, September 28, 2007
Hypothetical
What would happen if the designated worship leader didn't have an order of service? (I mean really didn't have one, not just hadn't written it down?)
Would anyone mind?
What should happen when we go to worship? Do we expect it to?
Would anyone mind?
What should happen when we go to worship? Do we expect it to?
Saturday, September 22, 2007
The R Word
This blog was started to help process the overload, in various ways, that was coming in while I was at College, which is why it slowed down in holidays and has been absent lately. So it was a bit reactive and didn't in fact do what it said on the tin. Perhaps it now can be a bit more proactive and initiating. (This is as close to a statement of intent as I can get right now.)
I won't change the name as there was precious little theology in it anyway (an issue in itself, ho-hum). Let's see if we can do better. But it's likely to be a grab-bag (that's the polite term, I believe) of what I'm working on at any given moment. Let's not make promises we can't keep. But we will see if anything can be revisited. Don't hold your breath.
I won't change the name as there was precious little theology in it anyway (an issue in itself, ho-hum). Let's see if we can do better. But it's likely to be a grab-bag (that's the polite term, I believe) of what I'm working on at any given moment. Let's not make promises we can't keep. But we will see if anything can be revisited. Don't hold your breath.
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Aspirational TV
I've discovered a wonderful new TV programme called Jane and the Dragon. It's about (ostensibly) a girl who wants to train to be a knight when everyone else, including her mother and father, wants to pigeonhole her into being a lady-in-waiting like her mother. Even her friends aren't sure about her ambition, but at least the rules are applied fairly by Sir Theodore, although he is a daft old ... knight. So she sets out to kill the dragon but instead befriends it and brings it back to the castle. Which isn't always appreciated as it should be.
Why she wants to be a knight when the examples around are less than honourable beats me, but I suppose it's better than being a lady-in-waiting, even if the young princess who smells of lavender is quite nice really.
There's a website although Jester hasn't fully finished it, so no link here. Google it and you'll find it. Programme is Saturday and Sunday mornings on Five.
In other news, I'm hoping to meet a man with seven wives.
Why she wants to be a knight when the examples around are less than honourable beats me, but I suppose it's better than being a lady-in-waiting, even if the young princess who smells of lavender is quite nice really.
There's a website although Jester hasn't fully finished it, so no link here. Google it and you'll find it. Programme is Saturday and Sunday mornings on Five.
In other news, I'm hoping to meet a man with seven wives.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Rock Your World
According to New Scientist, researchers have been making recordings to show what sounds come out like on other worlds, in preparation for sending recording equipment there. Atmosphere density and composition changes the harmonics. So now they know what Smoke on the Water sounds like on Venus and Titan. ("I should have doen thunder, but I couldn't resist" says the producer.)
On Venus it's much deeper and punchier and on Titan it's much louder. So that's next holiday sorted.
On Venus it's much deeper and punchier and on Titan it's much louder. So that's next holiday sorted.
Friday, August 10, 2007
A British Champion
Who says chess isn't exciting?
This afternoon is the last day of the British Championship and I doubt it's ever been so tense in the last round. The two leaders are the number 8 and 12 seeds, by half a point over numbers 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 and 11. 5 and 9 are half a point behind those two and number 2 seed is off the pace (!) a further half point behind. Now 12 is playing 10, 7 v 8, 1 v4 and 3 v 11. Any of these can therefore finish up first or equal first if the results go their way.
I've been watching live the last few days as Jacob Aagaard (12) has tried to blow a colossal lead. At 6.5 out of 7 he looked like a winner all the way; after 1 point from the next 3 games he's been demoted to Board 2, but is still guaranteed at least a share of first place (with up to one other) if he wins, and a draw will do it unless the game on board 1 is a win for White (potential for up to a four-way tie, if boards 3 and 4 are decisive one way or the other. A draw can't give him the title outright). Another defeat will leave him nowhere, relatively.
I note that Jacob has played (including this afternoon's game) the players currently lying in positions 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10. So I think he'll deserve it if he wins. Averaging the gradings of opponents, he has played the highest average of anyone, equal with the number 4 seed, Nick Pert. Jacob drew with the number 1 seed and beat numbers 3, 4, 5 and 9.
Jacob plays under the Scottish flag. The Scots do seem to have a lock on the championship in recent years .... (Famous last words.)
UPDATE:
Well every bit as thrilling as anticipated. No short draws with so much at stake. Aagaard won a pawn at the cost of an open g-file to his king, and contrived to lose the exchange. Pawn for the exchange then, but pressure against his king-side ....
Rowson beat Pert, so that's one player on 8. Hebden plugging away, but lost his a-pawn and facing an advanced passed d-pawn ... (which disappears with surprising speed)
On board one Gordon, needing a win for 8.5 to overtake Rowson, had a pawn for the exchange ... but I was never convinced his attack was going anywhere. Aagaard I felt could always resist the pressure but one slip and it would be over. Much tense manoeuvring.
Suddenly Kosten gets two rooks round the back of Gordon's defence, whose bishop is pinned to his queen and behind that the king. But the Black king is suddenly exposed ....
Howell beats Williams with 25 seconds left on his clock. (You can make a lot of moves in 25 seconds.)
I don't understand all the pawn captures in Hebden-Haslinger but it looks drawish, two bishops v bishop and knight. Yes, there it goes, in 62 moves. And Aagaard has two passed rook pawns. Now you don't see that too often. He must win, surely? Yep, thought so. Resignation after the second time control, move 60. Both players down to last two or three minutes before that. So can Gordon break through? I didn't think so. Drawn on move 61 - Haslinger can repeat moves and Gordon can't afford not to.
The winner is Aagaard, after all. I'm pleased for him.
Second equal, Gordon, from Oldham, and Rowson from, er, Aberdeen?
This afternoon is the last day of the British Championship and I doubt it's ever been so tense in the last round. The two leaders are the number 8 and 12 seeds, by half a point over numbers 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 and 11. 5 and 9 are half a point behind those two and number 2 seed is off the pace (!) a further half point behind. Now 12 is playing 10, 7 v 8, 1 v4 and 3 v 11. Any of these can therefore finish up first or equal first if the results go their way.
I've been watching live the last few days as Jacob Aagaard (12) has tried to blow a colossal lead. At 6.5 out of 7 he looked like a winner all the way; after 1 point from the next 3 games he's been demoted to Board 2, but is still guaranteed at least a share of first place (with up to one other) if he wins, and a draw will do it unless the game on board 1 is a win for White (potential for up to a four-way tie, if boards 3 and 4 are decisive one way or the other. A draw can't give him the title outright). Another defeat will leave him nowhere, relatively.
I note that Jacob has played (including this afternoon's game) the players currently lying in positions 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10. So I think he'll deserve it if he wins. Averaging the gradings of opponents, he has played the highest average of anyone, equal with the number 4 seed, Nick Pert. Jacob drew with the number 1 seed and beat numbers 3, 4, 5 and 9.
Jacob plays under the Scottish flag. The Scots do seem to have a lock on the championship in recent years .... (Famous last words.)
UPDATE:
Well every bit as thrilling as anticipated. No short draws with so much at stake. Aagaard won a pawn at the cost of an open g-file to his king, and contrived to lose the exchange. Pawn for the exchange then, but pressure against his king-side ....
Rowson beat Pert, so that's one player on 8. Hebden plugging away, but lost his a-pawn and facing an advanced passed d-pawn ... (which disappears with surprising speed)
On board one Gordon, needing a win for 8.5 to overtake Rowson, had a pawn for the exchange ... but I was never convinced his attack was going anywhere. Aagaard I felt could always resist the pressure but one slip and it would be over. Much tense manoeuvring.
Suddenly Kosten gets two rooks round the back of Gordon's defence, whose bishop is pinned to his queen and behind that the king. But the Black king is suddenly exposed ....
Howell beats Williams with 25 seconds left on his clock. (You can make a lot of moves in 25 seconds.)
I don't understand all the pawn captures in Hebden-Haslinger but it looks drawish, two bishops v bishop and knight. Yes, there it goes, in 62 moves. And Aagaard has two passed rook pawns. Now you don't see that too often. He must win, surely? Yep, thought so. Resignation after the second time control, move 60. Both players down to last two or three minutes before that. So can Gordon break through? I didn't think so. Drawn on move 61 - Haslinger can repeat moves and Gordon can't afford not to.
The winner is Aagaard, after all. I'm pleased for him.
Second equal, Gordon, from Oldham, and Rowson from, er, Aberdeen?
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Strange Echoes
Well it isn't exactly a pick-up truck, but I have this curious feeling that I should get a pink carnation and drive to the levee ...
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Off The Road
Been on it quite a bit lately. In hope, in frustration, in reflection, in anticipation. There will be journeys in a few weeks but now it's time to sit still. Don't suppose that'll stop me, though.
Thursday, July 19, 2007
New Game
"Fagin's Gang" was playtested yesterday with some popularity. Stealing is harder than you think. You have to be in the right place at the right time - not easy with the policemen moving you on and the other players stealing your turf. Deceptively simple and frustratingly complex.
A winner.
A winner.
Sunday, July 15, 2007
Rain rain go away come again another day
I suppose it really was a bit much putting the beer festival on Friday the 13th. Asking for it, you might say. Wetter outside than in, and so forth. Still Saturday was nice, made up for it, beer hadn't all run out, with a good band who seemed to have borrowed my record collection at one point. Get your tickets early next year.
And today is St. Swithin's Day. Which is not going to be good news for all those living on flood plains.
And today is St. Swithin's Day. Which is not going to be good news for all those living on flood plains.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)