The worst TV programme in the world..ever!

When I go home I often end up watching rubbish on TV. Nothing unusual about that, but today I hit a new rubbish TV low.

There are many categories of rubbish TV. For instance you have:

1) stuff you have seen a million times already,which was good at the time but kind of boring now, but still watch just because (eg the Christmas episode of Cheers, the Simpsons, Anything on Dave or daytime E4)

2) Stuff you watched when you were wee but is somehow still going and you wonder why you actually enjoyed it in the first place (Chuckle Brothers, I'm talking about you)

3) New kid's programmes (Basil Brush which is a parody of itself, were that possible)

4) Neighbours

and so on and so forth.

But the other day I shuddered at what I had witnessed. That I was on TG4, an Irish language channel, was odd enough (I don't speak much Irish). But this programme came on. It was called "Passion Fashion". Not a good start.
The hostess then showed up and presumably welcomed us to the show. Fine. She introduced us to the lovely Siobhan from Belfast, who it seems was unlucky in love and resorted to the last bastion of desperate singles- the dating show. Jolly hostess then introduces us to three equally desperate blokes, who all looked remarkably similar to eachother. They might have been brothers, I guess. I don't remember their names, so let's be racist and call them Sean, Seamus and Oisin. Jolly hostess spoke some Irish and brought the three mugs to a shopping centre (Castle Court, Belfast shopping centre fans) where they each picked out an outfit for the lovely Siobhan to wear. I don't actually know if they had seen a picture of the lovely Siobhan, but they more or less picked out the same outfit for her to wear (it transpired that she was to wear the outfit on a date- more on that later).

The lovely Siobhan then tried on all the dresses and whittered on about feeling "girly" (The Irish for girly is "girly" would you believe). She then dressed up in her civvies and met the gormless trio, who each presented her with a rose. Then, she went into a cubicle and emerged in one of the outfits a guy picked for her. Sean screams with delight and the other two offer their congratulations. Sean and Siobhan (not a good match in terms of nomenclature- names are perhaps too similar) then go off on a date to one of Belfast's top restaurants (the cafe at the zoo, maybe). Roll end credits as he pours the wine and she looks uncomfortable.

Anyway you probably gathered I didn't really think much of it, and you'd be right. But as the adverts rolled, I sat in a stunned silence.

Had I really spent 25 minutes of my life watching this claptrap? I could have read a book or phoned somebody or talked to my parents or gone into town or spent 25 minutes in a medieval torture rack and it would have a been more productive way of passing the time.

Make no bones about it, this was the most rubbish TV ever. Not because it's bad per se, but because it's bad and it draws you in, like all these daytime programmes. Moral of the story? TV before prime time is to be avoided. At all costs. And I think the lovely Siobhan will agree with me...

(I know having a TV in the first place makes me a terrible person. But it was not my decision to make so please don't judge me....)

2007: the big review

Well I say big, it's merely a set of questions and answers. It'd be cool if you could do the questions too because I'd love to see what everyone's year was like. Here are the categories, which you are free to choose from (and add to!):

High point of 2007
Low point of 2007
Person of 2007
Best film you saw this year
Best book you read
Best album
Funniest moment
Best sporting moment
What you are looking forward to most in 2008
Thing you will miss least about 2007
(where applicable) "God moment" of 2007

So without further ado:


High point of 2007
It has to be passing my first year assessment. Judging by the number of panic attacks and moments of self-doubt I had, it was going to be tough. And it was, but I got through it by prayer, getting moral support and pulling my socks up. Thanks to all who helped me with this! (Honourable mention goes to being asked to do PA at Lorraine's wedding. A small task, but I felt honoured nonetheless)
Low point of 2007
2007 hasn't actually been a vintage year in terms of happy moments. I was plagued by self-doubt for a lot of it, and explosive moments in the flat didn't help. Nor did failing my driving test twice and being "ill" for a lot of the summer. So take your pick from that lot.
Person of 2007
The person has already been notified. I hate to be so secretive, but I know that they wouldn't want me spreading it over the net, so I'll just say thanks!
Best film you saw this year
Probably the Bourne Ultimatum. Worst film I saw was Perfect Stranger. Avoid if you please.
Best book you read
The only book I read that wasn't a re-read was Mark Twain's "The adventures of Tom Sawyer", which, luckily, is pretty good. Even if I didn't understand a lot of the southern dialect.
Best album
"Minutes to Midnight" by Linkin Park is my most played. Don't judge me...
Best sporting moment
David Healy's winner vs Denmark in Euro 2008
What you are looking forward to most in 2008
Euro 2008, although it might be rubbish due to lack of home interest, spending time with folk before they graduate, maybe a conference, if I am lucky, less tutorials, Calcutta Cup, passing my driving test, 20's and 30's
Thing you will miss least about 2007
The general malaise that surrounded me this year should hopefully be gone in time for the summer. We'll see about that, as the GMan once said..
(where applicable) "God moment" of 2007
There was no real moment but God shed a lot of light on relationships, mostly of the boy-girl variety, but other sorts also. Some things in this regard have made me frightfully sad this year, but I have been able to understand some of the things that have gone on (though not all of them, much as I would like to) thanks to this teaching. I'm hardly an expert now, mind...

Anyway, I hope you enjoyed this brief snapshot of my year, and I look forward to reading yours. Let me know if you've written one!

Merry Christmas and have an amazing 2008!

Review or maybe not

I'm considering writing up all about my 2007 (well not all....within reason) but I'm worried this might be a bit too Narcissistic, even for me. I will ponder this for a while and get back to you. Your opinions are welcome..

Saint Anger

A long time ago, I was in the flat watching TV, just minding my own business, when my flatmate comes back from Uni. I have never been so scared in my life.

It kind of reminded me of the Tasmanian devil, a whirlwind of rage and anger as he proceeded to throw things into cupboards and slam the doors with such force that I feared for the hinges. That done, he walked out, slammed the door and went back to his room, presumably to punch a wall or smash some chairs or something.

Later I got to the bottom of the issue and it was resolved, at least from the perspective of our relationship, but I still remember it and it worries me that people can really get that upset about those sort of issues.

I live on the other end of the scale. I often get irritated by things, but I rarely get properly angry (unless an Ulsterbus is involved).

I don't believe either way is a healthy level, and I appeal to Jesus for clues...

Jesus got angry and irritated like the rest of us. But his anger usually had a point. Matthew 21:

18Early in the morning, as he was on his way back to the city, he was hungry. 19Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, "May you never bear fruit again!" Immediately the tree withered.

20When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?" they asked.

21Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, if you have faith and do not doubt, not only can you do what was done to the fig tree, but also you can say to this mountain, 'Go, throw yourself into the sea,' and it will be done. 22If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer."

Now apparently in another gospel, it was actually out of season for figs, so the tree was hardly doing anything wrong. But we see Jesus is clearly annoyed that the tree hasn't got any fruit and that he acts with swift judgement.

Earlier

12Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves. 13"It is written," he said to them, " 'My house will be called a house of prayer,'^[e] but you are making it a 'den of robbers.'^[f]"

Not the actions of a man who is okay with everything.

So we see two kinds of anger, one towards an unfortunate circumstance and one towards people not behaving as they should. So it seems it is okay to be angry sometimes.

But I say that with caution, since on both these occasions, an important point is made, one about living by faith and the other about propriety of conduct in the Temple. So, Jesus' anger is not merely a reaction to the circumstances, but more a way of demonstrating important principles.

There are many occasions where Jesus could get angry but doesn't. I can think of many daft questions posed by Pharisees and discipleswhere he could easily have lost his rag, or when the adulterous woman was brought to him or during his sham trial. On these occasions he either did not say anything at all or responded calmly and honestly.

So, I guess I can conclude that it is okay to be angry from time to time, but the anger should be brought about as a result of love for the other person if that makes sense. An example is that a parent can be angry with their child for erring, but that anger is justified because the parent wants the child to know the difference between right and wrong and is not just annoyed for the sake of being annoyed. I would hope so, anyway.

The other extreme is knowing when letting your anger affect your actions is inappropriate. Wisdom is the key here: and if you ask for it you get it (James 1 or 2), something I don't do as much of as I should. Just think: am I serving this person by losing it? Or am I just going to scare them and make them run away?

Anger may be good, but only so far, Paul commands in Ephesians not to go to bed angry as that gives the devil a foothold. In other words, sort your grievances out as soon as possible, so it doesn't fester.

That's what Jesus did, and I reckon that's a good act to follow.

(Usual blog disclaimer of it being late and not wanting to get all the ideas out that I wanted to)

Blast from the past

It's funny how your past catches up with you. I discovered today a blog that I kept an indeterminate amount of time ago, and it was something of an eye-opener. I'd completely forgotten about it and it was only when I was clearing out some old emails this evening that I saw that it existed.

And it is completely embarrassing. To discover that my mind at the time was completely devoted to one single issue wasn't so much of a shock (it wasn't THAT long ago), but to devote so many words to it was. I don't know how many ways there are of saying a single thing, but I must have broken the record over that two months (which, if I'm honest, wasn't a very exciting time of my life). Loosely, each post was like
"blah blah blah worry blah blah blah ask God to help me make the right decision". I'm glad it had a readership of no more than one or two (I only wrote it at the behest of my cousin who stopped caring about two posts in. I don't blame her). I wish I could go back in time and give myself a good slap on the face, but it gave me a chance to reflect and see if much had changed since then.

I won't go into much detail about it, but I'm pleased to say I am handling it a lot better in its current state than I was then. I guess you experience things over time that help you deal with later problems in life and perhaps time is, ultimately, the best thing for some issues. I want to write more about the role of time in the universe but I think I should go to bed.

If you want to visit my old blog go to
www.youmustbejokingifyouthinkIwilldirectyoutothis.com

(Google can't find it. Trust me, I've tried)

Pub quiz ettiquette

What is proper when it comes to pub quizzes? Well, wonder no more as I present to you the unwrriten (but now typed) rules of the pub quiz. My thanks to James Gray (no, the other one)for assisting me.


Arrive on time
The first thing about pub quizzes is that everyone is present for every question. Therefore if the quiz starts at 9, take some time to order drinks and take in the atmosphere, at around half eight if the quiz is a popular one. Once there, settle in and introduce yourself to any team members you may not know, since group cohesion is vital. Make sure that you pay your fee and split it evenly if one is required.

Team name
The team name is not so important, unless there are points on offer for best name. Bear in mind that an "amusing" name may get annoying as the evening goes on, so make sure it has longevity. If it is your first time doing the quiz, don't pick names with swear words in them since the quizmaster might not like that so much (especially inappropriate in a church quiz) and he may mark you more harshly. However, if you know the quizmaster is fine with it, then by all means, as long as it is funny. This also applies to insults towards the quizmaster and his or her appearance/girlfriend/mum.

Make sure it's easy to read and not too hard to pronounce, and no silly Prince-style symbols. If you want to make a name for your team, simple is best. The best quiz name I know of was
"Operation: Harold Bishop".

Team size
Ideal team size varies. The golden rule is check out the other teams to see how big they are. No size is too small, but if appropriate, split up into two groups of roughly equal size. Do not help each other's teams as this will be the same as having one big team.

Writer-downer
A writer-downer is to be appointed, and should be someone with neat, legible handwriting. They need not be the same for the whole quiz, but should realise that someone else may want to do it and be gracious and let them do it. For more see "Questions" and "Moguls".

Questions
The quizmaster will ask the questions, and while he or she is doing this, chatter should be kept to a minimum. When a question is read out, shouting out a ridiculous answer is not appropriate-it wears thin very quickly.

If the writer-downer knows the answer he or she can write it down, but should show everyone else the answer, just in case someone wants to correct it.

Moguls
A Mogul is defined as somebody in a pub quiz team who seems to have a high degree of knowledge in every area.

There are two types:
The first is the team-worker mogul. He or she will have an answer ready, but will consider everyone else's response before asserting that their answer is the correct one. It is worthwhile having one or two of these on a team.

The second is the dominant mogul. He or she will want to hog the paper and not accept anyone else's answer as correct, perhaps even being stubborn enough to insist that an answer they know is wrong is correct. It is vital that you do not give the mogul the task of writer-downer. I would suggest not having more than one such player on a team, since the whole point of the quiz is to have fun, and one person's selfishness can ruin it for everybody.

Group participation
It is vital that everyone feels valued as a quiz participant, after all, everyone paid an entrance fee. Thus, those who seem to be answering fewer questions should perhaps be given the task of writer-downer, so they feel included in the group.

Guessing
You may not know an answer. If someone has a vague inkling to an answer and noone else does, then put that down. I have some all-purpose answers for guessing
"Winston Churchill" and "Margaret Thatcher" are useful for "history" for example. Leaving blank answers is the ultimate no-no in pub quizzes. If you can't buy a ticket you won't win the raffle. Also, don't put stupid answers down as this will annoy the marker, which is not what you want. You might find that type two moguls won't accept guesses the "know" to be wrong. If they don't know the answer, tell them it's a good idea to put something down, ven if it seems wrong. Lastly, for true or false type questions, if none of you genuinely know the answer, then take a vote or toss a coin, then no individual can be blamed.

Mobile phones
There's no harm in keeping your phone on, but in the interests of fairness and transparency, try to use it between rounds when your team has handed in the answers. It's more fun to win by not cheating.

Specialist rounds
There is no avoiding the music and picture rounds. Usually, there are double points on offer for artist and song, and perhaps extra for naming the film whose soundtrack it was on, or the album or year of release. Be considerate by not speaking too loudly during this round, but you need to communicate your answer to the writer-downer so whisper or speak softly if needs be.

The picture round is usually a badly photocopied piece of paper with pictures of A-list celebrities in their youth or in some amusing situation. No writer-downer is required for this round as it's usually played over several "question" rounds and can be filled in at your leisure. Make sure your answers are sensible and legible and that everyone is content with the answers before handing in.

There may also be sport and current affairs rounds, but these are fading out and all the rounds seem to come under the banner "general knowledge". This is a great pity, but progress is progress. Where these rounds still exist, one player may nominate him or herself as a specialist. They should not be given writer-downer duties so everyone can object to an answer that was given, and not just assume they were right because they were a "specialist". I would keep specialisations to myself, personally, as it is easy to get annoyed when someone usurps your position.

Reading out of answers
The golden rule is that the quizmaster is always right even when (s)he's wrong. So when they read out an answer you disagree with, accept it with good grace. They're only human too, you know. Likewise, excessive cheering over an answer probably won't win you too many friends.

Results
Ideally, results will be read from the bottom upwards, so the team that finishes last will be read first. Finishing last is, for some, a great honour and will often be awarded with a booby prize. It is only polite to applaud the team's efforts as they collect it.

It is generally not the case that you applaud everyone else's name as they are read out. The teams in question probably aren't too bothered and will probably not want to be "congratulated" for mediocrity. When the second-place team (and hence the winner) is announced, applaud them, even if while cheering for victory. Likewise, applaud the winners. If you were dissatisfied as to their conduct, don't applaud them, but don't boo them either.

Prizes
Should be shared equally throughout the team, regardless of participation.

PES predictions

I played some vital Euro qualifiers on PES today and here is how they came out. Regard these as an omen if you must...

Israel 2 Russia 1
Scotland 2 Italy 3
Northern Ireland 2 Denmark 1

So the only result that matters came out good :p but let's see how it all pans out...

Blackout

This is my sixth year in Edinburgh and up til now I've not seen a power outage.

However, tonight that all changed as most of Marchmont was plunged into darkness by a failure in a substation in Marchmont ( or Morningside, reports are conflicting). It was all quite strange as Warrender Park Road, the bottom of Marchmont Road and the West Side of Marchmont Road were all subject to the darkness, but the East side of Marchmont Road seemed to be largely unaffected. Since my flatmate's girlfriend lives there, that was the place to go.

But anyway, it was interesting seeing how everyone reacted to the darkness. As soon as it happened, you could hear everyone in the flat above scrambling for torches and going outside to check it wasn't just them.

I did the same, and it was an eerie sight seeing the place in complete darkness with only car lights to reveal anything like pedestrians and the cyclists on the pavement. I have some photos which I hope to put up on facebook soon (which may or may not show anything) and you can see for yourself.

Luckily everything was fine, but there were a few moments when I was wondering if we would have to sit in the cold and the darkness for the whole evening, or even night! Having to talk to my flatmates, now that IS scary!

How are you?

I don't like this question, not because I have some problem with revealing my problems to people, but more because these days very few people (including myself on many occasions) actually expect an answer other than "ok", "fine" or "alright". If you're really lucky, you might just get "I'm okay, just working away" or something like that.

As such, because I don't know if the person asking wants a real response (and I would guess they don't on many an occasion. I'm not judging people here, I'm just speaking from experience), I end up giving the non-commital answers, not revealing anything until the conversation gets a bit more involved.


Even when we learn a foreign language, all they tell you how to say is
"Tha mi gu math" "Ca va bien merci" "Sehr gut" "Muy bien" and so on. Non-commital answers, probably confusing Jonny Foreigner into believing that we're all emotionless blockheads.

So it is sometimes surprising when you are having a conversation with somebody, and they initially say they are okay, when in fact the things they are talking about suggest otherwise. This happened to me a while back when I was lunching with a friend. He told me things were okay, so we talked about nonsense for a bit, and I realised that he seemed somewhat distant, so I asked him again if he was alright. He insisted he was fine, so I didn't press the issue.

It turned out that, unless he had a massive coverup, he was simply stressed from work and this has since subsided.

But I still wondered the need to be so defensive and cover it up. As with all things, however, I discovered that I was probably more guilty of this than anyone else. A while ago, I wasn't feeling exactly great and I decided to avoid answering the question all together, by asking another question. Noone really noticed, and it saved me from having to lie to people (NB I may still do this today. This is more out of force of habit than anything else, so don't read into it if I do it. Ask me again if needs be).

I guess it's merely a case of ettiquete, that "how are you" is something you say after "hello" and that "okay" or "fine" is merely a continuation of formalities. How very British is that?! Only someone from these islands would lie (or at the very least, be ambiguous) for the sake of social propriety! I know, in my case, the reason I didn't like to divulge how I was feeling was that it would be an inconvenience to the other person. They expected "fine" so they got "fine". Or at least, that's what I thought.

(I've just remembered actually, the worst answer I gave to "how are you" was "I don't actually know as I'm kind of in walking-home mode". While brilliant in its non-commital-ness, it didn't really help anyone)

Sincerity is hard to find these days, but more people are sincere with this question than you might think. I don't know why, but recently, people have been asking me follow-up questions when I say "fine" or "ok", and I actually find I very much appreciate it, and you know what, it's somewhat therapeutic. Even if you don't go into that much detail.

I recommend trying this, with questions like "good fine or bad fine". Obviously, some people won't budge, but it's worth trying anyway. You might even be surprised.

Anyway this is one of my usual late night ramblings so I should probably make my usual disclaimer that my point may not have been drawn out as much as I'd have liked it to and that it may not be entirely coherent. But at least I'm still feeling okay.

Stardust

So I went to see Stardust these evening and I have taken it upon myself to review it. So here goes.

It describes itself as "the fairy tale that won't behave" and I'm not quite sure what it means by that. But still, a fairy tale it is, and if you are expecting something with numerous plot twists and great narrative set-up then forget it. What you do get, however, is a very entertaining film, which keeps you on your toes even though you realise what's going to happen about twenty minutes in.

The premise is a simple one. Boy meets girl, boy and girl have one night stand in a gypsy caravan (hmm maybe they were right in saying it won't behave) , girl leaves child with boy. Boy becomes man, infant becomes boy (who strangely never seems to make much of the fact his mother is absent) and boy tries to get affections of another girl.

To win this girl's heart, he has to go and retrieve a "star" that has fallen from the sky as a result of an odd set-piece involving some brothers trying to kill eachother to get a throne.

The star becomes an attractive young woman, and some witches are after her to regain their youth, not to mention the throne brothers for different reasons.

What follows is somewhat predictable, but fun at the same time. The boy and the "star" begin an adventure which involves human goats, Robert de Niro being, shall we say, not his usual self, a woman called Bernard and a montage. Yes, Team America fans, there's a montage. Even Rocky had a montage. In fact, it's a double montage as two people learn to do stuff in a short space of time. How's that for value? Michelle Pfeiffer makes a pretty convincing witch (but not a convincing pretty witch, no) and clearly relishes her baddie role.

Unfortunately Ricky Gervais manages to find his way into the film. This is regrettable, given that he is unable to play anyone other than himself and he isn't even all that funny until he can't speak. Oh well, c'est la vie.

Anyway, the ending is quite well done, (if slightly corny) even though you know exactly what's going to happen.

Other than my Ricky Gervais complaint, sticking points for me included that there were about 4 different plots going on at once at one stage and they seemed somewhat disjointed. Sometimes the dialogue was a bit suspect and it was a bit "suggestive" for a fairy tale, and there are one or two plot holes, but these are but quibbles for what is a pretty fun way to spend two hours. Just don't expect any surprises.

End of an era

So the time has come, and it is with a heavy heart that I have decided to stop going to Navs in favour of doing the 20s and 30s group at St Cats.


I've had three-and-a bit great years at Navs but I've felt that with work commitments and my advancing years (ha!) that it was probably time to get more involved with what my church is doing.

I also had the feeling that I probably should have stopped sooner, as it seemed a natural point to quit when my last pod bit the dust (swallowed by the Morningside monster*, it would seem). Not to say that it was a mistake going to the Gillies pod, which has treated me well these last few weeks.

But I should say that Navs is a great ministry, and if you can be part of it, please do as you can

a) spend quality time studying God's word in the company of others, both teaching and learning
b) make great friendships
c) find wives/ husbands (Tim/AnnaLauren!)

okay the last one was a wee joke on my part, but I cannot praise the Navs ministry in Edinburgh highly enough. Without it, I don't know how I would have got through one of the darkest periods in my life without the friendships I had forged through Navs.

So yes, in summary, Navs is great, but all good things must come to an end and it's time for me to move on. Thanks to everyone who made my time with Navs so enjoyable, and I will probably see you at a main meeting or any other special events I can be bothered to attend!

But for now, it's "thanks for the memories".

Andrew

The top ten questions not to ask research students

Ask at your peril....

1. "How's your research going?"

2. "Are you writing up yet?"

3. "What is your thesis title?"

4. "How long do you have left/ How long does a PhD take?"

5. "You must love teaching undergraduates, don't you?"

6. "How long is your thesis going to be?"

7. "Why didn't you just go to medical school and become a real doctor?"

8. "You're just avoiding real work, aren't you?"

9. "You'll be like that Stephen Hawkings" (not strictly a question, but merely drawing a comparison between you and some famous, oft misnames, scientist like Stephen Hawking)

10. "Got any good results?"

Psalm 43:5

Why are you cast down, O my soul?
And why are you disquieted within me?
Hope in God;
For I shall yet praise Him,
The help of my countenance and my God.

If I were a betting man..

I don't gamble, but I find odds fascinating. In my naive youth, I thought that bookies' odds represented the actual probability of an event happening, but now I am aware this is not the case.

For instance, if, for some reason, bookies opened a book on the roll of a dice, you might find that the odds on it getting any particular number were 4/1 against (rather than 5/1 as you might expect). The reason for this is that I could bet £1 on each of the six possible outcomes and I would be guaranteed to get £6 back if the odds were 5/1 (you get your stake back if you win), thus breaking even. That would be utterly pointless, but the bookies want to get something out of you betting. Thus odds of 4/1 would guarantee that you would make a loss if you tried the "spread your money" scheme. This is why you might get, for example, two evenly matched teams being odds on to win a match they were playing against each other.

However, odds on a sporting event can still be misleading. The bookies only have part of the say as to what odds to give someone to win something, while the punters get the remaining say.

The reason for this is that if lots of punters seem to be betting on a particular event, the bookies will want to cut their losses and reduce the potential payout for this happening (thus losing less money). This is why England and English teams always seem to be among the favourites to win international competitions in Britain (but not elsewhere), since a lot of people here will bet on them (a lot of Scots are rumoured to bet on England: the logic being that if England win, then at least they will have something to make them happy. Frankly, that seems a bit daft).

Another thing you will find is that it is impossible to spread money over various bookies to ensure a guaranteed profit. You can get a maxiumum guaranteed return of about 95p for each pound bet currently on the 2008 Six Nations, for example. Doing it at all at the same bookie will net you about 85p max.

Thus, it is very difficult indeed to beat the bookie. There is one, guaranteed way to break even though. Bet £0 on everything. It worked for me.

A different perspective

So today, England beat France in a World Cup semi-final and fair play to them. I didn't see the game, but I am assured I didn't really miss anything.

In any case, that's not really what I want to talk about. A proud sporting nation reaching the final of a major tournament is one thing, but the biggest sporting story of the day came not in Paris or Glasgow, but in Gomel, Belarus.

"What?" I hear you cry, but fear not, my point is coming. Belarus played Luxembourg in a European Championship qualifier. Neither side had any chance of qualifying, so there was little at stake. The home side, whilst hardly giants of the European game, would have expected to win the game easily, since they had a couple of handy players such as Arsenal's Alexander Hleb, and that Luxembourg had lost their last 55 competitive games. Fifty-five. Even San Marino and Liechtenstein, with significantly less population and competitive history, have ground out some draws and wins in that time.

But Luxembourg held on. For 90 minutes they held on, encountering a Belarussian barrage and offering little themselves. In the fifth minute of injury time Luxembourg found themselves in the opponents half. They might have just gone to the flag and settled for the draw, but there was an opportunity for a cross into the box which, unbelievably, found a Luxembourg head and the ball flew into the net.

Cue silence in the crowd and delerium on the Luxembourg bench. This little nation, a country whose ambitions are often restricted to the odd 1-0 defeat and if they are really lucky, a friendly draw, had just recorded its first win since 1995. That's like me not seeing Northern Ireland win since I was 11. I know the no-scoring streak was long, but it wasn't that long.

It puts things into perspective, really. You have the likes of Germany, France, England etc with legitimate chances of winning the thing, whose managers will lose their jobs if the don't make it, and then you have Luxembourg who win games once every twelve years. And their fans will celebrate this result as much as a World Cup win, and after waiting twelve years, don't they deserve it.

We don't need no education

So, today I came in and found two nice blue folders waiting for me. This was not a surprise, because they contained the marking for the informatics tutorials I was due to take the next day. However, on checking my email, I had an email from John Byatt-Smith (a lecturer who looks not unadjacent to Harold Shipman, but that is nothing to do with anything) which had landed in my inbox, saying that (paraphrasing slightly)

"it has been suggested that you could take 2 Probability tutorials since the other guy has pulled out"

Initially, I was pleased, as this meant I would get more money, but then I realised that I was already doing the maximum of 6 hours a week on tutorials. No problem, they were desperate for people, so they were going to bend the rules for me. But then a thought occured. On odd weeks, I was to spend ten hours on tutorials. Ten hours. That is an awful lot of wasted research
and it's five hours of marking to boot. I realised I'd been guilt-tripped by the administration into doing something I probably shouldn't have done. But I can slag off the admin another time as this is not my point.

It makes me think that teachers don't get enough credit. Not that I'm saying I don't get enough credit, but there's an awful lot they have to do. Marking is such a tedious activity, it's no wonder my A-Level Chemistry teacher never bothered with it. The only redeeming features are that
A: you get some amusing answers (until you realise that it's your teaching that's caused the crap answer)
B: you get paid for it (although I imagine this makes part of a teacher's salary)
C: Umm..

(One thing that I like though is towards the end of term when students can't be bothered handing in and you get paid an hour's work for ticking a couple of things a couple of times)


Presumably teachers don't have time during their day so they must spend their free time after class marking work, and thus effectively working very long days. Of course this is made up with the copious amounts of holiday (a classic joke in Northern Ireland is "what are the two best things about being a teacher? July and August!"), but you can't fault their commitment during term time.

What my point is (I've found it at last!) is that when you're at school you don't realise how much teachers put into your education and that it is worth making the best effort you can for them to show them respect. Sadly, most of you reading this are disinterested, but I feel my point is still valid. Unfortunately, I can't really say the same for lecturers (I have inside information).

Also, as a post-script I find students pay most attention when you give them the answers to next weeks assesment, as I inadvertedly did last year when I was covering a ChemEng class. Failing that, give them sweets.

Lunchtime blog

For some reason John and I (quite independently) got lunch early so I'm now left with half an hour to kill. What better way to do it than by spouting random nonsense?

So, what to talk about? Maybe now would be a good time to talk about the PhD, as I haven't really updated anyone on it for a while.

Unfortunately, it is going rather slowly for my liking. The fact I haven't been on top form for some time hasn't helped, then again nor has the fact that it's actually quite hard. As one would expect.

Presently, I am looking at objects called uniquely solvable puzzles . These are a set of rows of numbers which satisfy a certain property (when you rearrange the set, one of the elements in a row has to change, essentially). The theory is that if you can find that if the row has length k, we can find a large number of rows that satisfy the property. This will eventually lower the matrix exponent (see previous entry "what I actually do" for details), although perhaps not to 2 as is hoped.

Another thing I am looking at is linked to this, and concerns how you can split the set of numbers 1...3k into three sets of size k, satisfying a certain property. Showing that this property holds for a large number k will also yield an exponent of 2 (and probably get me the Fields Medal, since it's not an easy problem to solve).

So that's where I am just now. Before I get back to work though, I have some tutorial work to mark. Aaah the joy...

Rugby World Cup

So the pool stage is over and the minnows have had their day of the sun. Whilst Portugal, Namibia, the United States and the like had long since booked their flights home, Wales and Ireland, teams you would expect to make the quarter finals both crashed at the hands of Fiji and Argentina respectively.

I will admit that I do not really follow Welsh rugby too much, so I can't really comment too much on their exit, but I will say that the Fiji game was one of the best I have ever seen. Real end-to-end stuff and with a thrilling finish to boot (even Fiji seemed to get caught up in the moment, seemingly forgetting to kick the ball out when the 80 minutes were up, almost giving Wales a reprieve). Fiji seemed to have evolved from the team that only squeaked past perennial table-proppers Japan to KO one of the more fancied nations (the last side to win a grand slam in the six nations, lest we forget) and probably give South Africa an easy route to the semis. Fair play to them though.

Argentina have probably been the side to have grown most in the last four years and remained the perennial thorn in the Irish side by beating them convincingly in Paris. A more significant result (maybe) was their victory over France on the opening night in Saint-Denis, where they looked like a side that had been winning things for years. Ireland, meanwhile never really got going. Laboured wins over the whipping boys weren't encouraging, and they were feeble against the French in game three. The lack of bonus points (I'm still not convinced on the benefits of the bonus point system) meant that Ireland needed to beat Argentina by more than 7 points, scoring four tries, and conceding less than four tries in the process. Such a restriction in the manner of victory was redundant however, as the only surrender monkeys in France that evening were wearing Green, going down 30-15. France didn't like this result much either, as they had to head to Cardiff to play New Zealand in the last eight.

Tonga gave England a run for their money in pool A, but fell away at the end of their decider, brought about because South Africa had walloped England 36-0 earlier on, a result which effectively put paid to any hopes of retaining the trophy. In group C, only Portugal seemed to make an effort against New Zealand, scoring a try in a 108-13 defeat. The decider was between Scotland and Italy, won by virtue of an immense Chris Paterson kicking display 18-16.

So the quarter final line-up is as follows:
Australia v England
New Zealand v France
South Africa v Fiji
Argentina v Scotland

It looks to me like itcould be the first all Southern Hemisphere line-up for the semi-finals, although I am hopeful that Scotland can exact some kind of Keltic revenge against Argentina (I spell it with a k to avoid confusion with the football club). But for me, this is where the tournament begins and every game will be worth watching. I think it will be tight, but I think South Africa may well sneak it. Just a hunch though.

In sickness and in health

This week, I have been laid low by a bout of the cold. This is annoying, but it's just a case of mucking down and getting on with it (I'm not much of a man 'flu sufferer, but mum will probably tell you otherwise).

However, I did have to sacrifice a day of work, so I spent most of it doing what I do best: thinking. I thought about many things, but I am only going to write about a couple.

The first struck me when I opened my curtains at about noon that day. I looked out and I was taken aback because I sensed something strange. I don't know what made this happen, but it was like everything was screaming, like it was in some serious pain. It went away again when I closed the curtain and re-opened it, but the feeling still stuck with me. It was strange, and I wonder if my being ill was something to do with it, but it just served to remind me of Romans 8.

Verse 22 says that "the whole of creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth", which was good, not only in that I am not crazy, but that this has been felt for about 2000 years. Ok maybe that's not so good, but the point is that it was the latest in a series of reminders that things are not ok in the world and something needs to be done. Up until 4th year (many moons ago) I hadn't been paying much attention to much else than.. well actually I don't remember, but I was cosy, shall we say. But the last year and a bit have opened my eyes to how much is wrong with creation. I don't want to list everything here, but the only conclusion I can draw as someone who claims to be a Christian is that we don't know exactly how reliant we are on Jesus. We'll all still be screaming, but through Him we know that it will end.

That's the gist of it anyway.

The second thing was that I remembered a time last year when I was unwell. I wouldn't wish what I had on anyone, but that's maybe another story for another time.

I thought about how much illness skews your view of the world. Maybe this relates to my first thought, but I remembered how I felt with this problem and compared it to how I currently felt with my cold. When you are unwell, it's sometimes very hard to appreciate the people who are caring for you, because you're so busy being sick and sorry for yourself. Looking back onto the problem I had, I didn't realise how many people I was rude or short-tempered or ungrateful to because the only thing that I was concerned with was this problem. It makes me think how hard it must be for Doctors and Nurses who work stupid hours to help people who often don't appreciate it.

Anyway, that was just a bit of a spiel about being ill, it wasn't supposed to be anythign mega, but I thought I'd share it nonetheless.

I'll leave you with a line from Doctor Who, which I think is very appropriate:

"This country has been sick, this country needs healing, this country needs medicine – in fact I'd go so far as to say that, what this country really needs, right now, is a Doctor."

Amen to that.

Taste sensation!

I'm probably not the first person to do this, but I would like to share it anyway.

This morning, while making porridge, I happened to have my generic hazelnut chocolate spread nearby. I decided it might be tasty to mix some into the freshly made porridge, since plain porridge isn't very exciting. And you know what, it was amazing! Try it yourself, you will need

4-5 tablespoons of porridge oats
300 ml/ half pint milk
tablespoon of generic chocolate hazelnut spread

Make the porridge as normal and when done, stir the spread into the porridge, ensuring that it's spread evenly throughout. Add more if necessary.

Enjoy!

Find out about your MP

I found a website today that tells you how all the MPs voted on issues in Parliament.

At www.theyworkforyou.com, you enter your postcode and it tells you who your MP is (although you should already know that) and what their stance is on key issues, as well as key things they might have said recently. It's worth a peek, particularly with the possibility of a general election being called soon. You can catch some top quality Ian Paisley quotes while you're there, like

"I can reply to the second part of the hon Member’s question. I was not at Pentecost, so I do not have the gift of interpreting languages."

A rant about rubbish cyclists (extreme rant warning)

All of you I know are responsible cyclists, so chances are that this doesn't apply to you. I'm just sorry that people that do the things I am about to rant about below tarnish your reputation. But still, a rant has been due for some time...

Anyway, I will start by saying I am pro-cycling. I don't do it myself because I am not confident enough to do it on Edinburgh's roads, but it is nice to see lots of cyclists out on the roads, helping the environment and getting a workout into the bargain. Excellent. However, cyclists are fine when they stay on the roads and on the designated cycle lanes.


Rant I:
One place they are not welcome is the footpaths. I have lost count of the number of times I have nearly been mown down by some idiot who doesn't understand the highway code. Noone should expect anything faster than a jogger creeping up behind them as they are going on a leisurely walk, and even then the jogger can easily get by. What you don't want is a cyclist going downhill at 10-15mph and having to swerve to get out of the way, and then have the audacity to swear at you because you happened to be where you were entitled to be. All this with a clearly marked cycle path on the road beside. Why do people do this? If you're not confident enough on the road then WALK. Yes. Bicycles belong on the road or on cycle lanes, and no cycling means NO CYCLING on Jawbone Walk.


Rant II:
Red lights mean stop. Not "stop only if you have a motor", it means stop. Cyclists are not exempt from the laws of the road. Pedestrians should be able to cross when there is a green man in confidence. Being hit by a car can be fatal, but being hit by a cyclist who thinks themselves above the law can still cause serious problems. Use the extra areas at the front of the traffic queue to get an advantage, and you won't endanger pedestrians.


Rant III:
I don't know how many road deaths Steve Jobs has indirectly caused, but I'm pretty sure having an iPod on when cycling is more of a distraction than having the radio on in the car. You can do without it for 20 minutes. Oh, and wear a freakin' helmet. God won't care how nice your hair looks.

I speak as a pedestrian, and not as a motorist. All I want is for cyclists and pedestrians to have consideration for others and for their own safety. The driving test means that motorists are generally more road aware than cyclists, but the lack of compulsory training for cyclists means that bad ones will always be something of an urban menace, but I hope one day all road users can live in perfect harmony (although this is akin to asking for world peace and asking the BBC to acknowledge that a team from outside England might win the Champions League. Hmm I smell another rant...).

Oh and as a token gesture, here is a pedestrian rant. If you are waiting to cross a busy road, it helps to press the button. There is nothing more annoying than coming up to a crossing where there's a group of people waiting and waiting ages to cross only to realise that no-one has pressed the button. You press it and the lights change immediately. Witchcraft!

Anyway, to counterbalance this massive display of negativity on my part (it's been coming for a while, if I am honest), I'll be doing another anti-rant about stuff I like soon. But for now, I'm going to take some valium.

Almost there...

I wanted to rant about how rubbish Northern ireland are at the minute, but I decided instead to give a short resumé on what Scotland have to do to qualify for the euro, after their amazing win in Paris today. The table looks like this: (top two qualify)

Group II	Played	Won	Drawn	Lost	For	Against	Points	Goal Difference	Max
Scotland	9	7		2	17	7	21	10	30
Italy	9	6	2	1	15	7	20	8	29
France	9	6	1	2	15	3	19	12	28
Ukraine	8	4	1	3	10	9	13	1	25
Lithuania	9	3	1	5	7	11	10	-4	19
Georgia	9	2	1	6	14	15	7	-1	16
Faeroes	9	0	0	9	3	29	0	-26	9

Max means maximum available points. Lithuania, Georgia and the Faeroe Islands cannot qualify.

Now, France, Ukraine and Italy all have a game against the Faeroe Islands, and you would also expect these sides to beat Georgia and Lithuania at home. Thus, the top four table is (effectively), not taking into account changes in goal difference:

Group II	Played	Won	Drawn	Lost	For	Against	Points	Goal Difference	Max
Italy	11	8	2	1	15	7	26	8	29
France	11	8	1	2	15	3	25	12	28
Scotland	9	7		2	17	7	21	10	30
Ukraine	9	5	1	3	10	9	16	1	25

We see that Ukraine are effectively out of it.

The remaining games involving these sides are:
13/10 Scotland v Ukraine
17/10 Georgia v Scotland
17/11 Lithuania v Ukraine
Scotland v Italy
21/11 Ukraine v France

Seven points would see Scotland qualify ahead of France, because the deciding factor between two teams level on points is the aggregate score between them (i.e. 2-0 to Scotland). However, a victory over Italy and a victory over either Ukraine or Georgia would also seal qualification.

So it's still a tough task to make it certain, but it means that victory over Italy is not essential in the last game. However, the last thing we want is to need Ukraine to beat France on the last day. History shows that these things don't always go one's way...

See you in Austria!

Monopoly money (moderate rant warning)

This is a bit pointless, but I thought I'd record it anyway. I have decided that euros are rubbish. Just look at the picture below of the five euro note."What's wrong with it?" I hear you cry. Well look at it. It just looks like it was dreamt up by some suit in Brussels. Which, of course, it was. "But there's a picture of the arc de triomphe" you say. Well, look closely and you will see it is not the arc de triomphe. It is a ficticious building based on the arc de triomphe, in some ludicrous PC stunt to avoid it favouring any EU member state. Why do that when you have the common agricultural policy?

My problem is that if you have banknotes in your posession, they should feel like they are worth what they say they're worth. A classic example is the Bank of England £10 note. With the Queen on one side (and I have to say it is a fetching photo, if heinously out of date) and Darwin on the other, the water mark and the satisfying way "£10" is written on the top left, you feel like you are getting your money's worth. Similarly with a dollar.

But the euro note has no soul, no pride or identity. It doesn't make me proud to be european, and, if I am honest, it doesn't feel like real money. Obviously it is, but I would feel more distressed if I lost a fiver than if I lost a €50 note, because that doesn't feel like money at all.

So in summary... bank notes are better when they make you feel good about having them, and I don't mean because it makes you feel richer.

Rant over.

Apologies for lack of coherence, structure, or point.

October can't come soon enough... (contains a high geekiness rating)

I'm a sad pathetic nerd with no life who likes to sit and blog about computer games when he's not playing them. Now I've said that, there is no need for you to do so.

Anyway, I like October, of all the months I hold it in highest regard after December. The weather's not too bad, and when you're at school, you get a half day and a week off at the end. Of course, there are other reasons too.

In the old days, Championship Manager (RIP) would always release a new incarnation in October. Then I discovered PES and the last friday in October was always a date to remember (and it still is). But this year, the new Half Life game is being released (as well as the new PES). The thought of two great releases in the same month is enough to make you giddy (in the highly unlikely event they release Gran Turismo 5 the same month, you might well count yourself lucky if you see me before Christmas), but before I get my crowbar and biohazard suit and queue up outside GAME like some Harry Potter loser at Waterstones (NB the adults who aren't parents who dress up are losers, not the people who read it), I have to make sure of the date. Unfortunately, Amazon, Play, Gameplay and GAME are telling me four different dates (5,12,19 and 26 respectively). Can anyone shed any light on this?

Whenever it is though, it will be epic...

Now, back to playing PES. Don't disturb me til September ends.

Sock dilemma

So... in BHS today, I was looking for socks because the sock fairy is stealing them all. I went to the menswear section and was pleased to find some very cheap socks.

However, as I was picking them up, I noticed that they said "World's Greatest Dad". I didn't buy them in the end because I espied some cheaper ones that said "world's greatest PhD student" (not really, they were plain), but I was in a brief dilemma...

So.. my question is this. Are cheap socks worth giving misleading information over? Or am I just overanalysing this waaaay too much?
What if I had bought "World's greatest Husband?"

Maybe I think too much. Oh well. Tata.

So which Premier League team DO I support??

I've often been posed with this question, but have never given a satisfactory answer. So to clear it up, here's a breakdown of how I see the Premier League:

Teams I like:
Tottenham
Everton
Blackburn Rovers
Man Utd
Man City

Teams I am indifferent towards but like to see winning because it makes my friends happy:
Aston Villa
Newcastle

Teams I don't really care about but contain a lot of Northern Ireland players so it's nice to see them do well:
Fulham

Teams I am completely neutral towards:
Reading
Wigan
Birmingham
Derby
Middlesbrough
Portsmouth

Teams I don't really like for one reason or another but am not really all that bothered:
West Ham
Sunderland
Bolton
Arsenal

Teams I can't stand:
Chelsea
Liverpool

So there you go. So when you ask who I support, the answer is "no-one", but as you can see, that doesn't mean I can't have an opinion...

Story time...

Well, not yet. Literally ones of you have been captivated by my stories in the past. Notable stories include:

The JCMB coming to life (this was dreadful and I am so thoroughly ashamed of it, no copies exist anywhere)

A man who falls in love with someone he's never met (which still exists... somewhere), a 10 part story whose premise is fully explained already

Fright of the Navidator: a parody of "flight of the navigator" starring Alice and Bob, which hangs around my hard drive

Bob, Actually: A valentine's day take on Dickens's classic "A Christmas Carol" which I think is still on my facebook

Well, this is just a preliminary post to tell you another one is in the pipeline, and I can exclusively reveal that it will not star Alice and Bob, and will be based on a song by Green Day. I won't say which one, but I will reveal it's not one of the sweary ones. So, be indifferent. Be very indifferent...

Lewis Hamilton, F1 champion! Hang on...

I've always had issues with British sports commentators (NB NOT the fans) as a whole. There's a lot of arrogance and presumption involved as well as (often) a lack of respect for "Johnny Foreigner". But anyway, this really, really takes the biscuit.

There's a forthcoming biography of Lewis Hamilton. I was directed to it on amazon today and was amused to find the following synopsis:

"
This is the story of the boy who proves fairytales do come true. The boy who grew up on a council estate, who, at the tender age of 22, came through against all the odds to dominate and revolutionise the world of motor racing.Thrown in at the deep end 'on a mighty whim' by F1 team owner Ron Dennis, Lewis Hamilton crowned his 2007 debut season by winning the title in Japan in October - and was in the running for the BBC's Sports Personality of the Year 2007. It was an outcome no one seriously could have predicted: not only did he have to combat his own nerves and fears; he had to overcome a dissenter within his own camp.With behind-the-scenes insight into the intense rivalry between Hamilton and his team mate Fernando Alonso which threatened to derail the young Briton's dream, bestselling sports author Frank Worrall describes how the rookie rose above his critics, keeping his dignity and emerging triumphant as he racked up sensational wins around the world.But the boy-wonder's stellar rise through the motor racing ranks from karting to the hotly contested F3 Superprix and onto the F1 podium was by no means straightforward. Lewis' racing career began aged just six, when his father, h"

That it doesn't even finish the sentence is bad enough, but read it again and you will spot the line

"Thrown in at the deep end 'on a mighty whim' by F1 team owner Ron Dennis, Lewis Hamilton crowned his 2007 debut season by winning the title in Japan in October - and was in the running for the BBC's Sports Personality of the Year 2007"

The Japanese Grand Prix is held on September 30th this year. The championship remains unresolved at this point, and it might not be won until Brazil in October. So something is a bit amiss.

You would think the publishers might act to prevent this kind of error...

You can find the link below:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lewis-Hamilton-Biography-Frank-Worrall
/dp/1844545431/ref=pd_rhf_p_1/202-6565797-4511001

Oh, and I'd really keep it quiet from a certain Senor Alonso....

The Stothman prophecies

(like the mothman prophecies, geddit? oh well never mind..)

Every I year I predict stuff that will happen in the football season (and usually get it wrong), so here is this term's selection:

Premiership: Man Utd to win; Wigan, Derby and Fulham to get relegated; Spurs to be dark horses and maybe pip Arsenal to the top four.

SPL: Celtic to win, Rangers to come second, Aberdeen to come third and Gretna to be relegated. Hearts finish in the bottom half having gone through 38 managers, one for each game of the SPL season. I end up as head coach, but get sacked because I haven't been to Lithuania.

Irish League (you knows it): Linfied to win, noone to understand what's going on with regards to relegeation..

FA Cup: Liverpool

Scottish Cup: Rangers

Champions League: I suspect it will go to England, but I don't wish to guess as to which club. Chelsea? Inter will get far, and Sevilla to be dangerous dark horses


UEFA Cup: Who knows? You don't know who's in it til December

Euro 2008: Will probably be rubbish, but I have an inkling that Germany could well return to their former glories. So they probably won't. England will just about qualify, but will lose to either Germany or Portugal on penalties. The media howls with injustice and the scapegoat this time is, oh I don't know, Michael Ballack. Northern Ireland probably don't qualify while Scotland fail to qualify as a result of a last minnute goal scored by Italy at Hampden.

So, watch the season unfold and see all of this not come true! I'd love to hear your predictions...

Of monkeys and typewriters

The concept of the monkeys and the typewriters is a famous one. If you have an infinite number of monkeys and an infinite number of typewriters, any work you care to mention (often cited as being the complete works of Shakespeare, you could also have all the Harry Potter books, my PhD thesis and your GCSE English coursework) will but spouted out. Well, supposedly anyway.

So why? The argument is that if you stick a monkey in front of a typewriter, it will either write a pointless blog whingeing about why it's okay for adults to like Harry Potter or it will start hitting keys at random (it is assumed the monkey doesn't run off or hide in Chris Griffin's closet) , thus we have a random variable. Now, supposing the complete works of Shakespeare contain k characters, there are 27^{k} possible combinations of letters plus the space bar (that is not including numbers, "tab" and other such keys), and so the probability that one monkey, after tapping k keys, has typed up shakespeare is < 1/(27)^k, which is very,very small. The point is though, that it's still more than 0, so it can happen. We call this probability p.

Now, the probability that the monkey will not type shakespeare is 1-p, which is less than 1. The probability that 2 monkeys don't type shakespeare is (1-p)^2 and so on. Thus, if M is some huge number, the probability that M monkeys don't type Shakespeare is (1-p)^M which, for large enough M, will be tiny, since (1-p)<1. style="font-style: italic;">almost surely.

Why almost surely? Surely 1 means that it is certain? No, sadly not, but it would make everyone's lives (well... my life) that bit easier. If something is certain, it will have probability 1 ( eg 2 is an even number), but if something has probability 1, it is not necessarily certain. Analogously, we say that something having probabilty 0 is not necessarily impossible.

An example then: it's easier to show that something of probability zero is not necessarily impossible, so I will do that.

Suppose I am throwing darts at a picture of JK Rowling on a dartboard. Now, there are an infinite number of points on the dartboard (don't believe me? try and count them), and we suppose that the dart lands anywhere in the dartboard. Where does the exact centre of the tip of the dart land? On any point, we assume with equal probabilty. Thus, the probability that it lands on any particular point is 1/infinity which is so ludicrously tiny that we define it to be zero. But the tip of the dart has to land somewhere.. So the probability of it landing in the exact centre is zero, but it is still possible... (and thus the probability that it will not land on a particular point is 1, but it can still land on it)

So what's the point of all this? Well, assuming I haven't confused you and you're still reading, the point here is that maths probably isn't as clear cut as you think it is, and that's why you get gibbons like me who decide they want to help advance it further. It's fascinating, is it not?

Andrew (aka Monkey 7854778434783274387547876947547033234...)

Addendum: I read this somewhere, lampooning wikipedia:

"The stuff about monkeys and typewriters is rubbish. If you have a million monkeys and a million typewriters, they can't even make an encyclopedia"

LOCAL CHURCH IN DRUGS RING SHOCKER

A local church, which for legal reasons we can only refer to as the psuedonym "Saint Columbine's" has been found to harbour a drugs ring, it has emerged today.

The story broke when a student from a more pious and holy congregation noticed a seemingly innocuous sign labelled "Charlie" on the wall during the mandatory tea and coffee at the end. This seemed innocent enough, until he caught sight of signs that said "hash" and "heroin", whereupon he went outside to call the police.

However, two of the ring's "goons"(believed to be those in the picture below, seen near the time of the incident) blinded him with a camera flash and threw him over the edge where he fell to his death.







The group's ringleader is rumoured to be the one whose codename is "dangermouse" (below). She is known for her fashion of wearing sunglasses all the time, due to her dislike of bright lights. However, police also suspect one Stephen Alison,the lead singer of a successful indie group. He has gone into hiding.
Local Councillor Polly Tishian of the "Mothers Against Dissolving the European Union Party (MADEUP) is said to be "shocked and disgusted" by the actions of those who were taking advantage of the church for the purposes of drugs, before excusing herself for a spliff.








If you encounter these people, exercise due caution, but do not be afraid to engage them in conversation as they will not harm those who don't pry too much, and they are actually very nice people.

Unavailable for comment, Yoda was.

The investigation continues.

prayer request

This is most unlike me, so I'll be brief (and this note will be gone in the morning)

I would just ask that you pray for me at this time. Lately, I've made things very difficult for myself and I'm not feeling too hot about it, as you can imagine. I've made some bad errors and been a total hypocrite about certain issues, as well as work not going too well. These things are all combining to make me feel like the worst person in the world and just terrible generally, and I really need your help. Please pray that I can patch things up with the people in question and God will allow me to see a more accurate view of both myself and others, that I can motivate myself to work again, and be the happy person I know I can be.

Thanks a lot, it would mean so much to me, especially when since I know many of you have your own worries just now.

Andrew
Rev 21-I can't wait for this!

No, I'm sorry, I've got exams...

It's that time of year again, when students everywhere put down their pints, stop claiming discounts and pick up their notes for the first time in the academic year- yes, exams are back to tease, torment and demoralise the populace (who, it seems, are increasing in both youth and number, but that is a comment for another day).

Some lock themselves in the library for days on end trying to remember that last piece of information on plant genetics or the algerian war or the gram-schmidt procedure, while others leave their bedroom only to go to the toilet or make a sandwich. Much weight is lost as they sacrifice meals to get that last piece of knowledge away before the big day. It's horrible, especially since the weather is starting to get nice and some people don't even have any exams!

It's tougher for some people than others, though.

The last two exam periods I had were both traumatic in their own ways. Last year my grandad died in the middle of them and my dad advised me not to come home for the funeral so i could finish my exams. It was the right decision, but it was horrible to be sat in the library when I could have been paying my respects to my grandfather.

The year before that, I made a horrendous mistake that left my self-confidence at an all-time low and I still wear the scars (physical and mental) to this day. Although, if I'm honest, the damage was largely caused by my initial repressing of the incident (due to an impending exam) and it coming back to bite me later, rather than the incident itself, per se.


These are big setbacks no doubt, but somehow they pale in comparison to what pain some people go through this time of year every year. I wish there are some words of comfort I could draw that would suit everybody, but I can't think of any at the minute.

But why do we have to go through this? Simple, we are a fallen creation. Genesis 3:17b-19

[God said to Adam after he had eaten from the tree of knowledge] Cursed is the ground because of you; in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground; for out of it you were taken; for you are dust and to dust you shall return.

our sin has meant that we won't get everything provided for us, we have to work for it, and it will be painful and excruciating at times. And, worst, we won't be the ones who benefit from it all the time.

Ecclesiastes 2:18-19
I hated all my toil in which I toil under the sun, seeing that I must leave it to the man who will come after me, and who knows whether he will be wise or a fool? Yet he will be master of all for which I toiled and used my wisdom under the sun. This.. is a vanity.

I have taken this passage slightly out of context to make the point, but hopefully you can see that sometimes life just doesn't seem fair- you work hard and your efforts don't seem to make any difference to you- it's all wasted effort.

The consequences of the fall reach far beyond this, but there is hope. We don't have to live as fallen people anymore- God has forgiven us through the sacrifice of His Son and we need not fear sin. Work is still important in our lives, but it can be a powerful way to glorify God if we work hard and appreciate how God has shown Himself through what we are learning. Trust Him , and He will lead you the right way, even if your exams don't go as planned. It might be the only thing that keeps you sane....

God bless

Andrew


[Addendum: I was trying to do about ten things at once when I wrote this so it's entirely possible it makes no sense or that the passages I quoted are totally out of context. If so... oops. In my defence I was just trying to help...]

Talk to the hand, the facebook ain't listening

Off work with nothing to do today, I was browsing facebook. Nothing out of the ordinary, until at around half four (I think) I had something approaching an epiphany. I found myself thinking
"what really is the point of all this? Am I really going to waste my whole holiday stalking people?".

Those of you that know me will know that when it comes to facebook, the word "addict" somehow doesn't quite cut it. I've lost a lot of work hours this year because of it, and if I'm honest, if I don't get through my first year review, this will be one of my prime reasons. It made sense, then, to head straight for "my account" and "deactivate my account". Intriguingly, when you do this, you have to click on a reason why. I clicked on "it's only temporary" because I will probably go back on sometime soon to see what the gossip is (because sadly the only space where you can find this kind of stuff out these days is on facebook), but other options include "it takes up too much time" (to which you get a message saying how they can reduce the number of emails you get) "I get too many emails" (ditto) "I'm not comfortable with everyone being able to see my profile" (it tells you you can change your privacy) and so on and so forth, in an obvious attempt to make you change your mind. I was resolute, however, and proceeded with it.

I must confess, it felt good. I have had my criticisms of it for a long time. I've always thought it a bit contrived and insincere, and while the original idea of it was good, the concept has gone something out of control (not least the mistake that was the news feed).

Other issues come into play too, because you read stuff that's been written about you on other people's walls, and I must say, I've found some pretty demoralising stuff written about me on someone's wall that came up on my news feed (the person that wrote that should have sent a private message). It's also very easy to get paranoid about what people write or that a person hasn't replied to something or other that you were expecting a reply to. I've made a couple of bad bad mistakes because of this.

The last thing is that there is no doubt that facebook has had a massive impact on the edinburgh uni social scene. Events are advertised almost exclusively on facebook now and now also everyone seems to know everything about everyone before they even meet them, and even then, they just talk about facebook. At least, if the last couple of parties I've been to is anything to go by (not saying the company I had then was poor...).


Anyway, the fact that you're reading this at all means that I'm back on it. It wasn't entirely my decision but frankly I don't feel like deactivating my account again- a weekend without facebook was great but it's my only point of contact with some people these days. I like to talk to these folk so I'm sure you'll forgive me if I stay on for a bit. I will try to tone it down though...