Sunday, January 06, 2019
Song Stylist: Nancy Wilson, by Wiggia
Outside of modern jazz I don’t put up music pieces on here as JD is the ‘man’ for that - his knowledge across the whole spectrum of music leaves me a long way behind in his wake.
With Nancy Wilson who recently died however I feel I am justified to write this. She came to prominence after meeting Julian “Cannonball” Adderley in 1959. When he suggested she could make it as a singer and should move to NY, she engaged Adderley's manager and after four weeks she had made it.
Born in Ohio in 1937 she was the youngest of six children born to working parents. From an early age as with so many of her contemporaries she was exposed to music brought home by her father. She was influenced by Nat King Cole, Billy Eckstine, Lionel Hampton's singer Jimmy Scott, Dinah Washington, Ruth Brown, LaVerne Baker and Little Esther among others.
She won a talent contest at fifteen whilst still at school and the prize was a twice weekly appearance on a local TV show. It was the beginning of a long and illustrious career spanning six decades.
She covered the whole gamut of music styles during those years: blues, jazz, R&B, pop and soul. She was the complete entertainer, with acting roles and her own TV shows.
It was after Adderley’s manager sent Capitol Records four demos including Guess Who I Saw Today that she was signed up in 1960. The single of that number was her first hit and four albums followed in two years with Capitol.
Nancy never had a Number 1 but her albums (which ran to seventy) sold in large numbers throughout her career.
She won three Grammys: in 1965 for best R&B recording “How Glad I Am”, in 2005 for best jazz vocal album RSVP - rare songs, very personal - and in 2007 in the same category for “Turned to Blue”.
Her frequent television appearances resulted in her getting her own show, The Nancy Wilson show (1967-1968) for which she won an Emmy, appearing also in many TV shows from I Spy to Hawaii Five O, Police Story, and all the major shows such as the Danny Kaye, Andy Williams etc.
She was also a successful business woman and a major figure in the Civil Rights Movement; a very full and meaningful life.
Yet her singing career though known for the more ‘pop’ aspects really took off after the Adderley meeting and she returned to jazz in later life as seen above with her award winning albums.
Here the lovely Nancy is singing The Very Thought of You in 1964:
Another of her early hits, in fact the biggest one (You Don’t Know) How Glad I Am:
At Newport Jazz Festival 1987 “I Was Telling Him About You”:
This is with Adderley in ‘61 “Save Your Love For Me”, for many their favorite Nancy Wilson song:
Sorry about the lack of videos but I am sure the music makes amends.
“Here’s That Rainy Day”:
Another ‘made for Nancy’ number, “Don’t Let ME Be Lonely Tonight”:
This was always such an emotional number, love this one - “Can’t Take My Eyes Off You”:
Whilst suffering a lot of ill health in later years Nancy was always the ultimate pro, her immaculate appearance never wavered, always a very smart lady. She will be sadly missed as the generation she and others represented are nearly all gone now.
To finish with, the Diva Orchestra in 2001:
Saturday, January 05, 2019
Weekend Wonders: The Outer Limits (Of Space)
Here is a diagram of the universe sorted by distance from us.
An expandable image is available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe
Light takes time to get to us, so the farther away an object us, the farther back in time we can see.
Is the Universe gradually disappearing?
Yes - and no.
The fabric of the Universe is expanding, so that the farther away an object is, the faster it will seem to be receding. (This is "on the whole" - some objects, such as the Andromeda galaxy, happen to be moving in our direction. But an otherwise "stationary" object will still be carried away by space-time expansion.)
The logic of this seems to be that with enough of this stretching, the farthest parts of the Universe will be going faster than the speed of light and so information from them can never reach us. In a sense, they will have torn free of our observable Universe and will cease to exist as far as we are concerned. An August 2018 article in Forbes magazine appears to be thinking on these lines:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/08/17/the-universe-is-disappearing-and-theres-nothing-we-can-do-to-stop-it/#35b81132560e
But if Einstein is right, then no matter is rushing away from us at or above light-speed.
This is because of the way you add two speeds together.
For everyday purposes, two cars approaching each other, each travelling at 30 mph, are closing the gap at 60 mph...
... very, very nearly, but not quite! For in reality, there is a microscopic reduction in the total, which becomes much more significant as velocities get closer to light-speed. The formula is this:
{\displaystyle u={v+u' \over 1+(vu'/c^{2})}.}
u is the combined speed, as seen from our point of view
v is the speed of the first object
u' is the speed of the second object, as seen from v
c is the speed of light (and c2 is the speed of light times itself)
So if we see a galaxy moving away from us at 60% of the speed of light (i.e. 0.6 C), and there is a quasar moving away from the galaxy in the same direction, also at 0.6 C (as seen from the galaxy), then (if you can do the math) Einstein's formula says the quasar is receding from ourselves not at a total of 1.2 C (20% faster than light) but at 15/17ths of C - i.e. lower than light-speed.
Therefore, a graph of celestial objects plotting distance against velocity would appear to be very nearly straight-line to start with (as per Hubble) but curving as the velocities approached C.
So information from the most distant reaches of the Universe can never be completely lost, but the frequencies will ultimately be lengthened to the point where we would have no means to detect them.
Like old soldiers, the remotest bits of the Universe don't die (leave us altogether); they just fade away.
An expandable image is available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observable_universe
By Pablo Carlos Budassi - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=74584660 |
Light takes time to get to us, so the farther away an object us, the farther back in time we can see.
The very earliest stage of the universe is invisible - photons could not get through the dense fog of subatomic particles. After c. 370,000 years, atoms began to form, so creating empty spaces that let photons start their long journey. We are still able to observe the radiation emitted at that time, because it has taken billions of years to reach us.
More on the early universe and cosmic background microwave radiation in these two short clips by Professor David Butler:
Is the Universe gradually disappearing?
Yes - and no.
The fabric of the Universe is expanding, so that the farther away an object is, the faster it will seem to be receding. (This is "on the whole" - some objects, such as the Andromeda galaxy, happen to be moving in our direction. But an otherwise "stationary" object will still be carried away by space-time expansion.)
The logic of this seems to be that with enough of this stretching, the farthest parts of the Universe will be going faster than the speed of light and so information from them can never reach us. In a sense, they will have torn free of our observable Universe and will cease to exist as far as we are concerned. An August 2018 article in Forbes magazine appears to be thinking on these lines:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/08/17/the-universe-is-disappearing-and-theres-nothing-we-can-do-to-stop-it/#35b81132560e
But if Einstein is right, then no matter is rushing away from us at or above light-speed.
This is because of the way you add two speeds together.
For everyday purposes, two cars approaching each other, each travelling at 30 mph, are closing the gap at 60 mph...
... very, very nearly, but not quite! For in reality, there is a microscopic reduction in the total, which becomes much more significant as velocities get closer to light-speed. The formula is this:
{\displaystyle u={v+u' \over 1+(vu'/c^{2})}.}
u is the combined speed, as seen from our point of view
v is the speed of the first object
u' is the speed of the second object, as seen from v
c is the speed of light (and c2 is the speed of light times itself)
So if we see a galaxy moving away from us at 60% of the speed of light (i.e. 0.6 C), and there is a quasar moving away from the galaxy in the same direction, also at 0.6 C (as seen from the galaxy), then (if you can do the math) Einstein's formula says the quasar is receding from ourselves not at a total of 1.2 C (20% faster than light) but at 15/17ths of C - i.e. lower than light-speed.
Therefore, a graph of celestial objects plotting distance against velocity would appear to be very nearly straight-line to start with (as per Hubble) but curving as the velocities approached C.
So information from the most distant reaches of the Universe can never be completely lost, but the frequencies will ultimately be lengthened to the point where we would have no means to detect them.
Like old soldiers, the remotest bits of the Universe don't die (leave us altogether); they just fade away.
Friday, January 04, 2019
FRIDAY MUSIC: Fripp-ery, by JD
Something to start the year in style and wake us all up from our post festivities slumber, the Mad Genius known as Robert Fripp!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fripp
Founder member of the rock group King Crimson and the only one to be in all of its various incarnations, he describes himself as 'the glue holding it together'. But in the past fifty years he has explored the world of music and sound and has recorded many 'unusual' styles and types of music. What it all shares is that attention must be paid, it is not background music or music while you work; listen and enjoy something which is, dare I say it, transcendental!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Fripp
Founder member of the rock group King Crimson and the only one to be in all of its various incarnations, he describes himself as 'the glue holding it together'. But in the past fifty years he has explored the world of music and sound and has recorded many 'unusual' styles and types of music. What it all shares is that attention must be paid, it is not background music or music while you work; listen and enjoy something which is, dare I say it, transcendental!
Monday, December 31, 2018
Some International New Year's Eve Celebrations, by JD
GERMANY
"Dinner For One" (1963) - Freddie Frinton's manservant heroically lifts a glass for each of May Warden's absent friends, for every course...
This comedy masterpiece has been shown on German TV for the last 55 years - we put it up last NYE but think it's a worthy tradition for Broad Oak Magazine, too:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinner_for_One
SWEDEN/NORWAY/DENMARK
Not exactly New Year's Eve but a midwinter celebration of Lucia, the return of the light after the winter solstice. The origins of the Lucia Tradition are explained in this first video:
- and here is how Jonna Jinton commemorates it:
CHILE
This one is bizarre when you see the picture in the first link but it is explained in the second link. The twelve grapes is inherited from the Spanish tradition but the others look like mad inventions.
Still, I suppose every tradition has to start somewhere. Who would have thought that the Germans would fall in love with Freddie Frinton and make it an annual ritual!
More about Chilean NYE here: http://www.southamerica.me/new-years-eve-traditions-chile/
- and here: http://www.chile-attractions.com/chile-new-years.html
SPAIN
Some Spanish practices: https://www.eyeonspain.com/spain-magazine/new-year-in-spain.aspx
Anne Igartiburu has become a fixture on Spanish TV every New Year's Eve (not sure which year this is). Paradoxically, she commands a big audience but hasn't got much coverage...
SCOTLAND
And for Caledonian Hogmaniacs, this is the first TV broadcast of Hogmanay in 1957-into-1958:
Oidhche mhath!
"Dinner For One" (1963) - Freddie Frinton's manservant heroically lifts a glass for each of May Warden's absent friends, for every course...
This comedy masterpiece has been shown on German TV for the last 55 years - we put it up last NYE but think it's a worthy tradition for Broad Oak Magazine, too:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinner_for_One
SWEDEN/NORWAY/DENMARK
Not exactly New Year's Eve but a midwinter celebration of Lucia, the return of the light after the winter solstice. The origins of the Lucia Tradition are explained in this first video:
- and here is how Jonna Jinton commemorates it:
CHILE
This one is bizarre when you see the picture in the first link but it is explained in the second link. The twelve grapes is inherited from the Spanish tradition but the others look like mad inventions.
Still, I suppose every tradition has to start somewhere. Who would have thought that the Germans would fall in love with Freddie Frinton and make it an annual ritual!
More about Chilean NYE here: http://www.southamerica.me/new-years-eve-traditions-chile/
- and here: http://www.chile-attractions.com/chile-new-years.html
SPAIN
Some Spanish practices: https://www.eyeonspain.com/spain-magazine/new-year-in-spain.aspx
Anne Igartiburu has become a fixture on Spanish TV every New Year's Eve (not sure which year this is). Paradoxically, she commands a big audience but hasn't got much coverage...
SCOTLAND
And for Caledonian Hogmaniacs, this is the first TV broadcast of Hogmanay in 1957-into-1958:
Oidhche mhath!
Sunday, December 30, 2018
The Trump Wall, In Context
In January 2018 President Trump requested $25 billion to build a wall along the border with Mexico.
In August, the Government Accountability Office warned that the project could cost more than estimated; but didn't quantify this, so we'll have to go with the figure given.
The US Federal Budget for 2018/19 is $4,407 billion. This is more than expected income so requires a deficit of $985 billion to make up the difference.
The US has a National Debt of $21,600 billion, implying $363 billion in interest charges in 2018/19.
This chart is to visualise the relative size of the Wall's cost. The Wall is equivalent to 0.57% of the annual budget, or 2.5% of the deficit, or 6.9% of the annual interest on the National Debt.
In August, the Government Accountability Office warned that the project could cost more than estimated; but didn't quantify this, so we'll have to go with the figure given.
The US Federal Budget for 2018/19 is $4,407 billion. This is more than expected income so requires a deficit of $985 billion to make up the difference.
The US has a National Debt of $21,600 billion, implying $363 billion in interest charges in 2018/19.
This chart is to visualise the relative size of the Wall's cost. The Wall is equivalent to 0.57% of the annual budget, or 2.5% of the deficit, or 6.9% of the annual interest on the National Debt.
Cancelling the Wall would make very little difference to the national finances. [UPDATE, 6.1.19: even less, if the current demand for $5.6 billion is agreed.]
The costs and benefits of unauthorised Mexico to US migration seem hard to establish. There are something like 10 - 12 million such migrants [correction: not all Mexican - see comment below] now residing in the US. If many of these represent cheap labour, then that is a benefit to employers; but the cheap labour force will pay little in income tax and may be entitled to supplementary in-work benefits, which is a cost to the State and in effect a subsidy to the employer. Also, wealthy Americans have many clever ways to keep down their tax contributions and are more likely than the average wage earner to put spare money into investments rather than personal expenditure.
Whereas if restricting migration and foreign imports increases labour wages, then the American working class may be more self-sufficient in income, pay more in taxes and also be more likely to spend spare cash, stimulating demand. Perhaps this could help bring the budget into balance.
If allowed to proceed, the Wall would be one useful test of that theory.
Proportional Representation: Paralysis and Parasites
"I am a great enthusiast for a couple of almost unique pillars of US and UK democracy: the first past the post principle in designating the winners of elections and the winner takes all notion of governance following the elections. To anyone who finds these principles unexceptional, I must explain that they run directly against the operative principles of many if not most nations on the Continent, where progressive political theories stressing consensus and inclusiveness have given us executives and legislatures which are utterly incapable of being disruptive. What we get here in Old Europe tends to be coalition governments or power-sharing in which parliamentary majorities are hobbled together by distributing the spoils of office, assigning ministerial portfolios with utter disregard for policy coherence or the competence of the appointees. The stasis in policy results in voter apathy and works directly against the vibrancy of democracy."
- Gilbert Doctorow
https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2018/12/20/donald-trump-orders-full-withdrawal-of-us-ground-forces-from-syria-the-establishment-howls-it-disapproval/
"Proportional representation - instead of voting for an MP, like we do in Britain, Weimar Germans voted for a party. Each party was then allocated seats in the Reichstag exactly reflecting (proportional to) the number of people who had voted for it. This sounds fair, but in practice it was a disaster it resulted in dozens of tiny parties, with no party strong enough to get a majority, and, therefore, no government to get its laws passed in the Reichstag. This was a major weakness of the Republic."
- BBC History
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/germany/weimarstrengthweakrev_print.shtml
But the Alternative Vote, whose adoption in the UK the Labour and Conservative parties colluded to block, is not the same thing, and if we are to have a second referendum on anything, this might be one to consider:
https://theylaughedatnoah.blogspot.com/2011/04/voting-reform-av-first-past-post.html
- I'd be interested to know of any simulations that might help us see the likely outcomes of an AV system. I don't think it would necessarily boost the LibDems - it depends on how they and other parties might reposition themselves and also what new parties might arise.
And after decades of Punch and Judy politics a more focused struggle for the centre might be beneficial.
- Gilbert Doctorow
https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2018/12/20/donald-trump-orders-full-withdrawal-of-us-ground-forces-from-syria-the-establishment-howls-it-disapproval/
"Proportional representation - instead of voting for an MP, like we do in Britain, Weimar Germans voted for a party. Each party was then allocated seats in the Reichstag exactly reflecting (proportional to) the number of people who had voted for it. This sounds fair, but in practice it was a disaster it resulted in dozens of tiny parties, with no party strong enough to get a majority, and, therefore, no government to get its laws passed in the Reichstag. This was a major weakness of the Republic."
- BBC History
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/germany/weimarstrengthweakrev_print.shtml
But the Alternative Vote, whose adoption in the UK the Labour and Conservative parties colluded to block, is not the same thing, and if we are to have a second referendum on anything, this might be one to consider:
https://theylaughedatnoah.blogspot.com/2011/04/voting-reform-av-first-past-post.html
- I'd be interested to know of any simulations that might help us see the likely outcomes of an AV system. I don't think it would necessarily boost the LibDems - it depends on how they and other parties might reposition themselves and also what new parties might arise.
And after decades of Punch and Judy politics a more focused struggle for the centre might be beneficial.
Saturday, December 29, 2018
Weekend Wonders: Amber
A tick grasping a dinosaur feather inside 99 million-year-old Burmese amber. (Image: Peñalver et al., 2017) https://gizmodo.com/new-evidence-from-ancient-amber-shows-dinosaurs-were-pl-1821213048 |
When we look at amber we wonder at the creatures often caught up inside, changeless in their warm-coloured, luminous prison. It is the fossilised resin exuded by some plants to protect themselves, and first became abundant around 150 million years ago (mya), though the oldest animals found trapped in amber are some mites dating from 230 mya. In the science fiction film "Jurassic Park" the blood-meal of mosquitoes preserved in ancient amber is used to re-breed dinosaurs. (Insects generally are far more ancient than dinos - anything from 412-479 mya.)
Amber is still being produced today, but it takes millions of years to mutate from a sticky sap, through a hardened stage called copal, to the transparent-stone-like final condition.
The very earliest amber found so far dates from around 320 million years ago (mya) and was found in 2008 in an Illinois coal deposit. This was from the Carboniferous period (359 - 299 mya), long before the the age of dinosaurs (previously said to be 220 - 65 mya - though in 2012 another dinosaur fossil was found dating to 243 mya.)
The Illinois amber discovery is something of a mystery as modern trees and flowering plants came later, in fact many millions of years after dinosaurs first appeared. Until recently, the ancestors of flowering plants that produce seeds in protective ovaries (angiosperms) were believed to date from perhaps 160 mya. But before angiosperms there were gymnosperms (plants carrying seed without covers) such as conifers and ginkos, which started in the late Carboniferous period and so it may be one of them that produced that earliest amber.
Having said that, the emergence of flowering plants and angiosperms is being redated too: last year a scientific team produced a model of the earliest flower, from 140 mya; yet in 2013 fossil plant pollen was found from 240 mya and so angiosperms may have developed in the "Early Triassic (between 252 to 247 million years ago) or even earlier."
The Natural History Museum says that dinosaurs evolved in the Triassic (252-201 mya) when all the world's land mass was clumped together (Pangea); lived though the split in Pangea that created the North Atlantic Ocean; survived the still-mysterious mass extinctions at the end of the Triassic and became far more numerous and various in the Jurassic (201-145 mya); and saw the further splitting of landmasses in the Cretaceous period, and diversification in plants and insects (including the appearance of bees).
So we're still finding out when dinosaurs first saw (and presumably ate from) modern trees and flowering plants. Scientists used to think that dinosaurs never even got to munch grass - but thanks to analysis of fossilised dinosaur poo the origin of grass has been pushed back from 55 mya to 66 mya, and some of its cousins may be much older.
There they are, these specimens, frozen in time; yet our understanding of the past keeps changing.
________________________________________________________________________________
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amber#Geological_record
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/08/pictures/120828-oldest-amber-animals-science-proceedings-arthropod-triassic/
https://www.livescience.com/48663-insect-family-tree-evolution.html
http://www.brost.se/eng/education/facts.html
https://www.dnr.illinois.gov/OI/Documents/March10Amber.pdf
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/prehistoric-world/carboniferous/
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/scientists-discover-oldest-known-dinosaur-152807497/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flowering_plant
https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j24_2/j24_2_16.pdf
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131001191811.htm
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-40780491
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/when-did-dinosaurs-live.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poaceae#Evolutionary_history
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)