December 18th, 2013

baby i'm a big star

objects from the past

i have my (eventual) brother-in-law, kaffeka (like kafka, but with coffee), for the christmas name-swap for c.'s family. yesterday i bought some used genesis vinyls for him from the local record store. i was looking the albums over before wrapping them, and out of one slipped a concert ticket stub from 1978. 1978! it was for the august 3rd show at pine knob (a wonderful well-toured outdoor amphitheater (which now is named after a corporate sponsor) which i visited for the first time this past july 4th when c. and i got to meet adam duritz and the rest of the band). they tore stubs back before barcodes and so the band name was missing. i assumed that it had to have been a genesis show since it had been stuffed into a genesis album. wrong. genesis did play a show at pine knob in the summer of 1978, but it was in july. after some searching, i found a concert database which showed that it was actually for a jackson browne concert. which is not as cool to me. but still, 1978! and pine knob's first year as a venue was only six years earlier in '72.
oh snap!

now that the magic has gone

last week jay leno had some young magician on. he did the exact same trick i've seen lior suchard do at multiple venues including the tonight show, the same one i disdainfully debunked earlier this year.

the trick is to pick/plant a meaningful large number (8+ digits), then solicit random numbers for use in some arithmetic operations on a phone's calculator app, which astoundingly results in the chosen number despite the random inputs given. of course all the magician does is type the chosen number into the calculator once the irrelevant calculations have been completed and pretends that the number was derived from the calculations.

these 'magicians' might work a little harder at these tricks to at least make them plausible. this one from last week multiplied several natural numbers (and used no other operations). however his chosen number '32771617' is prime and thus couldn't possibly have been derived in this way. disappointing, again.