Paddy Cronin(114 plays)

friendsofsliabhluachra:

The late, great Paddy Cronin rips through some slides with the greatest of ease.

It’s wonderful. I especially like the B part of the second tune. Does anyone have the names of these?

(via filmscorefan)

composteladailyphoto:

Baixo o Arco de Xelmirez

I spy a gaita in this photo.
Hooray for bagpipes!

composteladailyphoto:

Baixo o Arco de Xelmirez

I spy a gaita in this photo.

Hooray for bagpipes!

(Source: pablosabucedo, via sphericalmusic)

Fiddle Friday

Caoimhín Ó Raghallaign and Dan Trueman : Laghdú

Atmospheric but not ambient. Amelodic and not atonal. I don’t know what the hell is going on but I know I love it.

so much droning, so many ghostly notes, my ears are in the happy place.

word count = 100,001

I did it.

Damn, I’m tired.

folkingitup:

Niamh Parsons - Clohinne Winds

Oh, that voice.

Jerry McCarthy – Reels (160 plays)

friendsofsliabhluachra:

An epic set of reels played masterfully by Jerry McCarthy of Scartaglin. From PJ Teahan: “This is a recording of Jerry Mccarthy, star pupil of Patrick O Keeffe. It is part of a recording made in a kitchen in Upper Breahig by a visitor, Maggie O Connor, who was home on holidays from USA in the sixties with a reel to reel recorder. We think this is before Jerry went to America . Maggie O Connor is an Aunt to Denis O Connor ( Banjo ) and her brother Maurice and his son Martin were also pupils of O Keeffe . More from this recording will feature in Nicky Mcauliffe’s presentation on October 4th as part of the Handed Down series at the Scartaglin Heritage Center.”

Lovely!

rachelinbrooklyn:

Well done, Playboy.

This is the best decision tree I’ve seen in a long damn time.

rachelinbrooklyn:

Well done, Playboy.

This is the best decision tree I’ve seen in a long damn time.

(via mostlysignssomeportents)

"∃x(Fx & ∀y(Fy → x=y) & Gx)"

I’m still bowled over by the elegance of this.

Way to go, Russell

ryanandmath:

daniel-r-h:

transgeometer:

ryanandmath:

How to read math. You’d be surprised how far this will get you.

Nice graphic!

[Isn’t the last one “for all integers a and b there exists a unique positive integer k such that …..”? I think maybe you meant to not have the superscript +?]

I think there was supposed to be a plus, and that it was supposed to have your correction. In any case, it is false: there is no gcd(0, 0). Other than that edge case, though, all GCDs are positive.

Similarly, the subset sign used in saying the reals are a subset of the reals usually means “proper subset”, which is a non-equal subset; this is clearly false. The one used in the glossary part means any subset and would have worked. Think of the difference between the less-than sign (<) and the less-than-or-equal-to sign (≤): the bar means the same thing in both cases.

EDIT TO ADD: Still very good and gets the main points across nicely.

EDIT: Tumblr ate some of my post and formatting because I didn’t realize I was in the HTML editor mode. I fixed them.

daniel-r-h has some good points.

  1. The first statement is not a true statement (which is my bad). However, it is almost translated correctly (I believe). As transgeometer points out, there’s something going on with the superscript and the positivity of k. I intended the superscript because the gcd should be positive, but failed to translate it properly and say a “unique positive integer k.”

  2. The second point about the subsets is also technically correct, but… the translation is still correct in a way too. Notice how the glossary symbol for “subset of” has a line under where as the example does not. Some mathematicians interpret there being no line under the symbol as meaning the set has to be a proper subset, meaning the subset cannot be the entire set. However, there are many mathematicians that use both symbols interchangeably. When they want to indicate that they are looking at proper subsets, they use another symbol which has a line with a slash through it. I think it’s important to be told this because until someone does, you can ask the kind of questions that daniel-r-h did about proper and not proper subsets, when the writer is just using their preference of subset symbol. I’ll admit it was a mistake when I typed it up though (\subset and \subsetneq)

Thank you for pointing out these mistakes though! You’re better mathematicians than me

welcome to my life, ca. 2009-2012

took the training wheels off

took the training wheels off