...for the perfect espresso... (part nine)

I've been lucky of late in that I've tasted some very fine coffee. However I'm not sure whether the global standard of coffee-making is on the rise or my own standards are in steep decline. To be truthful I feel convinced that neither of these are in fact the case, and the net result has proved to be one of great pleasure to me.

For many years now coffee has been my constant companion. Wherever it was served, you'd find me present.

I've realised I won't find life's answers at the bottom of a demitasse, instead I'll discover all the reasons for being alive by looking beyond the rim of the cup and across to my companion.

When the book of my life is written, it will be measured not in the number of cups of coffee I have drunk, but instead through the quality of the company in which I consumed them.

...for an achievable target...

i've given up on intelligence.

having spent many years of my life in a lazy attempt to boost my iq by consuming brain-foods (oily fish, walnuts, pumpkin and flax-seeds), i've finally given up the chase for membership of mensa (which requires an iq level of 140)

i've learned that my brain weighs around one and a half kilos, 

but using it gobbles up a whopping 20% of my daily calorie intake. 

no wonder i'm always hungry.

not only would i eat brain-cell boosting foods, 

sometimes i'd even give it some exercise and read a book.

however even this i shall quit, since one of the books i read extolled the virtues of giving the brain complete down-time.

i know from my cycling that muscles can be over-trained, and that recovery time is an important part of any athletes strategy. 

so that's it, i'm permanently resting my brain.

the clincher though was my discovery that the average iq

 of nobel prize winners is just 120. 120!

henceforth my aim shall be to reduce my iq in the hope that

 one day i shall be awarded a nobel prize.

finally, an achievable target.

...for a number i can visualise...

sometimes it occurs to me that i am, perhaps, 

a man of very little brain.

everything around me is delivered in very big terms. 

the bigger the number the more interesting the story 

is perceived to be. apparently.

i'm not quite sure throughout what period of my life

 i began to get lost.

i am in control of my faculties throughout february, but visit me at the end of january, march, july, august, october or december and watch me fade. every leap year i take to my bed for one whole day.

i feel far more comfortable travelling at 70 miles per hour than i ever will at 112.654 kilometres per hour.

and i feel completely lost in a world of 7 billion souls.

when quantifying pi a figure of '3.1415' has always been sufficient for my practical purposes, although i understand that it has been computed (by people with far too much time on their hands i fear) to more than a trillion decimal places. and all this whilst a shorter version (to just 39 decimal places) would have provided enough accuracy to calculate the circumference of a circle as wide as the universe and with the precision of the size of one hydrogen atom. just thinking of that is giving me a nose-bleed.

i've been trying to find an accurately reported figure for total global debt. but it seems it is just too terrible an amount for anyone to have been brave enough to write down anywhere. 

i did read that the united states has (or had when i checked it a few days ago) a total debt of $15 trillion. which is nice for them since, if i'm honest with you, i don't really know what a trillion looks like. it is shortened to 'tr.' though, and that makes it far less threatening, although it's still not as friendly as its cousin 'bill.'

i think the time has come for more honesty in numbering.

such ridiculously large numbers are only quoted because they are too big for us to challenge. the truth is that no one even knows how much uncle sam owes, but the effect on the listener after hearing a figure of multiple-trillions is to render them temporarily blind and slightly paralysed. 

that's what happens to me anyway.

i have resolved, in future, to give a blanket term to any numbers larger than those i can comfortably imagine.

if i say it forcefully enough perhaps you too will go blind and feel tremors running the length of your limbs.

i've decided on 'vagillion'.

i think it is unsettling on more than one level, and delivered with a straight back and direct eye contact i fancy it will cure me of my hitherto debilitating phobia for large numbers.

i'll let you know how it goes.

...for the ideal wavelength...

if there's one thing i take seriously, it's radio.

and for radiophiles such as me there's never been

 a better time than now.

i used to have a radio in every room of the home,

 and i could move from room to room without missing a word

 or a beat. back in the day i had five national (british) networks i could tune into, together with a couple of local stations.

today there are thousands at my digital fingertips.

i've dallied with many, but always return to the bbc.

not the (international) bbc world service, you understand,

 but the real (national) bbc.

this is a secret that us brits like to keep to ourselves.

 in the same way we've known for years that the french keep the best wine for themselves and only export second-rate vintages, we've been doing the same with our radio since 1932. 

  there's a substantial difference between the output of

 the world service and the national networks.

if you're an international listener to the bbc's world service

 i heartily recommend that you find radio 4 

on the bbc's iplayer and give it a try.

bbc radio 4

but don't let anyone know who told you, otherwise that'll be my chance of a knighthood gone. and i really want one of those.

...for an anglo-indian dictionary...

i was caught somewhat off-guard by an email i received yesterday, the purpose of which was to inform me that the timing of an invitation had been brought forward. 

indeed, i was advised that the event had been 'preponed'.

of course i grasped immediately the salient message, but it set me wondering over the correctness of this term.

it transpires it is a term adopted by indian speakers of english, and is now seeking acceptance in the wider anglophone-world.

i can't see myself using this any more than i can see myself using 'revert' when in fact i mean 'reply'.

what's wrong with people?
does anyone actually own a dictionary these days?

...for wiser words than these...

observed on a train carriage: a lady drops and breaks her kindle. lady sitting next to her says, "real books don't break".


lovers of real books 1, electronic buffoonery 0.