1 . Albert Einstein’s 1915 masterpiece “The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity” is the first and still the best introduction to the subject, and I recommend it as such to students. But it probably wouldn’t be publishable in a scientific journal today.
Why not? After all, it would pass with flying colours the tests of correctness and significance. And while popular belief holds that the paper was incomprehensible to its first readers, in fact many papers in theoretical physics are much more difficult.
As the physicist Richard Feynman wrote, “There was a time when the newspapers said that only 12 men understood the theory of relativity. I do believe there might have been a time when only one man did, because he was the only guy who caught on, before he wrote his paper. But after people read the paper a lot understood the theory of relativity in some way or other, certainly more than 12.”
No, the problem is its style. It starts with a leisurely philosophical discussion of space and time and then continues with an exposition of known mathematics. Those two sections, which would be considered extraneous today, take up half the paper. Worse, there are zero citations of previous scientists’ work, nor are there any graphics. Those features might make a paper not even get past the first editors.
A similar process of professionalization has transformed other parts of the scientific landscape. Requests for research time at major observatories or national laboratories are more rigidly structured. And anything involving work with human subjects, or putting instruments in space, involves piles of paperwork.
We see it also in the Regeneron Science Talent Search, the Nobel Prize of high school science competitions. In the early decades of its 78-year history, the winning projects were usually the sort of clever but naive, amateurish efforts one might expect of talented beginners working on their own. Today, polished work coming out of internships(实习) at established laboratories is the norm.
These professionalizing tendencies are a natural consequence of the explosive growth of modern science. Standardization and system make it easier to manage the rapid flow of papers, applications and people. But there are serious downsides. A lot of unproductive effort goes into jumping through bureaucratic hoops(繁文缛节), and outsiders face entry barriers at every turn.
Of course, Einstein would have found his way to meeting modern standards and publishing his results. Its scientific core wouldn’t have changed, but the paper might not be the same taste to read.
1. According to Richard Feynman, Einstein’s 1915 paper ________.| A．was a classic in theoretical physics |
| B．turned out to be comprehensible |
| C．needed further improvement |
| D．attracted few professionals |
| A．Unrealistic. | B．Irrelevant. |
| C．Unattractive. | D．Imprecise. |
| A．The application of research findings. |
| B．The principle of scientific research. |
| C．The selection of young talents. |
| D．The evaluation of laboratories. |
| A．What makes Einstein great? |
| B．Will science be professionalized? |
| C．Could Einstein get published today? |
| D．How will modern science make advances? |
2 . Modern medicine’s ability to keep us alive makes it tempting to think human evolution may have stopped. But if we look at the rate of our DNA’s evolution, we can see that human evolution hasn’t stopped – it may even be happening faster than before.
Evolution is a gradual change to the DNA of a species over many generations. It can occur by natural selection, when certain traits created by genetic changes help an organism survive or reproduce. Such genes are thus more likely to be passed on to the next generation, so they increase in frequency in a population. Gradually, these changes and their associated traits become more common among the whole group.
By looking at global studies of our DNA, we can see evidence that natural selection has recently made changes and continues to do so. Though modern healthcare disrupts a key driving force of evolution by keeping some people alive longer, in countries without access to good healthcare, populations are continuing to evolve. Survivors of infectious disease outbreaks drive natural selection by giving their genetic resistance to offspring. Our DNA shows evidence for recent selection for resistance of killer diseases like Lassa fever and malaria. Selection in response to malaria remains in regions where the disease remains common.
Humans are also adapting to their environment. Gene change allowing humans to live at high altitudes have become more common in populations in Tibet, Ethiopia, and the Andes. The spread of genetic changes in Tibet is possibly the fastest evolutionary change in humans, occurring over the past 3,000 years. This rapid increase in frequency of a mutated gene that increases blood oxygen content gives locals a survival advantage in higher altitudes, resulting in more surviving children.
Diet is another source for adaptations. Studies show that natural selection favoring a change allowing adults to produce lactase – the enzyme (酶) that breaks down milk sugars – is why some groups of people can digest milk. Over 80 per cent of northwest Europeans can, but in parts of East Asia, where milk is much less commonly drunk, an inability to digest lactose is the norm. Like high altitude adaptation, selection to digest milk has evolved more than once in humans and may be the strongest kind of recent selection.
Yet, despite these changes, natural selection only affects about 8 per cent of our genome. But scientists can’t explain why some genes are evolving much faster than others. We measure the speed of gene evolution by comparing human DNA with that of other species. One fast-evolving gene is human accelerated region 1 (HAR1), which is needed during brain development. A random section of human DNA is on average more than 98 per cent identical to the chimp comparator, but HAR1 is so fast evolving that it’s only around 85 per cent similar. Though scientists can see these changes are happening – and how quickly – we still don’t fully understand why fast evolution happens to some genes but not others.
1. Which of the following statements may the author agree with?| A．Evolution occurs among several people overnight. |
| B．Genes may change and some are beneficial to people’s lives. |
| C．Evolution is done when the whole population possesses a certain gene. |
| D．The changed genes leading to higher survival rates are chosen deliberately. |
| A．explains | B．causes | C．upsets | D．heals |
| A．some people can resist infectious diseases like malaria |
| B．children in Tibet tolerate living environments with thin air |
| C．northwestern Europeans digest lactose better than East Asians |
| D．the human gene HAR1 resembles that of a chimp to a lesser extent |
| A．What Is Natural Selection? |
| B．Are Humans Still Evolving? |
| C．Why Will Certain Genes Evolve? |
| D．How Do Mutated Genes Function? |
3 . Your circle of friends may help you get a better reading on your overall health and wellness rather than just using wearable devices such as a Fitbit, according to researchers.
The study, published in the journal PLOS ONE, analyzed what the structure of social networks says about the state of health, happiness and stress.
"We were interested in the topololgy (拓扑学) of the social network — what does my position within my social network predict about my health and well-being said Nitesh V. Chawla, a professor at the University of Notre Dame in the US.
“What we found was the social network structure provides a significant improvement in predictability of wellness states of an individual over just using the data obtained from wearables, like the number of steps or heart rate,” Chawla said.
For the study, participants wore a Fitbit to capture health behavior data about walking, sleeping, heart rate and overall activity level. They also completed surveys and self-assessments of their stress, happiness and positivity.
Cbawla and his team then analyzed the data with a machine learning model, alongside the connections and characteristics of an individual's social network.
The study showed a strong correlation (相关性) between social network structures, heart rate, number of steps and level of activity.
Social network structure provided significant improvement in predicting one's health and well-being compared to just looking at health behavior data from the Fitbit alone.
For example, when social network structure is combined with the data from wearables, the machine learning model achieved a 65 percent improvement in predicting happiness.
The model also achieved a 54 percent improvement in predicting one's self-assessed health prediction, a 55 percent improvement in predicting positive attitude and a 38 percent improvement in predicting success.
This study asserts (断言) that without social network information, we only have an incomplete view of an individual's wellness state, and to be fully predictive or to be able to obtain interventions (干扰). It is critical to be aware of the social network, Chawla said.
1. What did the study find?| A．How people choose their friend circles. |
| B．What factors decide your friend circles. |
| C．How your circle of friends influences you |
| D．What your circle of friends says about your health. |
| A．By comparing data. | B．By giving examples. |
| C．By analyzing cause and effect | D．By describing personal experiences. |
| A．Easy. | B．Common. |
| C．Important. | D．Challenging. |
| A．How fitness devices can connect your circle of friends |
| B．That a person's social network is part of his health picture. |
| C．The best ways to make friends and keep a healthy social circle |
| D．That wearable devices are not useful for understanding someone's health. |
4 . Regrets are often painful. A study suggests that some people can overcome them, said Jia Wei Zhang, a psychology graduate at the University of California. But this isn’t the case for everyone, he said.
The researchers wondered why some people report feeling improvement from regrets but others don’t. Does it lie in how people approach their regrets?
In the study, the researchers focused on self-compassion (自我同情) as a potential factor in why some people have an easier lime leaving their regrets behind them.
400 people attended an experiment. First, they were asked to write about their biggest regret. Half wrote something they did but wish they hadn’t done; the other half wrote something they didn’t do but wish they had. Then, the participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: self compassion, self-esteem and a control group. The self-esteem group was asked to respond by “talking to yourself about this regret from the aspect of confirming your positive qualities”.
The control group was asked to write about their favorite hobby rather than their regret. Then, they were asked about their feelings of forgiveness, acceptance and personal improvement following the exercise.
They found that the self-compassion group reported greater feelings of acceptance, forgiveness and personal improvement, compared with the control group and the self esteem group. In other words, focusing on your best qualities is not what helps you feel better about a regret. Rather, being compassionate toward yourself is what may make a difference, the researchers found.
It’s possible that people who practice self-compassion are able to confront their regrets and see what went wrong, so they can make a better choice in the future, Zhang told Live Science. Self-compassion pushes people to accept their regret instead of running away from it.
The researchers used an example of this from a previous study on breast cancer patients who were asked to try thinking about their treatment in a positive light before it began. The women who did so reported greater feelings of personal growth later on.
1. What does the underlined word “confront” in Paragraph 7 mean?| A．Handle | B．Forget. |
| C．Ignore | D．Show. |
| A．Think of a way out. | B．Write about their regrets. |
| C．Record their favorite hobbies. | D．Treat their regrets in positive ways. |
| A．To cover up their regrets. |
| B．To see if they have weaknesses. |
| C．To see if they have self compassion. |
| D．To help them feel better about their regrets. |
| A．To show the method of the research. |
| B．To show the value of the acceptance. |
| C．To show the truth of people’s feeling. |
| D．To show the difficulty of the research. |
