1 . The road to a Nobel Prize, the most respected scientific award in the world, is growing ever longer, with almost half of winners now waiting more than 20 years from making a Nobel-worthy discovery to receiving the prize.

One analysis shows that the average time between publishing the work and receiving one of the science prizes has nearly doubled in the past 60 years. Across the three science prizes, chemistry now has the longest “Nobel lag”—an average of 30 years over the past decade—and physiology or medicine has the shortest, at 26 years.

Alfred Nobel’s will stated that the prizes should be awarded “to those who, during the previous year, shall have given the greatest benefit to mankind.” In reality this has only happened a few times. But in the first half of the twentieth century, it was common for Nobel prize winners to be in their 30s -and that is unheard of now, says Santo Fortunato, now a computational social scientist at Indiana University.

There are a number of possible reasons for this, says Yian Yin, a computational social scientist at Cornell University. It could be that the overall number of breakthroughs is increasing each year, so awards cannot keep up with the number of people who deserve to be recognized, he says. It is also the case that the importance of some works, which Yin describes as “sleeping beauties” are only realized years or decades later. Besides, the lengthening gap could be a sign that there has been a decrease in “disruptive” science - important studies or discoveries that change the paradigm (范式) of their field. This could be causing the Nobel committees to focus more on the past.

Fortunato points out that, if the gap continues to grow, outstanding scientists could miss out on the award owing to the Nobel Committee’s rule banning posthumous prizes (追授奖项). “It has to stop at some point,” he says, adding that a rethink of the posthumous-awarding ban would allow more people’s work to get the recognition that it deserves.

2 . There’s a song in your head. You keep hearing it repeatedly. You can’t make it stop, and it’s driving you crazy! Has this happened to you? Maybe you have suffered from an earworm, which is a memory of a song.

Earworms are common. A study showed that 90 percent of people experience them. Why do we get earworms? According to neurologist Oliver Sacks, music affects us whether we pay attention to it or not. We’re surrounded by music all the time in our everyday lives. Sacks wonders if there is a higher incidence of earworms today because of all this music in our environment.

Research on the primary auditory cortex supports Sack’s ideas. The auditory cortex is the part of the brain that processes sound. It’s a short-term storage system for small amounts of auditory information. Some of this auditory information is forgotten, and some of it goes into long-term memory. However, songs appear to stay in the auditory cortex for a long time.

James Kellaris, a professor of marketing at the University of Cincinnati, thinks that only certain types of songs become earworms. These songs are repetitive, simple, and incongruous — something unexpected such as uneven rhythm. Your brain pays a lot of attention to a song like this, Kellaris says. Because it is repetitive and unusual, it stays longer in the auditory cortex. At that point, Kellaris believes, it becomes an annoying earworm.

Advertisers often use jingles — short songs that are easy to remember to promote sales. Advertisers want jingles to stick in people’s minds to keep them thinking about their products. It seems that advertisers have learned what Kellaris has found out in his research.

Is there any way to get rid of an earworm? Here are some tips Kellaris collected: replace the earworm song with another song, try to distract yourself by doing an intense activity such as exercising, or tell someone about your earworm. What if none of these strategies work? Then perhaps you should just sit back and try to enjoy the music in your head!

3 . Angus Neish dared to hope that his fine-looking cattle, bred at Rodmead Farm in Wilt-shire, would nab a prize at the Royal Bath and West Show last month. The annual fair, held near Shepton Mallet, in Somerset, is England’s oldest and grandest. As well as a fiercely competitive livestock parade, it features Morris dancing, sheep-shearing and a vintage fairground. Its pony-chariot races are second to none. Many contestants performed vigorously before a large crowd. 100,000 turned out for some of the three-day show.

Britons love a fair. No one is sure exactly how many shows there are across the country, but at least 400 days of such rural events happen annually across the country. Roughly one in ten Britons attend them each year. It appears their popularity is rising.

In late June, it was the turn of the Royal Highland Show, near Edinburgh, where 217,000 people—breaking a record set in 2019—rolled up. It is estimated that the event last year boosted nearby businesses by almost £40m ($51m).

Why do people go? Nostalgia (怀旧) is evidently a draw. At Bath and West, as colored flags flapped, visitors formed queues, bought cream teas and listened as a military band played wartime hits. Rural shows also have a purpose. Many fairs were founded to spread the knowledge of new farming technology among rural populations. Some of that mission lives on.

A secondary goal is to better educate those who flood in from towns and cities—urban folk make up a decent share of those who pack the grounds. Some consumers also come armed with powerful knowledge of food supply chains—as well as sometimes picky personal preferences for organic, local, animal-friendly and environmentally sound products. Laura Williams, of the Royal Welsh Show, notes that visitors are “much more invested in farming and interested in where their food comes from” than in years past.

A last purpose, naturally, is for farmers to excel against their rivals in friendly competition. In this respect, Mr. Neish enjoyed an utterly successful day. In a first for Bath and West, his cattle scooped all four of the top prizes on offer in their categories. Such victories do not bring immediate, large financial rewards, but should boost the reputation of his breeding program.

4 . Two hours of screen time a day is enough to “dumb down” children or result in depression or physical illness, a global study has found.

The global study analyzed data measuring screen time, physical activity, mental health indicators and physical illness reported by 577, 000 children aged 11, 13 and 15 from 42 rich countries. It found that screen time—not including school work—averaged 6. 3 hours for boys and 5. 4 hours for girls.

The Australian-led study shows girls experience unhealthiness after just two hours watching screens including television, social media or online gaming. However, boys are more likely to be physically active, they can safely spend twice as much time on screens each day before suffering health problems.

Dr Khan said too much time spent watching TV, gaming or on social media could lead to “reduced learning abilities”. “If you spend more time on screens you are likely not to do well in your study performance.”

“We also found there were some benefits during the first hour of daily screen use, but bad effects on mental health kick in after 75 minutes in girls and 105 minutes in boys,” Dr Khan said. The solution to mental health the study found was an hour of physical activity, and no more than two hours a day using screens, apart from schoolwork. That is to say, children need to balance screen time with “green time” outdoors. Children who exercise or play outdoors regularly are healthier and happier, the study shows.

Melbourne dad, Tom Hindhaugh, said he tried to reduce screen time for his son, Patrick, 13. “Clearly we need those screens for homeschooling. Technology is the necessary way kids can communicate and hang out with each other,” he said. “But we need to get children outside and moving. Physical activity is the key for their health, whether it’s walking, riding a bike or kicking the football.”

5 . I recently had a conversation with a friend who was feeling very upset about work. Why? He thought his manager didn’t like him. He rarely heard much from his manager, and when his manager said something, it was about correcting some aspects of his work or giving him some constructive advice.

Not surprisingly, given my friend’s understandably anxious view of these workplace dynamics (动态), he was afraid of his annual performance evaluation. He was worried that his boss might even tell him that he wasn’t needed anymore. Accordingly, he considered looking around for another job — not because he really wanted to, as he liked the kind of work he was doing, but because he suffered from the kind of management.

The evaluation day came, and to his great surprise, rather than being harshly critical, his manager told him that he was doing a fine job and gave him a promotion.

The sad truth is, this kind of phenomenon is by no means unusual in the workplace. One recent survey showed that nearly half of the employees have considered leaving a job “due to lack of recognition”. Another similar study found 46 percent of the employees left a job “because they felt unappreciated”.

The good news is that, in this case, the damage was repaired before it was too late — before my friend was out the door and his company began the expensive and time-consuming process of hiring a new employee. But as the research noted above shows, workplace problems related to recognition and appreciation are as common as the office air we breathe.

This conforms with my personal experience; during my decades of corporate management, I saw similar appreciation issues all the time. When a job isn’t done well, nobody deserves anything, of course. But when a job is done well, if you’re an employee, it’s entirely natural to expect at least a bit of appreciation. So if you’re a manager, it’s a good idea to show some. It’s that simple.

8 . Twins may be more common today than at anytime in history. Researchers analyzed records from 165 countries and found a significant rise in twin birth rates since the 1980s, with one in 42 people now born a twin. According to the survey, the global twin birth rate has risen by one-third, on average, over the past 40 years.

“The trends are really quite striking,” said Christiaan Monden, a professor at Oxford University. “Over the past 40 years we’ve seen a strong increase in twinning rates in rich and developed countries. Globally, twinning rates have risen from nine to twelve per 1,000 births since the 1980s, but the picture varies from country to country. The greatest rises are seen in North America (71%), Europe (60%) and Asia (32%). In the UK, twinning rates rose about 62%. In the Oxford study, a decrease of more than 10% was found in only seven countries over the dates surveyed. “The absolute number of twin deliveries (分娩) has increased everywhere except South America,” Monden said. “In North America and Africa, the numbers have increased by more than 80%, and in Africa this increase is caused almost entirely by population growth.”

Raj Mathur, a doctor at St. Mary’s Hospital in Manchester, said, “It doesn’t surprise us that twinning rates have increased because the availability of assisted reproduction (生殖) has increased and also because women are slightly older when they have their first children, and both those things will increase the twinning rate.”

“The majority of twin babies are completely fine, but there is no doubt that a twin pregnancy (怀孕) carries greater risks for the mother and the baby. So when we can avoid it, we should avoid it. The principle we follow is simply summed up by the phrase ‘one at a time’,” Mathur said.