1 . If you live on this planet, there’s a decent chance you’ve seen the classic Star TrekEpisode, in which captain Kirk and several members find themselves in what appears to be another universe.

These days, it seems the idea of the multiverse—many worlds—is having its Hollywood moment. Its appeal as a storytelling device is obvious—characters explore a multi-world with varying degrees of similarity to our own, as well as different versions of themselves. Hence, it has been fully established in mainstream pop culture.

While Hollywood can’t seem to get enough of the multiverse, it remains deeply controversial (有争议的) among scientists. Advocates on the two sides show no mercy toward each other in their books, on their blogs. But physicists didn’t pull the idea out of thin air—rather, several distinct lines of reasoning seem to point to the multiverse’s existence. However, critics warn that making the multiverse legal could make it harder for the public to distinguish speculative (推测性的) theories from established fact, making it more difficult to keep pseudo-science (伪科学) at bay. Giving credit to such speculation risks “turning fundamental physics into pseudo-science”.

The multiverse controversy is rooted in the idea of test ability. If we can’t interact with these other universes, or detect them in any way, some experts insist that reduces them to mere philosophical speculation. But Carroll, an advocate for “many worlds”, argues that mathematics is the language describing our physical theories. Since Schrdinger’s equation (方程), on which Quanturr (量子) mechanic rests, predicts the existence of many worlds, so be it.

Could a more expansive view of the universe itself be the next breakthrough? As Siegfried puts it: “Every time in the past that we’ve thought, ‘We’ve got it; this is what the whole universe is’—the people who’ve said, ‘Maybe there’s more than one of those’ have always turned out to be right.”

3 . Lining up to board a plane has become an evident indicator of how our society has commodified (使商品化) the very act of waiting. The more you pay, the sooner you can get on the plane and the less likely you will have to check a bag. It’s not just airlines, it’s also museums, online purchases and amusement parks where VIP status can help you avoid lines. When did the act of waiting get such a bad reputation?

The very act of waiting can enhance our appreciation of something. We enjoy the anticipation like a child waiting for Christmas or summer vacation. Perhaps the person waiting in line to see his favorite singer perform in concert relishes the night more because of the time invested in getting into the venue.

As our world has sped up, this desirable balance between instant and delayed satisfaction conflicts with the current expectations of many people. When we denigrate (诋毁) the act of waiting, we risk losing an important part of our shared humanity. Having to wait is taken as a sign of being less well off or “not in the game”. It encourages privileged impatience and disdain (鄙视) for those who are caught waiting.

But the capacity to wait is a foundational part of a civilized society and thus an important skill to have. If we lose our ability to stand in line or to wait our turn, we suffer from the stress of a changing world. If we label people who wait as “losers”, we release strong urges to grab what’s ours at any cost with no concern about those we leave behind. We see the people in line as “other”, not like us, and that dehumanization (非人化) is dangerous.

Of course, we should not have to wait patiently for everything. For example, there are times when injustice deserves immediate action. Asking people to wait can be a calculated obstacle to change. In a larger context though, all of us are supposed to understand the act of waiting not only as a necessary evil but also as an important function which allows us to participate fully in life alongside our fellow travelers.

4 . In 2050, one in four people will be over 60 in the Asia-Pacific region. Are countries there prepared to fully address the needs of older persons so that they age with dignity?

In the past, senior citizens might have been supported by their families and communities. Yet times are changing.

    1     Meanwhile, more and more governments are wrestling with increasing healthcare costs and a decreasing workforce.

More than ever, there is an urgent need for policy reform in addressing population aging. This must be driven by a shift in mindset to turn the challenges into a demographic opportunity.

    2     More and more people are living longer due to the advancements in health, nutrition, economic and social well-being.     3     This is due to a variety of reasons such as challenges in striking a work-life balance to not being able to afford having more children. However, low fertility and longer life expectancy are not the problem. The real problem is not being ready to face this rapidly changing demographic shift.

It is noteworthy that, in the Asia-Pacific, with more than half of the older population being women, it is crucial to adopt a life-cycle approach to population aging, grounded in gender equality and human rights. Investing in each stage of life determines the path of a woman’s life course. When a girl has access to quality education, it helps her make informed decisions about life-changing matters.     4    

While there is no single comprehensive policy that can address population aging, we need to take action now.     5     In so doing, countries in the Asia-Pacific region can hope for, and achieve, a better future for all, where no one is left behind.

5 . “Sorry, I’m just now seeing your email!” (You sent it 15 minutes ago.)

“Sorry that you completely misinterpreted that thing I said.”

“Sorry you just rammed into me with your grocery-store cart.”

“Sorry” has become commonplace in daily conversations and communications. We drop it indiscriminately for all manner of things we really shouldn’t be sorry for. Is it time to stop?

“I wasn’t really that sorry,” admits Louise Julig, a freelance writer in Encinitas, Calif., who found she was constantly apologizing for the “delay” when replying to notes, even when there wasn’t much of a delay at all. “Sorry has lost its meaning, no longer a heartfelt declaration of remorse (悔恨) but just a subconscious response,” said Louise Julig. Now, faced with a blank email, Ms. Julig asks herself, did I miss something, or mess someone else up? If the answer is no, she’s not sorry.

I understand very well how she feels. When I searched my sent emails for the phrase, “Sorry for the delay,” the result was too many hits for Gmail to give me an exact count. I tried, in the course of reporting this column, to cut back on my apologies. Mostly I failed, catching myself exclaiming sorry! I apologized to the person I contacted for this piece when I called three minutes later than I was supposed to; then I apologized for only being able to meet him on the day I suggested, not the other; I even apologized in advance for any offence I might cause to him during the conversation.

While apologizing too much in daily life may not have serious consequences, doing so in business, especially when you’ve actually done something wrong, is just asking for trouble—you’re giving away your power, says Jeffrey Pfeffer, a professor of organizational behavior at Stanford Graduate School of Business.

People are never satisfied with an apology, he adds. Exhibiting vulnerability (脆弱) only makes you look weak. Standing your ground comes with risks. You might not be liked. But he thinks it’s worth it. “You can either give in to what people want you to be, or you can decide that you are going to risk offending people. Life is about trade-offs (权衡),” he says.

6 . Fast food chains have tried for years to appeal to customers who care about their health. They have added lighter food to their menus, such as salads and yogurt. Of course, the lighter food goes with the usual burgers, fried chicken and shakes.

Menus have changed over the past three decades. According to a recent study, fast food menus are less healthy than they were 30 years ago. The study suggests the problem is getting worse. The fat, salt content and size of fast food meals are the problem. They are often the reason for the rising obesity (肥胖) rate among adults in the United States. The researchers found that the average main dish weighed more in 2016 than in 1986. It also had more calories and more sodium (钠). One expert said, “The restaurants have not done enough. The big picture is that there have been some positive changes, but they are small. Overall, the changes have gotten worse.”

The average fast food dessert had more calories in 2016. It also weighed more than the average fast food dessert thirty years earlier. Restaurants are counting on bigger sundaes and cookies to increase the amount spent on each order. For example, McDonald’s recently introduced “donut sticks” dusted with sugar. Six sticks have 280 calories. But you can also order 12 sticks for less than the cost of two single orders.

The researchers found that, over the 30 years, there were more calories in items like chips, soup, and French fries. Sodium content rose even though portion(一份) size did not grow much. When consumed together as a single meal, the study found that the average main dish and side order account for nearly 40 percent of a 2000-calory daily diet.

7 . Phonics, which involves sounding out words syllable (音节) by syllable, is the best way to teach children to read. But in many classrooms, this can be a dirty word. So much so that some teachers have had to take phonics teaching materials secretly into the classroom. Most American children are taught to read in a way that study after study has found to be wrong.

The consequences of this are striking. Less than half of all American adults were efficient readers in 2017. American fourth graders rank 15th on the Progress in International Literacy Study, an international exam.

America is stuck in a debate about teaching children to read that has been going on for decades. Some advocate teaching symbol sound relationships (the sound k can be spelled as c, k, ck, or ch) known as phonics Others support an immersive approach (using pictures of cat to learn the word cat), known as “whole language”. Most teachers today, almost three out of four according to a survey by EdWeek Research Centre in 2019, use a mix of the two methods called “balanced literacy”.

“A little phonics is far from enough.” says Tenette Smith, executive director of elementary education and reding at Mississippi’s education department. “It has to be systematic and explicitly taught.”

Mississippi, often behind in social policy, has set an example here. In a state once blamed for its low reading scores, the Mississippi state legislature passed new literacy standards in 2013.Since then Mississippi has seen remarkable gains., Its fourth graders have moved from 49th (out of 50 states) to 20th on the National assessment of Educational Progress, a nationwide exam.

Mississippi’s success is attributed to application of reading methods supported by a body of research known as the science of reading. In 1997 experts from the Department of Education ended the “reading war” and summed up the evidence. They found that phonics, along with explicit instruction in phonemic (音位的) awareness, fluency and comprehension, worked best.

Yet over two decades on, “balanced literacy” is still being taught in classrooms. But advances in statistics and brain imaging have disproved the whole-language method. To the teacher who is an efficient reader, literacy seem like a natural process that requires educated guessing, rather than the deliberate process emphasized by phonics. Teachers can imagine that they learned to read through osmosis(潜移默化) when they were children. Without proper training, they bring this to classrooms.

8 . “Please, no flash photography.”

Polite requests like this can be found in museums all over the world, but they generally fail to persuade people out of taking photos of whatever they feel like. The same goes for concerts, movie theaters and other places where people routinely ignore filming restrictions. A new patent from Apple may help discourage that rebellious behavior-on phones at least.

The patent, awarded to Apple today, outlines a system which would allow venues to use an infrared emitter (红外线发射器) to remotely disable the camera function on smartphones. According to the patent, infrared rays could be picked up by the camera, and interpreted by the smartphone as a command to block the user from taking any photos or videos of whatever they’re seeing.

Many musicians and performers have banned cellphones from their shows, either because they want their audiences to actually pay attention to them, or because they don’t want the free footage (片段镜头) going viral around the web. Despite this, unauthorized (未授权的) images still manage to make their way into the public eye. The last concert of American singer Prince before he passed away was supposed to be cellphone-free —it apparently wasn’t. If Apple’s patent is introduced into iPhone software, and venues put infrared emitters around their stage, leaks like this could potentially stop happening.

But the patent also raises questions about the sort of power that this technology would be handing over to people with more immoral intentions.

Right now, there’s no guarantee that Apple intends to put this technology into any of its software —Apple doesn’t act on many of the thousands of patents it files each year —and the company wasn’t immediately available to comment on its plans for the patent.

Given the company’s rigid support of personal privacy when it comes to police requests to break into users’ devices, it’s possible that Apple just patented the technology so that no one else will use it. But who knows, if it does intend to introduce this feature to future operating systems, sales of alternative shooting devices like camcorders, or even GoPros, could get a much-needed boost, as people try to avoid having to use the prohibitive software.