Skip to main content

Home/ Groups/ Math Coffee
arithwsun arithwsun

袁世凯孙女的财富人生:炒股起家 84岁还在打拼 - 0 views

  • 来到天津,位于中心市区南部的“五大道”,素有“万国建筑博物馆”的美誉,这里至今还保留着300多座风格各异的小洋楼。在其中的“成都道”上,有一座并不起眼的四层英式洋房,是袁氏家族目前在中国大陆唯一的房产。洋房上挂着“苏易士西餐厅”的牌子,其经营者是袁世凯的孙女,已84岁高龄的袁家倜。
arithwsun arithwsun

科学网-[转载]用裸眼观看原子弹爆炸的人 --记诺贝尔物理奖获得者费曼 - 0 views

  • 1946年10月,麦尔维尔在一次中风后去世,这更加重了费曼的忧郁。 但是他既没有闷闷不乐也没有与世隔绝。正如贝特解释的那样:“费曼 忧郁的时候也比任何其他人兴高采烈的时候还要高兴。”   最终,费曼用一种完全是费曼式的方法打破了忧郁的恶性循环。有 一天,他在康奈尔大学的咖啡厅里看见一个学生抛起了一个餐盘。他给 自己提出一个挑战,用公式来描述盘子的转动和摆动之间的关系。经过 一番努力,他终于能够证明,就像他观察到的一样,当摆动角度很小时, 转动速度是摆动速度的两倍。当费曼兴奋地把这一结果告诉贝特的时候, 贝特很有兴趣地听完了他的话,然后问他:这有什么实际价值呢?   费曼只好承认这的确没有任何实际价值。对于费曼来说,这是一次 深刻的领悟。他决定从今以后,他只为了自己的兴趣而研究物理。被这 个决定激励着,他重新开始研究量子电动力学的问题,早在普林斯顿大 学的时候他就开始涉足这个领域了棗最终就是这方面的研究使他获得了 诺贝尔奖。具有讽刺意味的是,他发现他出于感兴趣而研究的旋转餐碟 的运动,也适用于电子旋转的问题。 
arithwsun arithwsun

杨贵妃体重到底多少_岳南的BLOG_新浪博客 - 0 views

  • 男女大防’在唐代是被冲毁了很大一个缺口,男女之间自由恋爱之风颇浓,非常开放。”又说:“先生上课,我们从不发问,有天下课后,一位同学好奇地问道:‘杨贵妃体形肥胖,究竟体重若干?’先生顺口回答:‘135磅。’(约合61.5公斤
arithwsun arithwsun

留美学人激辩中国,香港,美国大学和文化的优劣_薛涌:反智的书生_新浪博客 - 0 views

  • 去年,上海交通大学高等教育研究所发布了"2007年世界大学学术排名",香港科技大学和美国乔治梅森大学(George Mason University)都位于203-304名之间。也就是说,这两所学校的综合实力不相上下,均属于第三梯队。不过,一位留心观察的学者在两所学校各访问过几个月,就会感受到两地学风的显著差异。科技大学的学生在课堂上往往一言不发;梅森大学的学生常常抢不到发言机会。科技大学的师生习惯于墨守成规,他们的研究课题很少跃出主流领域之外;梅森大学的师生喜欢标新立异,海阔天空的想法在这里经常受到鼓励。科技大学的教授们平常总呆在自己的办公室里,他们很少和同系的老师交流,更不必谈跨系合作了;梅森大学的教授们则走动频繁,他们不仅和本院的学者常常碰头,而且不时发表与其他院系教授合著的论文。 提起香港学者,我们马上会想到张五常、郎咸平和丁学良诸公。这几位先生好发惊世之语,经常受到中文媒体的争议和追捧。其实他们三位只是特例,远远不能代表香港学人的众像。我甚至怀疑,这几位"公共知识分子" 正是因为在香港憋得发慌,才跑到内地媒体上鼓动唇舌的。香港的大牌学者享有言论自由,却更可能在大陆找到听众。笔者曾在香港科技大学社会科学部读过两年书,对该校学术气氛的印象,只合用"保守规矩,差强人意"八个字来概括。事实上,这种沉闷学风弥漫在整个香港学术界,科技大学只是尤显突出罢了。
  • 尽管香港学者享有言论的自由和资讯的便利,这座城市的其他氛围并不利于研究事业。由于紧促的城市布局和长期的殖民统治,香港社会条例繁多,管理严格。这一方面固然保证了规则明晰,维持了社会稳定;另一方面也强化了等级秩序,疏远了人际关系。中国人本来就承袭了父权制的传统,英国人的管治更是变本加厉;两者一同造就了香港人温顺保守的性格。香港人的这种"乘孩子"性格也渗透到了学术界,以至于北京的学者王小东挖苦他们搞的是"管家学术"。在香港的大学里,自由平等的讨论空气很难形成,年轻人参与讨论的劲头还不如中老年人,而讨论会(seminar)的频率和规模也逊于美国的大学。
  • 作为中西文化混杂的城市,香港不乏多元性,却缺少一种整合多种文化的亲和力。笔者在科大即发现,香港本地教授,大陆教授和外籍教授三足鼎立,各自抱团,只在自己小圈子里活动,相互之间很少往来。有位洋教授告诉我,他在香港呆了多年,依然有客人的感觉。学者之间如此隔膜,怎么可能促进学术交流?
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • 商业价值挂帅是影响香港学风的第三大负面因素。在《香港的困境》一文中,郎咸平强调香港是一个商人治理的社会。他毫不客气地批评香港的执政精英"一不懂高层次宏观管理,二不懂高新技术,三尤其是不重视研究发展和长期规划,因为他们以前的成功和这些因素无关。"其实不仅政界如此,商业气息弥漫在香港社会的各个领域。在大学餐厅的饭桌上,你会听到教授们热心于讨论各自申请研究经费的数额,而不是某学者文章的好坏。香港人普遍信奉功利主义,既不热衷于学术研究,也很难理解其长远价值。在商业文化浸润下成长起来的香港学生,很早就学会压抑个性,将自己嵌入整齐划一的白领模式。他们在校园里举办社团活动,不仅西装革履,而且样式颜色都别无二致,活脱在上就职预科班。在这崇商抑文的环境中,很难想像哪个年轻人会狂热地投入到实验室或书堆里。
  • 香港的大学资源很多,但比起美国来相对落后,特别是教授评选的学术标准,非常跟不上趟。老一代学者,在旧制度下养尊处优惯了,抵抗变革。这是学术死气沉沉的重要原因。
  • 各位许多是经过香港的大学来美国求学的。在美国大学的中国研究生里,已经有香港帮了。大陆人能去香港上学才几年呀!这本身说明香港大学的成就。各位可能觉得香港的大学比美国还落后。我完全同意。所以才主张进一步美国化。不过,香港的大学比起大陆的大学来,领先恐怕越来越大了(清华北大除了在生源上有优势外,哪方面能和香港的学校比?)。这是最近十年美国化的结果。这一过程,一定要走到底才对。不知道各位什么看法。
  • 其中有一句说:世界上没有任何一所一流大学座落在弹丸之地,香港不太可能产生世界一流大学----除非香港已经和中国融为一体
  • 我相信象各位这些在美国大学里的香港帮,如果不经过香港的教育,事业上大部分恐怕没有这么顺.我倒是觉得,北大人有一股傲气很要不得.就是觉得自己老子天下第一,目空一切.我和在纽约大学教书的张旭东有过一场辩论,他嘲笑我"不过拿了人家几个奖学金"就感恩戴德.我则确实拿了人家一点钱就非常珍惜.毕竟这是人家的钱.香港的大学,对各位学术事业逐益不小,我对各位对香港学生的蔑视有些不安.人家父母勤奋劳作纳税,创造了这么繁荣稳定的社会,并且给钱请各位去读书.难道人家没有一点好的地方?我们看不到人家身上可以学的地方,是人家一无是处,还是我们有这北大教育培养出来的"北大眼光",看不到人家的任何优点?这是否是因为中了北大的毒而不自知?
arithwsun arithwsun

Structure and randomness in the prime numbers « What's new - 0 views

  • 2 July, 2008 at 6:28 pm Terence Tao It unfortunately seems that the decomposition claimed in equation (6.9) on page 20 of that paper is, in fact, impossible; it would endow the function h (which is holding the arithmetical information about the primes) with an extremely strong dilation symmetry which it does not actually obey. It seems that the author was relying on this symmetry to make the adelic Fourier transform far more powerful than it really ought to be for this problem.
  • 3 July, 2008 at 3:41 am Gergely Harcos I also have some (perhaps milder) troubles with the proof. It seems to me as if Li had treated the Dirac delta on L^2(A) as a function. For example, the first 5 lines of page 28 make little sense to me. Am I missing something here?
  • 4 July, 2008 at 5:15 am Lior Silberman The function defined on page 20 does have a strong dilation symmetry: it is invariant by multiplication by ideles of norm one (since it is merely a function of the norm of ). In particular, it is invariant under multiplication by elements of . I’m probably missing something here. Probably the subtlety is in passing from integration over the nice space of idele classes to the singular space . The topologies on the spaces of adeles and ideles are quite different. There is a formal error in Theorem 3.1 which doesn’t affect the paper: the distribution discussed is not unique. A distribution supported at a point is a sum of derivatives of the delta distribution. Clearly there exist many such with a given special value of the Fourier transform. There is also something odd about this paper: nowhere is it pointed out what is the new contribution of the paper. Specifically, what is the new insight about number theory?
  • ...12 more annotations...
  • 4 July, 2008 at 6:09 am Emmanuel Kowalski A remark concerning Lior’s remark: the function h(u) in the current (v4) version of the paper is _not_ the same as the one that was defined when T. Tao pointed out a problem with it. This earlier one (still visible on arXiv, v1) was defined in different ways depending on whether the idele had at most one or more than one non-unit component, and was therefore not invariant under multiplication by . (It is another problem with looking at such a paper if corrections as drastic as that are made without any indication of when and why).
  • 4 July, 2008 at 8:15 am Terence Tao Dear Lior, Emmanuel is correct. The old definition of h was in fact problematic for a large number of reasons (the author was routinely integrating h on the idele class group C, which is only well-defined if h was -invariant). Changing the definition does indeed fix the problem I pointed out (and a number of other issues too). But Connes has pointed out a much more serious issue, in the proof of the trace formula in Theorem 7.3 (which is the heart of the matter, and is what should be focused on in any future revision): the author is trying to use adelic integration to control a function (namely, h) supported on the ideles, which cannot work as the ideles have measure zero in the adeles. (The first concrete error here arises in the equation after (7.13): the author has made a change of variables on the idele class group C that only makes sense when u is an idele, but u is being integrated over the adeles instead. All subsequent manipulations involving the adelic Fourier transform Hh of h are also highly suspect, since h is zero almost everywhere on the adeles.)
  • More generally, there is a philosophical objection as to why a purely multiplicative adelic approach such as this one cannot work. The argument only uses the multiplicative structure of , but not the additive structure of k. (For instance, the fact that k is a cocompact discrete additive subgroup of A is not used.) Because of this, the arguments would still hold if we simply deleted a finite number of finite places v from the adeles (and from ). If the arguments worked, this would mean that the Weil-Bombieri positivity criterion (Theorem 3.2 in the paper) would continue to hold even after deleting an arbitrary number of places. But I am pretty sure one can cook up a function g which (assuming RH) fails this massively stronger positivity property (basically, one needs to take g to be a well chosen slowly varying function with broad support, so that the Mellin transforms at Riemann zeroes, as well as the pole at 1 and the place at infinity, are negligible but which gives a bad contribution to a single large prime (and many good contributions to other primes which we delete).)
  • Emmanuel Kowalski That’s an interesting point indeed, if one considers that the RH doesn’t work over function fields once we take out a point of a (smooth projective) curve — there arise zeros of the zeta function which are not on the critical line.
  • 7 July, 2008 at 9:59 am javier Dear Terence, I am not sure I understand your “philosophical” complain on using only the multiplicative structure and not the additive one. This is essentially the philosophy while working over the (so over-hyped lately) field with one element, which apparently comes into the game in the description of the Connes-Bost system on the latest Connes-Consani-Marcolli paper (Fun with F_un). From an algebraic point of view, you can often recover the additive structure of a ring from the multiplicative one provided that you fix the zero. There is an explanation of this fact (using the language of monads) in the (also famous lately) work by Nikolai Durov “A new approach to Arakelov geometry (Section 4.8, on additivity on algebraic monads). By the way, I wanted to tell you that I think you are doing an impressive work with this blog and that I really enjoy learning from it, even if this is the very first time I’ve got something sensible to say :-)
  • 6 July, 2008 at 7:44 pm Terence Tao Dear Chip, Actually, the product has a number of poles on the line , when s is a multiple of . Li’s approach to the RH was not to tackle it directly, but instead to establish the Weil-Bombieri positivity condition which is known to be equivalent to RH. However, the proof of that equivalence implicitly uses the functional equation for the zeta function (via the explicit formula). If one starts deleting places (i.e. primes) from the problem, the RH stays intact (at least on the half-plane ), but the positivity condition does not, because the functional equation has been distorted.
  • The functional equation, incidentally, is perhaps the one non-trivial way we do know how to exploit the additive structure of k inside the adeles, indeed I believe this equation can be obtained from the Poisson summation formula for the adeles relative to k. But it seems that the functional equation alone is not enough to yield the RH; some other way of exploiting additive structure is also needed, but I have no idea what it should be. [Revised, July 7:] Looking back at Li’s paper, I see now that Poisson summation was indeed used quite a few times, and in actually a rather essential way, so my previous philosophical objection does not actually apply here. My revised opinion is now that, beyond the issues with the trace formula that caused the paper to be withdrawn, there is another fundamental problem with the paper, which is that the author is in fact implicitly assuming the Riemann hypothesis in order to justify some facts about the operator E (which one can think of as a sort of Mellin transform multiplier with symbol equal to the zeta function, related to the operator on ). More precisely, on page 18, the author establishes that and asserts that this implies that , but this requires certain invertibility properties of E which fail if there is a zero off of the critical line. (A related problem is that the decomposition used immediately afterwards is not justified, because is merely dense in rather than equal to it.)
  • 6 July, 2008 at 5:28 pm Chip Neville Terence, I have a question about your comment: “Because of this, the arguments would still hold if we simply deleted a finite number of finite places v from the adeles (and from k^*). … (basically, one needs to take g to be a well chosen slowly varying function with broad support, so that the Mellin transforms at Riemann zeroes, as well as the pole at 1 and the place at infinity, are negligible but which gives a bad contribution to a single large prime (and many good contributions to other primes which we delete).)” Does this mean that you would be considering the “reduced” (for lack of a better name) zeta function \prod 1/(1-1/p^{-s}), where the product is taken over the set of primes not in a finite subset S? If so, this “reduced” zeta function has the same zeroes as the standard Riemann zeta function, since the finite product \prod_S 1/(1-1/p^{-s}) is an entire function with no zeroes in the complex plane. Thus the classical situation in the complex plane seems to be very different in this regard from the situation with function fields over smooth projective curves alluded to by Emmanuel above. Does anyone have an example of an infinite set S and corresponding reduced zeta function with zeroes in the half plane Re z > 1/2? A set S of primes p so that \sum_S 1/p^{1/2} converges will not do, since \prod_S 1/(1-1/p^{-s}) is holomorphic in the half plane Re z > 1/2 with no zeroes there. Perhaps a set S of primes P thick enough so that \sum_S 1/p^{1/2} diverges, but thin enough so that \sum_S 1/p converges, might do. This seems to me to be a delicate and difficult matter. I hope these questions do not sound too foolish.
  • 7 July, 2008 at 11:01 am Terence Tao Dear Javier, I must confess I do not understand the field with one element much at all (beyond the formal device of setting q to 1 in any formula derived using and seeing what one gets), and don’t have anything intelligent to say on that topic. Regarding my philosophical objection, the point was that if one deleted some places from the adele ring A and the multiplicative group (e.g. if k was the rationals, one could delete the place 2 by replacing with the group of non-zero rationals with odd numerator and denominator) then one would still get a perfectly good “adele” ring in place of A, and a perfectly good multiplicative group in place of (which would be the invertible elements in the ring of rationals with odd denominator), but somehow the arithmetic aspects of the adeles have been distorted in the process (in particular, Poisson summation and the functional equation get affected). The Riemann hypothesis doesn’t seem to extend to this general setting, so that suggests that if one wants to use adeles to prove RH, one has to somehow exploit the fact that one has all places present, and not just a subset of such places. Now, Poisson summation does exploit this very fact, and so technically this means that my objection does not apply to Li’s paper, but I feel that Poisson summation is not sufficient by itself for this task (just as the functional equation is insufficient to resolve RH), and some further exploitation of additive (or field-theoretic) structure of k should be needed. I don’t have a precise formalisation of this feeling, though.
  • 7 July, 2008 at 1:22 pm Gergely Harcos Dear Terry, you are absolutely right that Poisson summation over k inside A is the (now) standard way to obtain the functional equation for Hecke L-functions. This proof is due to Tate (his thesis from 1950), you can also find it in Weil’s Basic Number Theory, Chapter 7, Section 5.
  • Babak Hi Terrance, A few months ago I stumbled upon an interesting differential equation while using probability heuristics to explore the distribution of primes. It’s probably nothing, but on the off-chance that it might mean something to a better trained mind, I decided to blog about it: http://babaksjournal.blogspot.com/2008/07/differential-equation-estimating.html -Babak
  • 15 July, 2008 at 7:57 am michele I think that the paper of Prof. Xian-Jin Li will be very useful for a future and definitive proof of the Riemann hypothesis. Furthermore, many mathematics contents of this paper can be applied for further progress in varios sectors of theoretical physics (p-adic and adelic strings, zeta strings).
arithwsun arithwsun

科学网-参加Zare教授北大午餐 - 0 views

  • It’s high time to realize that standardized tests are overhyped. While educational institutions compete in training their students to become even better test takers, skills that are difficult to quantify in test results—like lab talent—are increasingly being neglected.
  • Standardized tests can help provide a solid floor of academic achievement, but we must be very careful that it doesn’t produce an artificially low ceiling as well!
arithwsun arithwsun

一张图分出你是用左脑还是右脑(转自一江樽月博客)_yimingshi的BLOG_新浪博客 - 0 views

  • 一张图分出你是用左脑还是右脑   如果你看见这个舞女是顺时针转,说明你用的是右脑;   如果是逆时针转,说明你用的左脑。   耶鲁大学耗时5年的研究成果,据说。   14%的美国人可以两个方向都能看见
  • 方法有二: 一、看倒影。死死盯住倒影,再向上看去,舞女转向成功转换。 二、盯住网页上别的部分,用余光来看图片,转换成功。
arithwsun arithwsun

科学网-中国学者在科研上的合作:要经费还是要和合作? - 0 views

  • 这里,简单说几句关于中国人合作中的钱和感情的问题。
arithwsun arithwsun

LunarPages - 0 views

  • LunarPages是美国领先的主机服务商,提供linux虚拟主机,windows虚拟主机,VPS以及独立主机全线产品。我们向您推荐LunarPages是因为它特有的以下优点
  • 物美价廉 Basic方案1500G空间,15000G流量一年只需要95.4美元,优惠后只要67.4美元。
arithwsun arithwsun

数学家的傲慢 (zz) - 数学&统计 - 太傻超级论坛 - Powered by Discuz! - 0 views

  • * }! P/ W1 R1 k8 I3 w: x1 v  
  •  
    数学家的傲慢
arithwsun arithwsun

日本推出新式养生运动 可纠正老人脊椎歪曲症状_新闻中心_新浪网 - 0 views

  • 日本养生学家最近推出四项运动:金鱼运动、毛细血管运动、合蹠(zhí)合掌运动以及背腹运动等。可以纠正老年人脊椎的歪斜、弯曲;可以促进血液回流,改善微循环通路,使心脏回流量及搏出量增加。   金鱼运动 仰卧,身体伸成一条直线,两脚尖自然向上,两手交叉重叠放在第四颈椎部位,像金鱼的样子身体左右水平摇动。动作要稍快些,每日早晚各做一次,每次一二分钟。   毛细血管运动 仰卧,头枕硬枕,两手、两足垂直高举,然后缓慢抖动,每次最少一二分钟。此运动可促进全身血液循环和淋巴液的回流,提高心脏、肾脏的机能。   合蹠合掌运动 仰卧,两手相合置于胸部,两手指尖合并,膝盖弯曲,两脚尖合并形成合蹠合掌。合掌后两前臂顺长轴上下活动,下肢亦顺长轴活动,合蹠合掌上下伸屈运动36~100次,做完后手掌与脚底合拢,静躺5分钟。   背腹运动 坐姿,手自然放在膝上,躯干挺直,重心落在尾骨上,身体左右摇晃,在不受呼吸影响的前提下,脊柱左右倾斜的同时,腹肌也收缩、松弛交替。一分钟50次左右,做10分钟。
arithwsun arithwsun

科学网-中国给美国金融买单超过地震损失(转) - 0 views

  • 中国投资界现在有很有些人以巴菲特为榜样,那就先跟巴菲特学这招吧,到全球去投资有价值的公司。只是单纯抛售美元,可能把美元的汇率打得更低,最终受损害的还是中国。而把美元转换成全球有价值公司的股份,则是不错的选择。对一个资源并不充裕的大国来说,把这些美元外汇储备转变成沃尔玛、苹果、惠普、IBM、思科、力拓、必和必拓、摩根大通、高盛、瑞银等一流消费类公司和资源型公司的股权,可能具有更多价值。
arithwsun arithwsun

科学网-柏杨看博士婚姻 - 0 views

  • 千古伤心是结婚 柏 杨        柏杨先生有位朋友,膝下只有一个女儿,宝贝得要命,按说独生女儿一定娇纵过度而不成才,其不流入太妹,或自甘堕落者,几希。偏偏该朋友祖宗有德,女儿虽娇纵得不像话,可是却没有流入太妹,不但没有流入太妹,反而功课奇好,尤其数理奇好。这年头,一个年轻人只要数理奇好,就等于吃了神仙丸,想怎么念就怎么念。她阁下一条鞭上去,由小学,而中学;由中学,而大学;由大学,而留学;最后在美国啥啥理工学院,成为该校有史以来第一位航空女博士。中美同胞,无不惊叹,认为她将来定会在社会上露一手。尤其是她的老娘,兴奋得坐卧不安,东串门西串门,宣传她女儿如何如何,谁要是说三句话还没有夸奖到她女儿,那比杀父之仇还严重,老娘能恨他一辈子。柏杨先生深知她有这种绝症,所以一见面就恭维她好福气,有这么个好女儿,总算不虚此一生也。有一次,我出奇计灌米汤曰:“看你女儿,多有出息,天分高,教养好,她总有一天要得诺贝尔奖金的,到时候,带着妈妈到斯德哥尔摩领奖,你也可见见活国王,报上再那么一登,真光彩呀!”她曰:“你说啥,死得脱?啥叫死得脱?”我曰:“不是死得脱,是斯德哥尔摩,瑞典国的京城,到那地方领奖呀,听说第一特奖就是美金二十万。”她看我应对称旨,立刻用一种惟恐怕不被说服的声调叫曰:“我可没有那种福气呀,不过我女儿倒满有雄心,前些时还来信说正在研究研究啥呀,好多博士都佩服她哩。”说罢之后,立刻打开手提包,给了我一支她女儿从美国寄回来的洋烟,以励来兹。  这是四年前春天的事啦,今年春天,偶尔又碰到她,我还是按照着老规矩,没头没脑的称赞她女儿,最初她支支吾吾,后来因我跟在她屁股后赞个没完,她没好气曰:“老头,你歇歇舌头好不好?”这一次连洋烟也没掏,就扬长而去。  事后才知道,老太婆发那么大的威,不是宝贝女儿死啦,也不是宝贝女儿忘了娘,而是宝贝女儿得了博士学位不久,就结了婚。老太婆当然不反对女儿结婚,可是结了婚之后,跟着就是生子,而且生起来像北平卖的冰糖葫芦一样,“ 大珠小珠落玉盘”,三年就生了三个。如果她身在中国,问题还小,盖中国人工不值钱,请个下女小姐,就可以分忧。无奈身在美利坚,人工贵得可怖,买菜、煮饭、抱娃、喂奶、铺床、叠被、洗衣服、烫衣服、洗盘子、换尿布,大自“电线走火”,小至买根针,都事必躬亲。亘古奇观的女博士,遂成了一个管家黄脸婆。  我们介绍这个故事,并不是触谁的霉头兼碰谁的疮疤,尤其是毫无轻视家庭主妇之意,盖世界上可以没有女博士,却不能没有家庭主妇也。在对人类贡献的价值上,家庭主妇要超过女博士千百万倍,这可不是拍家庭主妇的马屁,以便将来挨门讨饭;而是没有女博士的世界,世界仍是世界;没有家庭主妇的世界,简直不能想像。不过,问题在于,一个家庭主妇,只要受国民小学堂教育,就可胜任愉快;而一个女博士,恐怕至少也要投下去二十个年华。七岁上小学堂的话,最快的博士也二十七岁矣(有的年已半百,头发都白啦,还在往里钻,那就更是紧张)。国家花了这么多的钱,自己也费了那么大劲,不过造成一个管家婆,成本未免太高。这种浪费,恐怕连太行山都得赔进去。如果将来大学堂全体成了女学生,而女学生又全体冲进厨房煮饭抱娃,中国高级知识界,势将成为真空。夫国家培养一个科学家,就有理由、也有权利,要他从事科学研究工作,如果所有的科学家一齐坚决的蹲到河边捞鱼,那又何必培养这么多科学家,直截了当培养捉鱼的好啦。  女博士嫁人,当然是应该的,但如果她阁下折腾了半辈子不过只是煮饭抱娃,我们就忍不住要疑心,当初何必那么穷凶极恶,把臭男人从榜上挤到枯井里乎?当她阁下午夜人静,半闭着瞌睡得要命的秋波,从床上爬起来喂孩子奶时,隐隐约约,不知道听没听到枯井里的哭声也。吾友盛紫娟女士,她在香港读大学当时,兼编了好几个刊物,正在日正当中,前途无量,却忽然结了婚。结婚之日,来信描写远景说,她丈夫是个大律师(也可能是个工程师,日子一久,记不清矣),生活不成问题,所以一定要好好写几本小说。我老人家就一百个不信,盖小姐一旦变成了太太,她的朋友圈就会来一个一百八十度的转弯,生活方式也会跟着别有天地,而且一有了孩子,更是全盘皆垮。不要说写小说啦,能有心情看小说,已很可贵矣。她对我的看法颇不服气,在信上致训词曰:“你这个老顽固,总自以为是,总用你过去陈腐的经验去判断新的事物,务请拭目以待。”好吧,我就拭目以待,拭到了今天,已整整五年,她不但没有一本小说,而且音讯杳然,像是从地球上失了踪。呜呼,非她不上进也,而是形势比人强也。不过女作家和女博士之间又有不同,女作家二十年之后,儿女渐渐成长,她仍可继续爬她的格纸,起初可能有点生疏,久啦也就可以应付,而且随着年龄见识的增加,作品或许可能更成熟。可是女博士学的是航空工程,二十年之后——不要说二十年之后,纵然三年之后,她学的那一套已落伍了十万八千里,她就不得不成为废料。
Peng Yang

Polya 的 <怎样解题> 中的重点语句 - 数学&统计 - 太傻超级论坛 - Powered by Discuz! - 0 views

  •  
    Polya 的 中的重点语句
arithwsun arithwsun

科学网-科技期刊国际化三部曲 - 0 views

  • 那平台上要连一个中文字都没有,上面所有的内容都要开放获取。要大气,大气到人人相信它的未来。就大大方方宣称,中国人要为世界服务,我们出钱为全球科研人员打建OA出版平台,请所有的人献计献策。什么诺贝尔奖得主了,美国院士了,都请来吧,就是贡献个名字也好。要是有了这么个平台,还担心中国科研人员不来奉献吗?现在的中国期刊,连个虚名的编委会都要是中国人,怎么可能吸引到其他国家的人来投稿或审稿呢?
arithwsun arithwsun

聚焦庞加莱猜想与中国数学-老包-搜狐博客 - 0 views

  • 张寿武说学生有三种,最好的学生自己找题目自己做,一般的学生做老师给的题目,最差的学生可能都看不懂老师给的题目,更做不了。
arithwsun arithwsun

范剑青:把数学作为解决社会问题的工具-中国教育 - 0 views

  • 我对统计很有自信,跟人合作时喜欢说两句话:'只要你觉得问题对你的领域充分重要、我听上去问题很复杂,肯定会有好结果。’因为如果问题不复杂,我能解决别人也可以,甚至说不定已经解决,那就没意思了。
  • 计算技术的发展为统计学的发展提供了新的能量,信息和技术革命又给统计学带来了很多新问题,只要用统计去解决实际问题,永远做不完,我现在比当年还用功。
arithwsun arithwsun

Ray的波动山谷: 展梦谈速读经验 - 0 views

  • 音读的克服 方法同样:多种方法相结合,具体方法共享中有,大家可以下来看看。   &nbsp; 补充一种方法:想象法。在摊开 的书上想象有一个小人在打拳或是跳舞,把你的注意力 集中在小人的动作上,这样也可以仰止发音;如果一旦在发音,就立马在注意到小人身上。大家可试试看
arithwsun arithwsun

科学网-华罗庚:学与识 - 0 views

  • 有人说,基础基础,何时是了?天天打基础,何时是够?据我看来,要真正打好基础,有两个必经的过程,即“由薄到厚”和“由厚到薄”的过程。“由薄到厚”是学习、接受的过程,“由厚到薄”是消化、提炼的过程。譬如我们读一本书,厚厚的一本,加上自己的注解,就愈读愈厚,我们所知道的东西也就“由薄到厚”了。但是,这个过程主要是个接受和记忆的过程,“学”并不到此为止,“懂”并不到此为透。要真正学会学懂还必须经过“由厚到薄”的过程,即把那些学到的东西,经过咀嚼、消化,融会贯通,提炼出关键性的问题来。我们常有这样的体会:当你读一本书或是看一迭资料的时候,如果对它们的内容和精神做到了深入钻研,透彻了解,掌握了要点和关键,你就会感到这本书和这迭资料变薄了。这看起来你得到的东西似乎比以前少了,但实质上经过消化,变成精炼的东西了。不仅仅在量中兜圈子,而有质的提高了。只有经过消化提炼的过程,基础才算是巩固了,那么,在这个基础上再练,那就不是普通的练功了;再念书,也就不是一本一本往脑里塞,而变成为在原有的基础上添上几点新内容和新方法。经过“由薄到厚”和“由厚到薄”的过程,对所学的东西做到懂,彻底懂,经过消化的懂,我们的基础就算是真正的打好了。有了这个基础,以后学习就可以大大加快。这个过程也体现了学习和科学研究上循序渐进的规律。
« First ‹ Previous 41 - 60 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page