注册 登录  
 加关注
查看详情
   显示下一条  |  关闭
温馨提示!由于新浪微博认证机制调整,您的新浪微博帐号绑定已过期,请重新绑定!立即重新绑定新浪微博》  |  关闭

东南隅

wantnon的blog

 
 
 

日志

 
 
 
 

科学需要想象力  

2010-09-24 12:19:55|  分类: 考研英语阅读 |  标签: |举报 |字号 订阅

  下载LOFTER 我的照片书  |
http://edu.sina.com.cn/kaoyan/2010-08-26/1446264908.shtml

Science, in practice, depends far less on the experiments it prepares than on the preparedness of the minds of the men who watch the experiments. Sir Isaac Newton supposedly discovered gravity through the fall of an apple. Apples had been falling in many places for centuries and thousands of people had seen them fall. But Newton for years had been curious about the cause of the orbital (轨道) motion of the moon and planets. What kept them in place? Why didn’t they fall out of the sky? The fact that the apple fell down toward the earth and not up into the tree answered the question he had been asking himself about those larger fruits of the heavens, the moon and the planets。

  How many men would have considered the possibility of an apple falling up into the tree? Newton did because he was not trying to predict anything. He was just wondering. His mind was ready for the unpredictable. Unpredictability is part of the essential nature of research. If you don’t have unpredictable things, you don’t have research. Scientists tend to forget this when writing their cut and dried reports for the technical journals, but history is filled with examples of it。

  In talking to some scientists, particularly younger ones, you might gather the impression that they find the “scientific method” a substitute for imaginative thought. I’ve attended research conferences where a scientist has been asked what he thinks about the advisability(明智) of continuing a certain experiment. The scientist has frowned, looked at the graphs, and said, “The data are still inconclusive(不允分)。” We know that, the men from the budget office have said, “but what do you think? Is it worthwhile going on? What do you think we might expect?” The scientist has been shocked at having even been asked to speculate(推测)。

  What this amounts to, of course, is that the scientist has become the victim of his own writings. He has put forward unquestioned claims so consistently that he not only believes them himself, but also has convinced industrial and business management that they are true. If experiments are planned and carried out according to plan as faithfully as the reports in the science journals indicate, then it is perfectly logical for management to expect research to produce results measurable in dollars and cents. It is entirely reasonable for auditors(审计员) to believe that scientists who know exactly where they are going and how they will get there should not be distracted(分心) by the necessity of keeping one eye on the cash register while the other eye is on the microscope. Nor, if regularity(规则性) and conformity(一致性) to a standard pattern are as desirable to the scientist as the writing of his papers would appear to reflect(此句为插入语), is management to be blamed for discriminating(歧视) against the “odd balls”(怪人) among researchers in favor of more conventional(传统的,惯例的) thinkers who “work well with the team。”

  评论这张
 
阅读(48)| 评论(0)
推荐 转载

历史上的今天

评论

<#--最新日志,群博日志--> <#--推荐日志--> <#--引用记录--> <#--博主推荐--> <#--随机阅读--> <#--首页推荐--> <#--历史上的今天--> <#--被推荐日志--> <#--上一篇,下一篇--> <#-- 热度 --> <#-- 网易新闻广告 --> <#--右边模块结构--> <#--评论模块结构--> <#--引用模块结构--> <#--博主发起的投票-->
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

页脚

网易公司版权所有 ©1997-2018