Analysis of examples: What is the difference between Chinese and American science enlightenment education
For successful scientific enlightenment, we must teach both "scientific knowledge" and "how to do science". Why both are indispensable and how to make them complement each other. I hope this article can give you some inspiration.
Writing | Man Weining
I've been thinking about writing an article for many years, comparing Chinese and American science enlightenment education, and talking about how to learn from each other's strengths. This time I took this American elementary school science competition as an introduction, and finally wrote some thoughts and experiences to share, maybe for educationBoth parents and parents can have some inspiration.
Talking from the results of a primary school student scientific research competition
In 2019, I visited a science competition in the United States. Elementary students did a lot of original research. This fifth grade child's research won the first place in the entire school district: "Is WIFI radiation harmful to plants?"The public-like account reported this news and caused a lot of discussion.
Simply put, this elementary student wants to study the effect of wireless WIFI signals on plants. After 12 days of experiments, he claims that the pot near the WIFI router is "dead" and the pot far away is "growing very well."
He came to the conclusion that, as he imagined, WIFI seriously harmed the plants, and everyone should be careful of the radiation at home. There is also a data chart, which is what he called "the weight of plants", from the first day to the first12 days, the unit is grams. A basin represented by blue is near to WIFI; B basin represented by orange is far from WIFI.
I started an physics enlightenment course "Ubiquitous Physics, One Million Whys" on the Internet, so I sent these to the group that started the class and asked students to take a closer look. I said, "First, be sureThis child's creative ideas and efforts. Do you have any doubts or even questions about this conclusion? What problems can you think of? Which are related to the heat and light we have recently learned? Of course, WIFI is also closely related to the electricity and magnetism we will learn."
Elementary and middle school students in the group express their opinions :
A: Does WiFi really affect the growth of plants? Does it also affect the human body?
B: During the planting process, the weight of the soil should be the same, and the soil quality should be the same. The grams of watering each time should be the same, and they should be placed indoors or outdoors at the same temperature. One pot cannot be placed outside or one pot. BecauseThis will result in different evaporation and different levels of absorption of sunlight.
C: Is the light and humidity the same under WIFI environment and not under WIFI environment?
D: Is the environment of the plants in the two pots different? One is indoor, the other is ventilating? Are the two pots of plants at the same distance from the window? If they are not the same, then the results of the experiment are also there.Great influence.
E: If there is a light source and heat near the machine, there will be more bugs, which is suitable for the temperature of pests.
I think it ’s good. Everyone did n’t give up my class in vain. I always emphasized to them and the graduate students I supervised: When designing comparative experiments, we must ensure that the remaining conditions are as consistent as possible unchanged in order to applyOnly the corresponding consequences of the condition to be studied are reflected separately, and it is possible to draw valid conclusions.
Everyone raises reasonable doubts about the consistency of the experimental conditions, so I remind everyone to take a closer look at the original author's own data chart, what other problems can be found?
Some students also suggested that the weight of the plant is not good, and said :
D: Is it possible to use the change in overall plant height as the measurement data in this experiment?
E: I think you can also observe the color of the plants.
G: It may be more appropriate to use the number of plant leaves, the size of the leaves, and the color of the leaves to calculate the data than the weight of the plants.
H: It's better to measure the height or thickness of the rhizome.
I said: These are good ideas, but after 12 days, one pot does not look as good as another. With the number of leaves and the difference in plant height, you can conclude that "WIFI allows this plantVictim? "
What should be the logical relationship between hypotheses, experiments, data, and conclusions? This is a great example to really cultivate the scientific thinking mode of children. What is the scientific thinking mode and how to cultivate it, pleaseLook down carefully.
reproduced from the original picture in the photo, click to enlarge
Soon, the students noticed a major problem with the original data chart :
I: How is the weight of the plant weighed out? From 1st to 12th day, the total weight of the plant shows a downward trend, which is contrary to the law of plant growth.
J: The weight is the same for the first 3 days, and the weight has increased on the 4th and 5th days. It is estimated that water may have been poured. When was the weighing weighed? If you weigh it immediately, does it mean the weight of the water she poured?Different.
K :? If the soil weight and watering amount are the same, and they are all indoors, but the distance from Wi-Fi is different, I think his measurement data is wrong. AB's data is reversed: plants absorb water and grow nutrients, Should be getting heavier, but B weighs less than A.
Yeah, everyone has found out, how did the "plant weight" decrease first? There are also contradictions in the data and conclusions, including BuBu children over eight years old, who also independently questioned: "Why the pot away from WIFIIt looks good, but its weight is low in the chart? "
Then I remind everyone of the concept of order of magnitude, so how much is a pinch of small leaves with a large fingernail? What is more than 300 grams? What did the original author say?
Everyone reacted in succession :
N: Teacher, how was the weight of the plants measured in his experiments? Does it include the weight of the soil?
L: How to solve the weighing problem? Although the weight of soil and water can be subtracted from the total weight, the evaporation of water cannot be calculated.
O: Wouldn't it be the soil and plants that are weighed, will the whole process not be watered for 12 days?
I: It may be that after the first day of watering, there was no watering, and then the total weight of the whole pot was weighed, but this did not take into account the difference in soil water evaporation between pots.
Dangdang! We need to exercise critical thinking instead of passively receiving information! Even if the teacher says this is the first item, even if his chart indicates that it is "the weight of the plant", you must be able toQuestioning what he measured?
Let ’s say that he confuses the concepts of mass and weight. It is important to think that most of the bottles of mineral water can only weigh more than 300 grams, and you will realize that what he called was the entire plastic dish plus that layer of soil.
What else can we analyze?
R: The weight of the first 4 days is the same, and the weight of the two pots of plants increases on the 5th day. There should be watering on this day. The amount of watering of the two pots of plants needs to be marked out. The weight of the two pots of plants in the next few daysThe rapid decline may be related to whether his pot has moved or not, and it is related to the exposure to sunlight. The latter will affect the evaporation of water. From the day when the weight of the plants in the two pots decreased, the respective change curves are basically the same.However, the difference between the absolute values of the two should be that a variable has a different effect on the two. The position of sunlight exposure is different. One of them may be closer to the room in order to meet the radiation conditions, and the other is more.Close to outdoor.
S: One experiment is not enough to reach a conclusion. It is too accidental and requires multiple verifications.
T: People with experience in flower growing know that even the same plants in the same environment may have differences, and too many accidental factors can cause differences.
More and more clear. Careful, careful, and more careful: you see that on the 4th to 5th days, the pot near WIFI increased by 15 grams, and the other pot increased by more than 1 gram. The 15 grams isWhat was added consciously or accidentally? No matter what it was, from that day on, this group of experiments lost the significance of comparing the effects of WIFI on the plants.
Since then, both pots have been reducing weight, and the mass including the soil has been greatly reduced by nearly half. The only reasonable explanation for the weight loss is moisture evaporation. Why is there no change in the total weight in the initial four or five days?A layer of soil flat on a large open plate will not evaporate a gram of water for four or five consecutive days? Is it in a steam-saturated sauna?
Does the author see that the germination has not yet occurred, and thinks that the "plant weight" should not change, so those days have not been measured. When drawing, artificially filled the data of the days before germination with the same number? ThenI took it for granted, and I was fooled. Otherwise, the speed of soil evaporation in two places can be compared.
There is a clear difference in the speed of weight reduction in the two pots thereafter, which just shows that the evaporation rate is not the same, but it is no longer possible to distinguish between the water directly evaporated by the soil and the water lost by plant transpiration.
In short, how can such a rigorous experimental process and inconsistent experimental environment explain the reason why the plants do not grow well is the influence of WIFI?
Is there really a causal relationship between the obvious fruit one pot grows better and the other pot grows worse and the apparent cause the poor pot is close to the WIFI router?
What kind of experimental design, experimental conditions, and experimental results can exclude other causes to support this level of causality? Children who have seriously participated in the previous discussion have formed a clearer understanding of these issues, but if the original author himself does not haveThe rigorous scientific spirit may be fooled by the strong subjective desire to selectively point to the desired conclusion.
The truly successful scientific enlightenment is not how much book knowledge has been learned in advance, nor is it informed of some problem-solving skills and experimental routines, but to go through rigorous logical thinking training and be given the opportunity to repeatedly observe, experiment, and think.Ask questions, verify, and build these capabilities across the board.
But why do such projects win awards in the United States? What inspiration or reflection can we get from them? Let's talk about the differences between Chinese and American scientific enlightenment.
Enlightenment of Chinese Science in Memory
Remember that the domestic elementary school nature class talks about weather records and seed germination, but most of the time, it is memorized like ideological and moral lessons, and there is very little thinking. I remember copying and reciting the definition of plastic late at night in elementary school. I rememberAfter learning the nouns that left and right the atrium and ventricle, I once mistakenly thought that the heart lived in turns in these four places. I remember after one year of “same-sex repulsion and opposite-sex attraction”, I still did not understand what the positive and negative charges are.
When you look back after you are an adult, you will find that our history lessons are not just teaching historical facts. They are asking us to recite the evaluation of historical events.The historical significance of an event is like writing a dissertation setting out good arguments.
But in our science class at that time, we just talked about "facts", talked about phenomena, and talked about conclusions, just like detailed and precise explanations. Basically nothing was involved: discussing the differences between facts and opinions, discussingHow to find the answer, develop critical thinking, train scientific thinking ... etc.
At the middle school, I was fortunate to meet a few good teachers. I have learned a wide range of profound knowledge in physical chemistry and biology. This is important. I will be able to learn more in the field of natural science in the future.And the basis for doing research.
But at that time most of the time was used to "talk on paper"-practice exam questions. The only purpose of the experimental class was to verify the correctness of the principles of the book. If the experimental results do not match, try to find a way to "ideal"Results", there are very detailed empirical details that we strictly follow in order to get the ideal results, rather than let us explore and discover the reasons behind the divergence of results. Get used to the conclusions first, and then think about the ideal experimental resultsIt is impossible to make any new discoveries in science and solve any new problems.
The point is: we have always been told that the book is about science itself, and no one has taught "how to do science."
So much so that when I first heard that “all propositions that cannot be falsified cannot be called scientific propositions”, I was shocked and thought for a long time before I understood: Only faith cannot be falsified anyway., And scientific propositions can be tested by designing experiments, which confirm the results of the experiments, and the falsification of the non-conformities. If no experiments can be designed to verify, if no experimental results can be overturned, it is justBelief is not science.
At that time, there were many difficult exercises and the logic was very strong, but it was limited to books and calculations. It was separated from the actual problems in life by eighteen thousand miles. It made the physics so magical, interesting, and nowhere.The absent discipline has become a profound and obscure distant book that can only be understood by a few talented students, which is regrettable.
I have been very sure that domestic basic education is very successful in mathematics, and there are many merits in physical chemistry biology: solid basic skills, stronger than many places abroad, really. But it is limited to providing many scientific "facts"Knowledge, there is no way to provide students with the opportunity to explore, discover and think for themselves. Students are accustomed to passively receiving information, do not actively ask questions, are prone to behavioral diligence and laziness in thinking, and cultivate interest and solve practical problems.There is a long way to go in terms of capacity building. After leaving the country for more than ten years, I do n’t know how much changes and improvements have been made in this area. I am talking about the education I experienced as a kid.
What about science enlightenment education in the United States?
Do n’t be superstitious about the United States first. After nearly two decades in the United States, I learned that American liberal arts education language, reading, speech, writing, philosophy, etc. is great, but American mathematics education ranks very low in the world.Science is hard to say.
One reality is: In the United States, physics, chemistry, and biology may not be required until high school. Of course, students who want to go to college often take these courses in middle school. Another reality is that junior high schools are usually a teacher.Teach all the homework in the class. A person who graduated from a liberal arts college as a teacher may have taken only two or three semester compulsory basic science literacy courses in the university in his lifetime, and may be a grammar reading writing history mathematics logic natural science and all other disciplines.Teachers, the effect can be imagined. And there is no formal textbooks and textbooks in the United States. Teachers can choose books and play freely, and students are asking for happiness. Of course, good private schools or top public schools invite high-level teachersIt is also common to offer university courses in secondary schools.
Even so, I still want to emphasize a very good idea of science enlightenment education in the United States: there are not too many specific knowledge requirements in junior high school, and the syllabus and examination outline of science lessons emphasize more on how to do science.
Take this elementary school student scientific research exhibition competition as an example, you must study a problem of your own.
This process lasted for several months :
1. Ask the questions you want to answer, as precise and clear as possible. For example :
Is it harder to shoot basketball on a concrete floor than on a wooden floor?
Does the magnet's magnetism change with temperature?
How will the melting point of different amounts of salt or vinegar be added to the ice?
These are more precise than "Can my household waste produce biogas power?" And "Is WIFI harmful to us?"
2, put forward your assumptions on the answer. For example :
Suppose "collision between basketball and concrete ground will lose more energy than collision with wooden ground";
Assume that "magnetism will weaken after temperature rises";
Suppose "the more salt added to the ice, the lower the melting point".
3. Do background research and investigation, understand basic nouns, related variables, and common sense.
4. Design experiments to verify your hypotheses: For example :
With the same basketball, freely fall on the floor of different textures from the same height, measure the rebound height to compare the energy lost during the rebound.
With the same magnet, after cooling or heating to different temperatures, see how long a series of paper clips can be attracted to each?
Add different amounts of salt to the same ice and measure the melting point temperature separately.
5. Analyze the data, determine whether the hypothesis is true based on the data, and then draw a conclusion. For example :
When the temperature is lower than the temperature, no obvious change in magnetism can be detected. When the temperature is higher, the number of paper clips that can be held is reduced, indicating that the magnetism is weakened.
How much salt will the melting point of ice decrease? And with more salt, will the melting point decrease all the time, or will it rise again? Etc.
Sometimes it is necessary to design follow-up experiments to continue in-depth research and verification. These are examples of elementary students participating in this competition
6. Write an abstract of scientific research, and make clear a few major questions: what is this topic, why is it important, why do I need to study it, how do I study it, and what are the results or conclusions what, why, how, what.
You see, this is exactly the research process of serious dissertation projects or scientific research bidding projects of universities and research institutes.
This is a complete set of training, from questioning, reasoning, assumptions, experiments, comparisons, verification, to conclusions and preparation of follow-up plans. This is something we have only come into contact with since we came to graduate school in the United States.
Can you realize the importance of these things?
What should we do?
Simply put it: make up for the shortcomings, and combine Chinese and Western.
To get the essence of wisdom eye beads :
Don't just think that domestic education is too rigid, but really cherish the opportunities to train basic skills and accumulate knowledge in various subjects. The building cannot be built in the air.
Don't just think that the education in the United States is too superficial, look down on the fact that they need a calculator to calculate simple arithmetic, can't remember a few chemical elements; instead, learn humbly the ideas and methods of cultivating thinking and research habits,The process is returned to the students.
For example, some students proposed hypotheses in this discussion :
"The closer to the WIFI machine, the higher the temperature will be, and the more water will evaporate."
Is this hypothesis true? I did not answer directly, but asked more questions :
You can go to the home near the WIFI router to measure if the temperature is higher than the distance?
What else could be affected by the temperature distribution in the room?
We have studied in the heat and light parts. What is the relationship between the speed of evaporation and the temperature?
Are there any other factors that will cause the water evaporation rate to differ?
These data show which pot is lighter if the watering is consistent, which pot evaporates faster?
Bold assumptions, careful verification are exactly what we want to learn. What is the logical relationship between different factors? How to design experiments to isolate separate individual factors and test your hypotheses? What kind of data can support orWeaken a conclusion or assumption?
For successful scientific enlightenment, we must teach "scientific knowledge" and also "how to do science", both of which are indispensable, complement each other, and complement each other. Strong interest and thinking habits will make students become self-motivatedSmall motors, take the initiative to master more scientific knowledge and better "do science".
Scientific Enlightenment is not for everyone to learn more book content in advance, but to guide the whole process of observation, experiment, thinking, reasoning, and verification, so that students can truly understand the scientific principles through the process of "discovering by themselves",Understand millions of reasons, develop a habit of thinking hard, ask questions at any time, and dare to try to solve problems.
What should we avoid?
Scientific enlightenment has many misunderstandings: it is reduced to memorizing and reciting knowledge points, knowing what it is and not knowing why, contented with knowing a lot of profound terms, not knowing how to think deeply and asking questions, habitually receiving information, without critical thinking, even becauseUnderstanding and deeply rooted plausible wrong impressions ... these must be avoided by parents and teachers.
We should not be superstitious about STEM science, technology, engineering, mathematics education in the United States. Many ideas and original intentions are good, but the effect depends on the skills of the specific teacher. If you emphasize the "creativity" and "new inventions", Emphasis on subverting known cognition, but just superficial, it will become a typical flower shelf quality education. The students of the science summer camp that I led told me that there is a type of American science summer camp. The team from abroad is very dazzlingCool position, it looks very novel, but in the end, I just built some building blocks and compared with our summer camp from morning to night, whether it was experiment or eating, riding a car, watching the stars, constantly comparing, asking questions, discussing, thinking repeatedly.The experience is absolutely incomparable. I'm very pleased. Peeling the outer cover of the flowering shelf, how much real deep thinking is guided is the most important standard for testing science education.
As for why, among so many excellent works, this flawed project came first? Does it have no advantages?
First of all, everyone must see its advantages: it pays attention to the problem of self-risk for everyone. Is WIFI harmful in the end? It is everyone's interest to figure this out. In addition, its layout design has done it visually.is attractive.
However, I have to say that this project won the first place in the entire school district, exposing the limitations of the school district's teaching staff there is no instructor to see those obvious problems. No matter how good the concept and framework still need teachers to goExecution. Does the teacher have the skills to make content for cultivating the thinking mode, and lay down layers of depth? Can you find the problem, have sufficient knowledge and fluent expression ability to control the students' questioning, and give enlightenment one by oneAnswer? Even, find bright spots in the seemingly simple or even unreasonable questions to encourage and inspire students to practice and think more deeply-such teachers are really impossible to find. In emphasizing innovation and encouraging subversionAt the same time, the teacher has sufficient skill to guide and judge, which is the basis for the success of such attempts.
Secondly, this result reflects a great joy, attracted the attention, the mainstream popular taste of "political correctness." When children come out to promote the so-called "dangers that scientists have not discovered or acknowledged", when promoting a certain crisis, alwaysIt is a halo with its own heroism. People are enthusiastic about saving the world with their own power, and they especially appreciate the "fate" of children or individuals who "oppose authority" or "protect the world."
Also, the theory of danger is always more credible than unbelievable. Rumors of "microwave food is harmful" and "WIFI is harmful to health" also have a market in the United States. Unfortunately, at the awards ceremony that day, the organizers were particularly concernedThe audience emphasized: "Everyone should take a look at this first place study, it will alert you to the harmful radiation in your home." The conclusions obtained by using obviously wrong experimental design are seriously misleading the public with low background knowledge and let this kind of peopleThe rumor has more loyal supporters.
And the effect of public superstition may be much stronger than you think. For example, a professor friend who studies 5G in China told me that their community opposed the construction of 5G base stations, and everyone signed to protest that he went. Although heAfter calculation, the signal strength of that base station is too small, and it must be harmless. I asked him: "You should be too late to rumor, why should you oppose it?" My friend replied: "There is no way, because everyone believes that it is harmful and it was built.If that happens, the price of our unit will fall. What I say is useless, what the public believes is important. "
Back to this science competition, because there is not enough knowledge to judge, coupled with the influence of the heroism aura, the scientific spirit of seeking truth is extinguished. Another example is a middle school student scientific research project awarded by the President of the United States: for African childrenCreate a kind of football for playing during the day, and by the way, send electricity, and use the electric lights stored in the football to read at night. This project earns eyeballs and praise by gimmicks, and wastes a lot of money. Each "aid"Africa power football" cost more than one hundred dollars, which is very inefficient and easy to break. In fact, the effect is far less than that of a twenty-dollar football and a simple hand-cranked generator.
In this kind of selection, it is these politically correct gimmicks and halo that are easy to sell. The students who are used to halo and applause in the impetuous flower-frame education will only get more and more from the real science and technology.It ’s going to be farther away. This cultural soil is inevitable to create technology scams that pit investors into ruins. For example, the recently famous 80-year-old Stanford CEO, Elizabeth Holmes, and her blood testing company Theranos Silicon Valley Unicorn estimateValued at 9 billion U.S. dollars, the main technology and product is "a drop of blood for testing various diseases", which is actually a gimmick against common sense and a worthless scam. In the end, it can't escape the practical test, and it is a shame.
Scientific sincerity, I don't bully, no matter how many gimmicks and auras, no pseudoscience can escape the test of time.
Do n’t limit science education to the battle of the sea on paper. No matter how difficult the formulas can be, they are only hypothetical questions that meet the intention of the person asking the question, and are far from the real reality. Do n’t just teach science "knowledge", Ignoring how to cultivate science.
Similarly, we cannot ignore the cultivation of basic skills, blindly pursue innovation and "subversion", foster impetuous flower shelf education, and blindly pursue the air tower without knowing it.
What is the best scientific enlightenment in the end? I hope this article has a little inspiration for you, and welcome to leave a message to express your opinion.
Postscript: Do you need to worry about the harm of WIFI?
As a PhD in Princeton Physics and a scholar who has been studying microwave for more than ten years, I tell you responsibly that you don't have to worry about the harm of WIFI at home. The word radiation is often misunderstood. In fact, the so-called electromagnetic radiation and radioactive ionizing radiation are not a concept.
Understanding the harmfulness of electromagnetic waves, we must consider from two angles: one is the frequency and energy of single photons in different bands, and the other is the overall intensity the energy of electromagnetic waves passing through a unit area per unit time.
First of all, radio waves, microwaves, millimeter waves, infrared and visible light are ordinary electromagnetic radiation. From the perspective of a single photon, their frequency is low enough. The energy carried by the photon is far enough to destroy the structure of the atom or molecule. UltravioletA single photon of electromagnetic waves such as X-rays, X-rays, and gamma rays carry enough energy to ionize some atoms or break molecular bonds. They are harmful ionizing radiation. This is why no matter how long you roast in front of a fireplace warm infraredI can't accumulate the ultraviolet damage that can be suffered by standing in the midsummer sun for a few minutes. Another celebrity who is familiar with it said that the frequency of electromagnetic waves used by 5G or WIFI is as high as 9th power billion Hz, which sounds so high.What harm does "no need to have". In fact, what is a billion? The frequency of infrared and visible light can be hundreds of thousands of times higher than a billion hertz. Even the warm bonfire light or the faint red light of the cigarette can have a frequency greater than5 trillion billion times per second. This is just because of these electromagnetic wave sources such as some kind of atom or electric dipoleSeconds to complete one hundred trillion times the electromagnetic oscillations only, the smaller the electric dipole, the higher the frequency, and nothing more.
Secondly, the discussion of harmfulness and harmlessness can never be discussed in terms of dosage. Even pure water, drinking 5,000 ml at a time will increase the burden on the heart and even cause "water poisoning." So for ordinary electromagnetic radiation, although they do not destroy molecular bondsFar from ionizing radiation, we still have to quantitatively consider their penetrability and the degree of absorption in different materials including the human body, and the possible effects include accumulation effects such as thermal effects and sensitivity at different locations such as the retinaDifferent from skin damage conditions, to strictly determine the absolute safe intensity range when exposed to electromagnetic waves of different wave bands: the electromagnetic energy per unit area passes through a unit of time. Otherwise, even if the fire infrared is too close, you can be burned. Electromagnetic wavesThe intensity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the point wave source. When the distance is moved from ten centimeters to one meter, the electromagnetic wave intensity is attenuated by a hundred times.
In terms of intensity, here is the conclusion of Princeton University ’s research on indoor and outdoor coverage WIFI in the school :
The Department of Environmental Protection of New Jersey has measured the level of radio frequency radiation radio frequency electromagnetic wave energy intensity emitted by the wireless network on the campus of Princeton University, and determined that the level of radio frequency radiation attributable to the WIFI network cannot usually be detected, even when directly connected withAccess point antennas also measured only values much smaller than federal, state, and international guidelines or regulatory limits. The entire evaluation, including direct measurement of transmission power and computer modeling, showed that using a WIFI network under no circumstancesHave any significant impact on RF exposure to bystanders. Based on our recent and ongoing routine review of the literature on WIFI and health, there is no reason to believe that WIFI exposure on campus is harmful to health. Http://ehs.princeton.edu/ laboratory-research / radiation-safety / non-ionizing-radiation / electromagnetic-fields # WIFI
Prof. Man Weining, graduated from Jilin University with a bachelor's degree, Ph.D. graduated from Princeton University's Department of Physics, and worked as a postdoctoral fellow at Princeton University and New York University. She is currently a tenured professor in the Department of Physics and Astronomy at California State University San Francisco.The team is engaged in the research of soft condensed matter physics, disordered materials, quasicrystals, photon energy gaps and nonlinear optics. He has published many articles in top scientific journals such as Nature, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, American Physics Letters, and Nature Communications.Thesis. Obtained scientific research funds issued by the Natural Science Foundation of the United States and other institutions for many times. Good at writing popular science articles, for readers without professional knowledge, and cutting-edge science and technology. Readers interested in the concept of science education can follow the author's WeChat publicNo. mv0 mv number zero.
"Return to Park", a good science popularized by scientists. Wen Xiaogang, an internationally renowned physicist, and Yan Ning, a biologist, serve as editor-in-chief, together with dozens of top-notch scholars in different fields, together with you on an editorial board.Ask for it. Follow "Return to Park" to participate in more discussions. For reprint or cooperation, please contact the back to the public account backstage.
This article is uploaded and published by the media, authors, etc. on Baidu Know Daily. It only represents the author ’s point of view, and does not mean that Baidu knows the views or positions of the daily newspaper. It is known that the daily newspaper only provides an information publishing platform. For cooperation and contributions, please contact email@example.com.