这里是附录一关于鲍威尔的报道中的的一段，故意慢下来，反而有了突破。故意慢就是放松，卸下本来不需要参与而且参与了会帮倒忙的那部分神经系统，回归SSH，因此，跑进了世界记录：

2007年9月9日，在国际田联意大利站比赛上，他用9.74秒刷新世界纪录，证明自己在这个项目上的绝对优势。更令人惊奇的是，在跑最后20米时，他似乎还故意慢了下来。

“我慢下来是因为那是当天的第一场比赛，我还得跑两场。”他说，“教练告诉我悠着点儿。所以当跑到80米时，我想最好让我的腿歇歇。”那么，他该怎么解释那个惊人的成绩？“我无法解释。我不知道为什么，自己能那样做，别人却不能。”

附录一 世界上跑得最快的人
http://news.qq.com/a/20080420/000512.htm

据一项新的研究表明，血液替代品，如来自伊利诺伊州埃文斯顿Northfield实验室的一种替代品，存在很大的危险。

一个临床试验专家组和消费者声称他们得出的结论表明:使用血液替代品增加了30%的死亡率，而且使患心脏病发作的危险增加三倍。不是每个人都相信这个发现，但是这个领域的临床试验还在继续。

捐赠的血液只有很短的一段保质期，而且它的供应往往也非常紧张。数十年来，研究人员都在试图制造各种血液替代品。虽然这些产品各不相同，但是所有的都含有一种能携带氧气运送到身体组织的血红蛋白分子。虽然这些产品没有一个在美国和欧洲被批准广泛使用，但是一些产品已经在外伤病人和各种外科处理中试验过了。一些研究表明，血液替代品可能比血液更加危险，但是这些差异不是总有统计学意义。

Charles Natanson,一位马里兰州，美国国立卫生院临床研究中心关键的护理专家，认为如果结合试验数据可能会使安全问题更加清楚。他与一个华盛顿特区的民间健康提倡者集团合作，表达了他们对血液替代品的庄重的关注。他们浏览文献数据库，新闻发布，美国食品药品管理局会议的资料和利用16个部分没有发表的，自 1998年开始的使用五种血液替代品的临床试验。

综合数据，这组研究人员测量了两个普遍报道的血液替代品的危险:死亡和心脏病发作。通过试验，1927个接受了血液替代品的病人中有164人死亡，而对照组中1784人中有123人死亡，危险增加近 30%．在治疗组，59人发生了心脏病发作，而对照组只有16人发生，危险增加2.7倍。

没有人知道在这些的背后的原因。但是有一个可能是血液替代品里面的血红蛋白分子夺取氧化一氮分子，这些分子一般发挥舒张血管和组织血小板凝集作用。理论上，丢失氧化一氮将导致血管收缩和血栓形成。

Natanson不赞成停止对血液替代品的研究。“但是我们需要退回原始状态，除非我们找到一种毒性更低的方法。”他说，尽管存在明显的安全问题，食品药品监督管理局还是继续批准血液替代品的人体试验。今天发表在美国医学会杂志上的论文说，有五个血液替代品的试验正在进行。

这个发现遭到了关注，Dean Fergusson（一个加拿大安大略省渥太华卫生研究所的流行病学家）说，引起他注意的是，所有的血液替代品都可能造成伤害。“那告诉我们需要倒退，说‘这里发生了什么？’”

但是其他一些人不以为然。“他们的出的这个结果反应过度了，”Jonathan Jahr（洛杉矶加州大学的麻醉学家，他领导了几个血液代替品的试验）争论道：这些研究者在综和血液替代品制作不同标记的时候犯了错误。他也指出：一个 700人的整形外壳试验结果将要在六月发表，这将缓和人们对一个产品的关注：Hemopure。结果是使用血液替代品的有10人死亡，而接受血液的6人死亡，这个差异在统计学上没有显著性意义，Jahr说。

http://www.dxy.cn/bbs/post/view? ... amp;tpg=1&age=0

人脑除了保持大量长期记忆外，还能产生只维持几秒中的短期记忆，这种记忆对于完成
诸如将两个数字相加及比较两张面孔哪个更有吸引力等任务来说是必不可少的。我们知
道，只有有限的信息可以存储在短期记忆中，但我们是高质量地存储少量东西、还是有
可能以低分辨率存储数量无限的东西则是一个存在很多争议的问题。对视觉工作记忆所
做的一项新的研究解决了这个问题，其结果支持“高分辨率”之说：短期信息存储并不
以牺牲质量来谋求数量，而是存储数量相对较少的东西，将其表述为离散的、具有固定
分辨率的记忆内容。

Nature 453(7192): 233, 8 May 2008 (见附件)

[ 本帖最后由 刘承宜 于 2008-5-11 11:22 AM 编辑 ]

Kaminski JA, Sloutsky VM, Heckler AF. Learning theory. The advantage of abstract examples in learning math. Science. 2008 Apr 25;320(5875):454-5. Undergraduate students may benefit more from learning mathematics through a single abstract, symbolic representation than from learning multiple concrete examples.

[ 本帖最后由 刘承宜 于 2008-5-9 05:38 PM 编辑 ]

用Google初步查了一下，下面两个帖子中介绍的可能是已经翻译成中文的一本书，可以估计书里反映的科研成果至少是两三年以前的研究。对照这里收集的研究结果，可以初步肯定，虽然书中危言耸听，但基本过时。

【科普】英国神经学家纠正大脑谬论 称100%都已用上
http://www.dxy.cn/bbs/post/view? ... &sty=1#11818529

专家纠正有关大脑各种谬论 大头不一定聪明
http://news.xinhuanet.com/tech/2008-05/07/content_8118297.htm下面两个

[ 本帖最后由 刘承宜 于 2008-5-12 09:13 PM 编辑 ]

The identification of a disease-causing gene mutation in humans is typically followed by a flurry of research aimed at elucidating the normal function of the gene and how disruption of that function produces the specific pathological features of the disease. These projects often rely on the phenotypic characterization of mice in which the murine ortholog of the gene has been inactivated (knock-out mice) or in which the specific disease-causing mutation has been introduced into the murine germline (knock-in mice).

Although such models are informative, a recent analysis serves as a reminder that mice are not men, especially when it comes to protein quality-control systems. By examining the Mouse Genome Informatics database and the literature, Liao and Zhang identified 120 genes known to be essential for human survival and found that 22% of these are nonessential in mice. Interestingly, nearly half of these 27 genes encode proteins localized to vacuoles, which are membrane-bound compartments that help remove cellular waste such as misfolded proteins. In independent studies, Kobuke et al. and Bartoli et al. found that a missense mutation responsible for a specific type of muscular dystrophy in humans (an R77C substitution in alpha-sarcoglycan) caused no disease phenotype when introduced into mice. In this case also, the cross-species difference was tentatively traced to the quality-control systems that recognize and process defective proteins. -- PAK

Liao BY, Zhang J. 2008. Null mutations in human and mouse orthologs frequently result in different phenotypes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 May 13;105(19):6987-92. Epub 2008 May 5.
One-to-one orthologous genes of relatively closely related species are widely assumed to have similar functions and cause similar phenotypes when deleted from the genome. Although this assumption is the foundation of comparative genomics and the basis for the use of model organisms to study human biology and disease, its validity is known only from anecdotes rather than from systematic examination. Comparing documented phenotypes of null mutations in humans and mice, we find that >20% of human essential genes have nonessential mouse orthologs. These changes of gene essentiality appear to be associated with adaptive evolution at the protein-sequence, but not gene-expression, level. Proteins localized to the vacuole, a cellular compartment for waste management, are highly enriched among essentiality-changing genes. It is probable that the evolution of the prolonged life history in humans required enhanced waste management for proper cellular function until the time of reproduction, which rendered these vacuole proteins essential and generated selective pressures for their improvement. If our gene sample represents the entire genome, our results would mean frequent changes of phenotypic effects of one-to-one orthologous genes even between relatively closely related species, a possibility that should be considered in comparative genomic studies and in making cross-species inferences of gene function and phenotypic effect.

Today in Science

To what extent are the opinions you hold simply a reflection of the opinions of those you associate with? Most people like to think that their opinions are based on their own deliberations. Of course, there are exceptions. You may take into account the opinions of others if you believe they are better informed. You may even conform to the majority opinion in order to avoid being seen as deviant (1, 2). Studies of how norms and beliefs vary between groups, and how they are transmitted from peers or parents, testify to the importance of such social influence (3).

Explanations of social influence usually focus on why people are persuaded by or conform to the opinions of others (4). Although important, this research has neglected the role of information collection in belief formation and how biased beliefs, as well as social influence, can emerge from biased search processes (5).

    Figure 1 attached

For example, suppose you are deciding which of two cars to buy. If your neighbor buys one of the cars, you can observe it more closely and will thus learn more about its attributes. This opportunity to observe the car can bias your decision toward buying the same car, even if you do not care about whether you have the same car as your neighbor. This is especially true if acquiring information about cars other than your neighbor's is costly (6). If the information you learn about your neighbor's car is strongly positive, it makes sense to buy this car and discontinue the search. In this case you will not find out whether the other car is superior. If the information you learn is not very positive, however, it then makes sense to examine the other car. Only in this case will you find out how the two cars compare. Because the comparison process is asymmetric, you are overall more likely to buy the same car as your neighbor even if the information you learn is equally likely to be positive or negative.

The attitudes and behavior of others can also influence our learning processes by leading us to revisit objects and events that we had previously avoided because of poor past experiences (7). Suppose Bob likes a restaurant while Alice does not. By herself Alice might not visit the restaurant again, and her attitude would remain negative. But Alice might join Bob if he wants to go to the restaurant. By visiting the restaurant again, Alice gets a chance to change her opinion. Alice's attitude will depend on Bob's, but only because he influenced the probability of her revisiting the restaurant.

Finally, the number of your friends who engage in some activity can also influence your estimate of the value of this activity. If you have many friends who start firms, for example, your estimate of the chances of success will be based on a large sample size. A large sample size may lead you to have a higher estimate of the success rate than you would if the sample size were small. Experiments show that a large sample size leads to a more optimistic view when the outcome distribution is skewed (8). If only 10% succeed, you may only observe failures in a small sample, and will then underestimate the success rate.

These mechanisms produce behavior that looks like conformity: You are more likely to evaluate an activity positively if others do so. But in these examples your attitude is not directly influenced by hearing about the attitudes of others. Your attitude is only indirectly influenced by others because their behavior exposes you to additional samples of the activity.

Such indirect mechanisms of social influence are important, because even individuals who try to be impartial and make the best decision given the available information may fail to recognize that the available information is influenced by others (9). For example, a manager who tries to avoid discrimination may nevertheless come to believe that individuals who belong to the same social networks as the manager does are superior to those the manager seldom interacts with and has less information about. To learn more about these mechanisms, we need to broaden studies of social influence and belief formation to include the phases of learning and information collection that precede decision-making and judgment (10).

References and Notes

   1. S. E. Asch, Sci. Am. 193, 31 (November, 1955).
   2. M. Deutsch, H. Gerard, J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 51, 629 (1955).
   3. P. J. Richerson, R. Boyd, Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution (Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2005).
   4. R. B. Cialdini, N. J. Goldstein, Annu. Rev. Psychol. 55, 591 (2004).
   5. Y. Trope, A. Liberman, in Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles, E. T. Higgins, A. W. Kruglanski, Eds. (Guilford, New York, 1996), pp. 239-270.
   6. N. V. Moshkin, R. Shachar, Market. Sci. 21, 435 (2002).
   7. J. Denrell, G. Le Mens, Psychol. Rev. 114, 398 (2007).
   8. R. Hertwig et al., Psychol. Sci. 15, 534 (2004).
   9. J. Denrell, Psychol. Rev. 112, 951 (2005).
  10. For recent research on the effect of sampling on judgment, see K. Fiedler, P. Juslin, Eds., Information Sampling and Adaptive Cognition (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2006).
  11. I thank J. March for comments.

最近罗伯斯获得了八连冠
13.28(6/6)
12.87(6/13)
13.48(6/16)
12.96(6/28)
13.08(7/12)
13.04(7/14)
12.88(7/19)
12.91(7/23) (附录一)
根据以赛带练的国际惯例和本人的理论可以推测，争夺北京奥运会110米栏冠军，罗伯斯的机会大于刘翔。
有人根据周期理论预测最佳竞技状态只能维持7~10天。其实周期理论已经过时，罗伯斯已经进入训练平台，只要他继续训练，可以维持相当一段时间，至少出席北京奥运会是不成问题的。遗憾的是，刘翔最近缺席国际比赛，缺乏以赛带练的环节，会大大影响他在北京奥运会上的成绩。

附录一 罗伯斯继续晒状态
http://epaper.nddaily.com/A/html/2008-07/24/content_524900.htm

雅典奥运会，中国与美国的金牌数相差不多。
北京奥运会前两天的比赛，中国暂时领先美国（6：2）
中美体育较量实际上是两种运动员培养体系的较量，即体工学校与平民教育的较量。

体工学校可以更早发现人才，更专门培养人才。如果两个优势的发挥可以很专业，体工学校应该优于平民教育。在乒乓球、体操、射击和重竞技等方面确实如此。观看这几天的比赛，这种观念得到进一步强化。这种成功可以归因于SSH。建立每个项目的SSH所特异的系统并不多，可以说不需要文化学习。这几天甚至产生了身体智慧的想法。

体工学校在田径和足球等方面是失败的。田径的失败可能在于选材和教练（见附件）方面。足球的失败可能是教育制度本身的缺陷。

选材和教练方面的研究进展很快，我们的体工学校并没有跟上科学的前沿。本人最近发现，心理基因也是一个特别重要的因素（附录一）。

足球是一个团队合作，除了个人的体力和智力外，更需要团队的配合。从心理基因的角度，两个无法合作的人几乎不可能通过训练形成合作。足球要求的是十人的合作，合作性的训练难度几乎比蜀道还难。在这种情况下，平民教育是一个根本的解决方法。球队的形成是通过竞争产生，没有大规模的群众基础是不可能完成的。因此，我国足球的问题不是教练的问题，是体育教育制度本身的缺陷。

因此，体工学校和平民教育是两个相辅相成的人才培养方法。中国进一步提高体育水平的根本途径是加强平民教育。

附录一 [原创] 心理基因： 20080810 体育天才
http://www.tiyuol.com/thread-3482-1-1.html

[ 本帖最后由 刘承宜 于 2008-8-11 11:58 AM 编辑 ]