Scientists have found that human eyes are more likely to be damaged by UV rays while skiing in the snow-covered areas than sitting on the beach, according to a report by the UK newspaper The Telegraph. The researchers at Kanazawa Medical University, Japan and American company Johnson conducted the study together. They looked at the effects of light reflection on newly fallen snow on a ski trail (a rough path) in Ishikawa District, northern Japan. They compared the results with the levels of UV rays on a sand beach in southern Japan's Okinawa District. They found that on the beach, eyes are exposed to a daily 260 kilojoules of UV a square meter compared to 658 kilojoules in snow-covered areas. The findings are supported by the Japan Meteorological Agency. According to the agency, the reflection rate of UV light on beaches is often between 10 and 25 percent, compared to 80 percent in the new snow areas. The amount of light increased 4 percent with a 300-meter rise in height. Most of us know that UV rays can harm the skin. That's why we wear sunscreen on our skin before we get out in the sun. But many of us may not realize that UV rays are also harmful to the eyes. If your eyes are exposed to large amounts of UV radiation over a short period of time, you may experience a kind of sunburn of the eye, which is harmful. Your eyes will become red and feel a strange feeling. They may be sensitive to light. Fortunately, this is usually temporary and seldom causes permanent damage to the eyes. Long-term exposure to UV radiation, however, can be more serious. Scientific studies and researches have shown that exposure to small amounts of UV radiation over a period of many years increases the chance of eye damage, which could lead to total blindness. Which of the following statements is TRUE according to the passage? A) Too much eye exposure to UV rays may cause total blindness. B) Short-time exposure of the eyes to UV rays doesn't harm them at all. C) Most people know that UV rays harm the eyes as well as the skin. D) The study was conducted by researchers from Japan, the USA and the UK.
A
US universities are among the best in the world. Since World War II, American scientists --- mostly working in universties or colleges --- have won more than half of all Nobel Prizes in physics and medicine. Foreign students rush to the United States by the tens of thousands. Last year they earned more than one quarter of the doctoral degrees awarded in the country. Yet while American universities produce the great research and great graduate program, they sometimes pay little attention to the task that lies at their very core: the teaching of undergraduate students. With the increase in fees, educators feel obliged to improve undergraduate teaching. In speeches and interviews the nation's higher educators have rediscovered teaching. Robert Rosenzweig, president of the Association of American Universities, said, "Our organization was never very concerned about teaching. In the last 18 months, we have spent more time on undergraduate education than on any other subject." Despite such promising efforts, no one doubts that research still outranks teaching at some of the leading universities, not least because it is a surer and faster way to earn status. Some people don't think it has to be that way. They argue that the reward system for college faculty can be changed, so that professors will be encouraged to devote more time and effort to teaching. They say that they are beginning to believe that the first ten years of the 21st century may come to be remembered as the decade of the undergraduate. That would bring it full circle. For more than two centuries after the founding of Harvard College in 1636, the instruction of undergraduate students was an essential condition of American higher education. It is implied in the passage that about 200 years ago undergraduate instruction _ . A) began to change all of a sudden B) was already threatened by research work C) was the central part of higher education D) began to be neglected in most universities
C
Q: Please help! I live in Germany with my wife and three kids. My parents live in the UK. I want my kids to have as much contact with their grandparents as possible. The kids all use e-mail, Skype and SMS but my parents won't. I've bought them a laptop, paid for broadband, given them both mobile phones and a digital camera, but they won't use them. My parents say they hate computers and new technology. What can I do with these " _ "? Daniel, Buremburg, Germany Actually, the original technophobes were the Luddites, a group of cloth workers in 19thcentury Britain during the Industrial Revolution. The Luddite cloth workers, who traditionally made cloth by hand, were worried that machines were going to take away their jobs and way of life. These machines could make cloth much faster and cheaper than humans. In 1811 and 1812 the Luddites destroyed the machines that they hated so much, but the British government supported the factory owners. Many Luddites were arrested. Charlotte Bronte's novel Shirley will tell your parents all about it. Laura, Valencia, Spain Laura makes some interesting points, I think. Technophobes has been a common theme in science fiction. Frankenstein, one of the first science fiction, is a warning of what could happen if humans began to experiment with human life. Freda, Copenhagen, Denmark One thing you could try is to find hardware that is designed for older people to use. An example is the mobiles made by the US company, Jitterbug. Instead of icons and menus the Jitterbug phones ask users simple "yes/no" questions and have larger keypads. The company realized that there are potentially 100 million older users in the US alone. Graham, Patras, Greece What can we infer from the passage? A) Daniel would buy her parents a novel written by Shirley. B) Charlotte Bronte wrote about technophobes in her novel Shirley. C) Daniel would buy her parents cell phones with icons and menus. D) Daniel worried about her children using e-mails.
A: B
Q: In 1826, a French man named Niepce needed pictures for his business. But he was not a good artist. He invented a very simple camera. He put it in a window of his house and took a picture of his garden. That was the first photo. The next important date in the history of photography was in 1837. That year, Daguerre, another Frenchman, took a picture of his reading room. He used a new kind of camera in a different way. In his picture you could see everything very clearly, even the smallest thing. This kind of photo was called a Daguerreotype. Soon, other people began to use Daguerre's way. Travelers brought back wonderful photos from all around the world. People took pictures of famous buildings, cities and mountains. In about 1840, photography was developed. Then photographers could take pictures of people and moving things. That was not simple. The photographers had to carry a lot of films and other machines. But this did not stop them, for example, some in the United States worked so hard. Mathew Brady was a famous American photographer. He took many pictures of great people. The pictures were unusual because they were very lifelike. Photography also became one kind of art by the end of the 19thcentury. Some photos were not just copies of the real world. They showed our feelings, like other kinds of art. This passage tells us _ . A) how photography was developed B) how to show you ideas and feelings in pictures C) how to take pictures in the world D) how to use different cameras
A: A