- Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
- 1 2 3 4
- 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
- 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
- 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
- 26 27 28 29 30 31
Passage 1 小说
Liz’s biology professor sent an email asking her to meet。
meeting 之前的一堂三个小时的生物课，LIz 以为是自己最后一次上课，要和实验室里的各种设备say goodbye了。她觉得professor 是这种人：show her frustration with kindness. 当你打碎仪器的时候，她用很高的音调说“It’s okay”, 你打扫碎玻璃的时候她就在旁边，帮你看着哪里有没扫的玻璃，等你扫完了，扫帚放好了，她又看见了碎玻璃，会温柔地让你重新拿扫帚扫（呼应前文刻画的professor追求细节的个性）
课程结束了，Liz忐忑地等所有人走了，去找教授。professor 问她喜欢生物课吗？她说喜欢。问她的梦想是什么？LIz竟然为了讨好教授说相当科学家，但她真正的梦想是医生。故事真相是——教授又一个summer research position 想推荐liz 去.
“Make Your Home Among Strangers”
BY Capo Cruet
I scanned my mind for what this could be about. Had I left a supply closet or fridge unlocked? Had I open centrifuged one of the specimens she’d asked me to look at when it was supposed to be closed centrifuged? Had she glanced over my shoulder
at my class notes and seen the list of embarrassing questions only I seemed to have and which I’d scribbled under the heading Things to Look Up Later? I’d been so careful around her so far, hoping to make up for all the times I raised my hand and revealed how little I knew, all the times she caught me pretty much fondling the equipment —the elegant pipettes, the test tube racks that kept everything snug and in place, the magical autoclave incinerating all evidence of use and making everything perfect over and over again. It could’ve been any or all of these things: she was so smart that I was certain she’d put these observations together and conclude, long before I figured it out, that though I was eager and good at keeping contamination at bay, I wasn’t cut out for the hard sciences. I wrote her back, composing my e-mail in a word processing program first
to make sure the green squiggly line of grammar impropriety didn’t show up under every clause, and confirmed I could meet with her Monday at noon, right after class. She wrote back a cryptic, That will be more than fine.
The three hours of that week’s lab class felt like a goodbye. I stacked each petridish as if it were the last time I’d be allowed to handle those delicate circles of glass. I swished saline solution for longer than was needed, looked at the agar coating the bottom of plates as if its nutrients were intended for me and were about to be withheld. When a question popped into my head, I kept my hand down and didn’t even bother to write it in my notebook.
I watched Professor Kaufmann for clues all class but saw nothing, though she’d already proven herself good at masking frustration with kindness. You could drop an entire tray of beakers, and she would smile and in a too-high voice say, That’s OK! I sometimes thought I was the only one in the class who saw through her, could tell how very upset she was at all that shattered glass on the floor: I knew it from the way she’d
say Hmmm as she accosted the student culprit with a broom and stood over them, pointing out a missed shard here, a tiny speck there. She’d wait until they put the broom
away before noticing another piece, then instruct them to go back to the closet and bring the broom again.
I approached her lab bench once everyone had left. She was scribbling something
on some graph paper, and I glanced at what she wrote once I was closer. Whatever
it was, it was in German— probably not a good sign— and it was underneath a series
of equations that meant nothing to me and which were in no way related to our
—Liz! she said. Oh, super! Come here, please!
She stood and let me have her seat. I sat there for a good minute, watched her keep working as if she hadn’t just asked me to sit down. Her pen dug into the paper and I wondered if she had two brains—wondered if there were a way I could split my own mind like that, be in one place but let my mind hang out wherever it wanted.
She slapped the pen down on her notebook, and without even apologizing for the awkward three or so minutes we’d been right next to each other but not speaking, she said, Thank you for staying after class. I see you’re eager
to know what this is about.
—Yes, I said. I tried to keep my back straight; I found trying to maintain good posture more painful than just slouching. Even seated on her high stool, I was still looking up at her. I said, Is everything okay?
—Yes, of course. Thank you for asking.
I figured then that I should stop talking lest I incriminate myself, but she
smiled at me and nodded as if I’d kept speaking, as if I was saying something at that very
—Yes, so, she said. You are enjoying the lab so far?
—I love it, I blurted out. It’s my favorite class this semester.
—Super! she said. That’s super.
She nodded some more. After a few additional seconds of painful silence and sustained eye contact she asked, Are you interested in becoming a research
I thought I wanted to be a doctor, but that didn’t seem
like the right answer.
—Yes, I said. I am.
—Good, super. Because there is something you should do then, a program.
She slipped a hand beneath her pad of graph paper and slid out a glossy
folder. I closed my eyes, not wanting to look at it: here it was, the remedial program for
students needing extra help, forced in front of me like that list of campus resources I’d
printed out last semester as my only hope. The folder was white with a crimson stripe
down the front of it, a gold logo embossed at its center.
—This is connected to my research group. It’s a summer position at our field laboratory off the coast of Santa Barbara, in California. You would be perfect for it.
Passage 2 历史
a speech of franklin in 1787
Two passions of men that have great impact, 一种是ambition, 第二是the pursuit of money and power. If you show a man a post of power, 他会不遗余力地得到它。接着作者用英国政府中存在这样的职位竞争，导致conflict不断来支持前面的观点。（此处考了一道寻证题）
第二段以问题开头—是哪种人会不遗余力获取权力金钱呢？一定不是爱好和平，humble, patient这一类人；却是ambitious, 有欲望的人。
第三段讲the conflict between the governing and the governed, 人民越不想被统治，统治阶级对权力和金钱的需求和欲望越大，他要钱去讨好支持他的党派们以巩固自己的地位，钱肯定要从人民税收中来，这是主要矛盾点。
“A Speech that Benjamin Franklin delivered to the United States Constitution Convention”
BY Benjamin Franklin
And of what kind are the men that will strive for this profitable preeminence, through all the bustle of cabal, the heat of contention, the infinite mutual abuse of parties, tearing to pieces the best of characters? It will not be the wise and moderate, the lovers of peace and good order, the men fittest for the trust. It will be the bold and the violent, the men of strong passions and indefatigable activity in their selfish pursuits. These will thrust themselves into your government and be your rulers. And these, too, will be mistaken in the expected happiness of their situation, for their vanquished competitors, of the same spirit, and from the same motives, will perpetually be endeavoring to distress their administration, thwart their measures, and render them odious to the people.
Besides these evils, sir, tho we may set out in the beginning with moderate salaries, we shall find that such will not be of long continuance. Reasons will never be wanting for proposed augmentations; and there will always be a party for giving more to the rulers, that the rulers may be able, in return, to give more to them. Hence, as all history informs us, there has been in every state and kingdom a constant kind of warfare between the governing and the governed; the one striving to obtain more for its support, and the other to pay less. And this has alone occasioned great convulsions, actual civil wars, ending either in dethroning of the princes or enslaving of the people.
Generally, indeed, the ruling power carries its point, and we see the revenues of princes constantly increasing, and we see that they are never satisfied, but always in want of more. The more the people are discontented with the oppression of taxes, the greater need the prince has of money to distribute among his partizans, and pay the troops that are to suppress all resistance, and enable him to plunder at pleasure. There is scarce a king in a hundred who would not, if he could, follow the example of Pharaoh—get first all the people’s money, then all their lands, and then make them and their children servants for ever.
Passage 3 科学
“the greatest show on earth: the evidence of revolution”
一种名为ps 的动物，originally from 一个地方名为pk, 在另外一个叫PM 的地方是不存在的，1971年的时候，科学家把一部分ps 这种动物运到PM。2008年再比较两个物种的时候，科学家预测PM上的PS和PK上的PS是一样的。（紧接着后面的内容出了寻证题）但是这样推测是没有道理的，因为不管怎样这36年PK上的PS一定也是进化了的，有改变的。
There are two small islets off the Croatian coast called Pod Kopiste and Pod Mrcaru. In 1971 a population of common Mediterranean lizards, Podarcis sicula, which mainly eat insects, was present on Pod Kopiste but there were none on Pod Mrcaru. In that year experimenters transported five pairs of Podarcis sicula from Pod Kopiste and released them on Pod Mrcaru. Then, in 2008, another group of mainly Belgian scientists, associated with Anthony Herrel, visited the islands to see what had happened.
They found a flourishing population of lizards on Pod Mrcaru, which DNA analysis confirmed were indeed Podarcis sicula. These are presumed to have descended from the original five pairs that were transported. Herrel and his colleagues made observations on the descendants of the transported lizards,
and compared them with lizards living on the original ancestral island. There were marked differences.
The scientists made the probably justified assumption that the lizards on the ancestral island, Pod Kopiste, were unchanged representatives of the ancestral lizards of thirty-six years before. In other words, they presumed they were comparing the evolved lizards of Pod Mrcaru with their unevolved ‘ancestors’ (meaning their contemporaries but of ancestral type) on Pod Kopiste. Even if this presumption is wrong – even if, for example, the lizards of Pod Kopiste have been evolving just as fast as the lizards of Pod Mrcaru – we are still observing evolutionary divergence in nature, over a timescale of decades: the sort of timescale that humans can observe within one lifetime.
And what were the differences between the two island populations, differences that had taken a mere thirty-seven years or so to evolve?* Well, the Pod Mrcaru lizards – the ‘evolved’ population – had significantly larger heads than the ‘original’ Pod Kopiste population: longer, wider and taller heads. This translates into a markedly greater bite force. A change of this kind typically goes with a shift to a more vegetarian diet and, sure enough, the lizards of Pod Mrcaru eat significantly more plant material than the ‘ancestral’ type on Pod Kopiste. From the almost exclusive diet of insects (arthropods, in the terms of the graph opposite) still enjoyed by the modern Pod Kopiste population, the lizards on Pod Mrcaru had shifted to a largely vegetarian diet, especially in summer.
Why would an animal need a stronger bite when shifting to a vegetarian diet? Because plant, but not animal, cell walls are stiffened by cellulose. Herbivorous mammals like horses, cattle and elephants have great millstone-like teeth for grinding cellulose, quite different from the shearing teeth of carnivores and the needly teeth of insectivores. And they have massive jaw muscles, and correspondingly robust skulls
for the muscle attachments (think of the stout midline crest along the top of a gorilla’s skull).*
Vegetarians also have characteristic peculiarities of the gut. Animals generally can’t digest cellulose without the aid of bacteria or other micro-organisms, and many vertebrates set aside a blind alley in the gut called the caecum, which houses such bacteria and acts as a fermentation chamber (our appendix is a vestige of the larger caecum in our more vegetarian ancestors). The caecum, and other parts of the gut, can become quite elaborate in specialist herbivores. Carnivores usually have simpler guts than herbivores, and smaller too. Among the complications that become inserted in herbivore guts are things called caecal valves. Valves are incomplete partitions, sometimes muscular, which can serve to regulate or slow down the flow of material through the gut, or simply increase the surface area of the interior of the caecum. The picture on the left shows the caecum cut open in a related species of lizard which eats a lot of plant material. The valve is indicated by the arrow. Now, the fascinating thing is that, although caecal valves don’t normally occur in Podarcis sicula and are rare in the family to which it belongs, those valves have actually started to evolve in the population of P. sicula on Pod Mrcaru, the population that has, for only the past thirty-seven years, been evolving towards herbivory. The investigators discovered other evolutionary changes in the lizards of Pod Mrcaru. The population density increased, and the lizards ceased to defend territories in the way that the ‘ancestral’ population on Pod Kopiste did.
I should repeat that the only thing that is really exceptional about this whole story, and the reason I am telling it here, is that it all happened so extremely rapidly, in a matter of a few decades: evolution before our very eyes.
Passage 4 社科
The passage is adapted from Wray Herbert: On second thought: outsmarting your mind’s hard-wired habits.
后面的段落引用研究人员Adam Altman and Daniel Oppenheimer设计的三个实验证明上述结论，第一个实验是给被实验人1 dollar和1 susan B，让其对生活常用品，比如纸巾，笔等进行评估价值， 尽管两者在价值上相同，但是由于人们只对一美元熟悉，普遍对一美元的购买力赋予更高价值。
为了进一步证明的普遍性，实验人员给了被实验着2 dollars （现实中不存在）和2 shinges, 虽然2美元上印着美国开国元勋杰弗逊的头像，人们由于对其不熟悉，给予其的购买力价值相对较低。
第三个实验对人们对与熟悉度的偏好有个更进一步的验证。给予被实验人2组字体的物品清单，一组较为熟悉，另一组不清晰，被实验者做出了和上述两个实验相同的结果，这就是Adam Altman and Daniel Oppenheimer 提出的 fluency heuristic，强调familiarity导致人们习惯性赋予其较高价值。
文中引用了Adam Altman and Daniel Oppenheimer的文章：easy on the mind, easy on the money (psychonomic society)中的表格证明了熟悉度增加事物价值。
Princeton psychologist Daniel Oppenheimer and his New York University colleague Adam Alter believe that many of the economic decisions we make have little to do with objective value. Market choices have much more to do with the brain’s basic internal perception of the world and the way those perceptions shape our feelings of comfort and ease. In this view, even currency has no clear and absolute value within one national economy. Regardless of those numbers on bills and coins, money derives its true value at least in part from the individual mind. In a series of experiments, these two psychologists have been studying the marketplace cues that trigger psychological comfort or discomfort, and thus shape us as economic beings. They’ve found that our economic behavior is driven by the same fluency heuristic at work in the Moses illusion.
The basic idea is that it’s human nature to get anxious and wary when the world is strange or challenging. We’re more at ease around the familiar and comprehensible. Think back to the avalanche fatalities described in the introduction. Most of them happened in places familiar to the victims. That’s a version of the fluency bias, which is probably deep-wired from the days when the world was much more threatening. But the cues that signal us to be on guard in the modern social world—including the financial world—may not be obvious. Indeed, they may be almost undetectable at times. It’s these nuanced signals that the psychologists have been exploring in the lab.
Here’s an example of their work. Oppenheimer and Alter asked a group of volunteers to estimate how much of various commodities they could buy with a dollar. They were ordinary things like paper clips and gumballs and paper napkins. Some of the volunteers were given a regular old dollar bill, with George Washington on it, while others were given less familiar currency of the same value: a Susan B. Anthony $1 coin, for example. Invariably, the volunteers believed that the familiar old dollar bill was worth more—that it had more buying power—than the unusual currency.
That’s not logical, of course. But it was not a fluke. They got the same result when they gave some people a rare $2 bill and others two singles. It’s not as though people never see a $2 bill, and it does have Thomas Jefferson on it, after all. But just the slight unfamiliarity of the denomination was enough to make people devalue it. Why would this be? Oppenheimer and Alter believe this irrational behavior is rooted in our most fundamental mental processes: The world is full of stimuli of various kinds, some more familiar than others, and the brain is tuned to process the familiar ones rapidly, effortlessly, and intuitively. More difficult or alien cues require more mental work, more plodding deliberation; the brain switches to its more cautious and calculating style to be on the safe side. We intuitively know that familiar $1 bills are valuable items, but the dollar coin is an unknown commodity—and the difference shows just how hard it is for us to know the “value of a dollar.”
This is humbling to know. But there’s more. The psychologists wanted to see if the same cognitive bent shapes our perceptions and attitudes toward goods themselves, and they decided to use the typeface manipulation to find out. In this experiment, they gave everyone the same currency—the familiar dollar bill—but they made the commodities more or less accessible. Some of the “consumers” purchased the gumballs and paper clips from a form that was printed in a clear black font, while others had to select from a form printed in the difficult-to-read gray script—basically the same manipulation described before. The idea was to make the strangeness as subtle as possible, to reduce it to basic perception. Even at this most fundamental level, the differences shaped economic judgment: volunteers in the study consistently rated identical goods as less valuable when they came in an unfamiliar, cognitively challenging form.
Passage 5 科学双篇
Passage1：Robert Hazen的Genesis: The Scientific Quest for Life's Origin
在以前的知识体系下，DNA和Protein是鸡生蛋蛋生鸡的关系：DNA携带信息，protein制造和表达信息，根据对RNA的最新研究发现，RNA ribozymes可能同时具备这两项功能，由此产生了RNA World theory.
Passage 2：取自university of North Carolina School of Medicine的文章biochemists resurrect: molecular fossils: findings challenge the attempts about origins of life（发表在sciencedaily上）
其次，没有证据表明RNA ribozymes在几十亿年前存在。Carter教授使用最新技术进行了研究。人类基因密码由两大modern day enzymes族系转译。Carter教授发现这两大族系由共有的identical cores来产生molecular fossil， 教授将其命名为Urzymes. 并推断出此物质可能是古时早期生命信息的的存在状态。
“Molecular fossils: findings challenge the attempts about origins of life”
BY University of North Carolina School of Medicine
Now, research from UNC School of Medicine biochemist Charles Carter, PhD, appearing in the September 13 issue of the Journal of Biological Chemistry, offers an intriguing new view on how life began. Carter's work is based on lab experiments during which his team recreated ancient protein enzymes that likely played a vital role in helping create life on Earth. Carter's finding flies in the face of the widely-held theory that Ribonucleic Acid (RNA) self-replicated without the aid of simple proteins and eventually led to life as we know it.
In the early 1980s, researchers found that ribozymes -- RNA enzymes -- act as catalysts. It was evidence that RNA can be both the blueprints and the chemical catalysts that put those blueprints into action. This finding led to the "RNA World" hypothesis, which posits that RNA alone triggered the rise of life from a sea of molecules.
But for the hypothesis to be correct, ancient RNA catalysts would have had to copy multiple sets of RNA blueprints nearly as accurately as do modern-day enzymes. That's a hard sell; scientists calculate that it would take much longer than the age of the universe for randomly generated RNA molecules to evolve sufficiently to achieve the modern level of sophistication. Given Earth's age of 4.5 billion years, living systems run entirely by RNA could not have reproduced and evolved either fast or accurately enough to give rise to the vast biological complexity on Earth today.
"The RNA world hypothesis is extremely unlikely," said Carter. "It would take forever."
Moreover, there's no proof that such ribozymes even existed billions of years ago. To buttress the RNA World hypothesis, scientists use 21st century technology to create ribozymes that serve as catalysts. "But most of those synthetic ribozymes," Carter said, "bear little resemblance to anything anyone has ever isolated from a living system."
Carter, who has been an expert in ancient biochemistry for four decades, took a different approach. His experiments are deeply embedded in consensus biology.
Our genetic code is translated by two super-families of modern-day enzymes. Carter's research team created and superimposed digital three-dimensional versions of the two super-families to see how their structures aligned. Carter found that all the enzymes have virtually identical cores that can be extracted to produce "molecular fossils" he calls Urzymes -- Ur meaning earliest or original. The other parts, he said, are variations that were introduced later, as evolution unfolded.
These two Urzymes are as close as scientists have gotten to the actual ancient enzymes that would have populated Earth billions of years ago.
"Once we identified the core part of the enzyme, we cloned it and expressed it," Carter said. "Then we wanted to see if we could stabilize it and determine if it had any biochemical activity." They could and it did.
Both Urzymes are very good at accelerating the two reactions necessary to translate the genetic code.
"Our results suggest that there were very active protein enzymes very early in the generation of life, before there were organisms," Carter said. "And those enzymes were very much like the Urzymes we've made."
The finding also suggests that Urzymes evolved from even simpler ancestors -- tiny proteins called peptides. And over time those peptides co-evolved with RNA to give rise to more complex life forms.
In this "Peptide-RNA World" scenario, RNA would have contained the instructions for life while peptides would have accelerated key chemical reactions to carry out those instructions.
第一篇：Dickens takes the stage
第二篇：Fritz Pollard Beyond the Gridiron
第三篇：Why we still need mapmkers
第四篇：The art of a cat’s lap
而且，研究人员发现，lapping和猫科动物的质量mass成反比关系，体积越大，lapping越慢。比如，家猫每秒3.5-4次lapping, 而狮子是每秒1.5-2次。因为大体积的猫科动物，舌头较宽，形成的water column也会重，这时重力会起作用，导致掉落下来。
18道一次函数的题，考察形式和section 非常类似，包括应用题， 图表题，一元一次函数，二元一次；函数其中斜率的考察屡次出现
比例尺题： 地图上1inch represent 300feet, 面积是12的地图，当地图长宽都增加50%后，1inch 代表多少feet？
line of best fit考了两道，都以带图表的选择题形式出现。
文章作者是Eric Betz, 选自2015年Los Angeles Times的一篇文章, 名为 “Let There be (Less) Light”, 文章主要探讨了夜间光污染的问题. 文章的主旨在题目中的prompt中直接体现: “Cities must reduce light pollution”.
The essay gives you an opportunity to show how effectively you can read and comprehend a passage and write an essay nalyzing the passage. In your essay, you should demonstrate that you have read the passage carefully,present a clear and logical analysis, and use language precisely.Your essay must be written on the lines provided in your answer booklet;except for the Planning Page of the answer booklet, you will receive no other paper on which to write. You will have enough space if you write on every line,avoid wide margins, and keep your handwriting to a reasonable size. Remember that people who are not familiar with your handwriting will read what you write.Try to write or print so that what you are writing is legible to those readers.
1、Do not write your essay in this booklet. Only what you write on the lined pages of your answer booklet will be evaluated.
2、An off-topic essay will not be evaluated.
You have 50 minutes to read the passage and write an essay in response to the prompt provided inside this booklet.
As you read the passage below, consider how Eric Betz uses
? evidence, such as facts or examples, to support claims.
? reasoning to develop ideas and to connect claims and evidence.
? stylistic or persuasive elements, such as word choice or appeals to emotion,to add power to the ideas expressed.
Adapted from Eric Betz, “Let there be (less) light” ?2015 by the Los Angeles Times. Originally published August 16, 2015.
1、Looking out across Los Angeles from Mt. Wilson Observatory at night, the hills and mountains look like islands in a sea of light. It was here that Edwin Hubble first proved our universe was expanding at a rapid pace. From this vantage point you can still make out the major constellations, but drive into the light bubble and suddenly the cosmos feels awfully far away. The city shines so bright it blocks out the stars, a phenomenon known as "skyglow."
2、Light seeps into the sky from stadiums, malls, parking lots, offices and billboards. But streetlights, with their harsh bulbs, are the worst offenders. . . .
3、We intuitively assume that more lights mean less crime. Indeed, police are often taught that, second to more cops, good lighting is the best crime deterrent.
4、Yet decades of research show there's no scientific reason to believe that darker streets are inherently more dangerous. And, increasingly, researchers are finding that excess light is toxic for both humans and wildlife.
5、In one study, published July 28 in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, researchers examined 14 years of data from 62 local authorities across England and Wales, hunting for crime and collision trends among agencies that reduced their lighting.
6、But the health researchers found no link between collisions and lighting despite studying about 14,500 miles of roadways where streetlights were dimmed, lighted for only part of the night or shut off entirely. They also examined lighting's effect on crime and similarly found no increase in burglary, auto theft, robbery, violence or sexual assault in areas where lighting policy had changed.
7、The scientists published a companion study based on surveys of 520 people living in darkened areas. Many residents said they didn't even notice the dimming, let alone feel threatened by an uptick in crime.
8、Other studies back up these results. In 1998, for example, Chicago tried to fight crime with a three-phase plan that included upgrading 175,000 streetlights, as well as lights in transit stations and alleys around the city. The city kept experimental control areas unchanged and found that crime consistently increased in both the well-lighted and the control areas. Illinois criminal justice officials concluded that strolling down a dark alley was no more dangerous than doing so in a well-lighted one.
9、All this should make taxpayers uneasy. Last week, the Cities at Night project released a report estimating that the European Union alone spends about $7 billion annually to power streetlights.
10、But there's something much more troubling than wasted money about losing the night. A growing body of biological research suggests that nighttime lighting messes with the circadian rhythms of humans and other animals, wreaking havoc on everything from sleep patterns to DNA repair.
11、Studies have shown that nighttime light exposure is a risk factor for some cancers, diabetes, heart disease and obesity. As scientists continue to gather evidence, the American Medical Assn. has already recommended that cities reduce light pollution and that people avoid staring at electronic screens after dark.
12 LEDs are of particular concern. Cities around the world are converting from traditional yellow sodium-vapor lamps, which cast their light in a narrow range, to broad-spectrum LED streetlights. Los Angeles has installed 165,000 LEDs in recent years, slashing streetlight energy use by 60% and netting $8 million in energy savings annually.
13、The problem is that these bright lamps increase skyglow by emitting more blue light than the older technology. They also could have unintended effects on wildlife. Artificial lights can disrupt navigation, mating and feeding among the many nocturnal animals that share our cities.
14、A University of Bristol study published this month showed that certain moths can't perform evasive maneuvers against predatory bats under LEDs. And recent research in New Zealand shows some insects are 48% more attracted to the new LEDs than they were to the old-fashioned lights. The researchers worry that widespread use of the new technology will create a "white-light night" that intensifies light pollution's pressure on ecosystems.
15、The psychological loss is less measurable. . . .
16、What happens when people grow up without stars? Do they lose their connection to the cosmos that our ancestors tracked so carefully, night after night?