Doctors say anger can be an extremely harmful emotion, unless you learn how to deal with it. They warn that angry feeling can lead to heart disease, stomach problems, headaches, emotional problems and possibly cancer.

    Anger is a normal emotion that we all feel from time to time. Some people express anger openly in a calm, reasonable way. Others burst with anger, losing control of themselves. But still other people control their anger. They cannot or will not express it.

    For years many doctors thought that controlling one's anger was more dangerous to a person's health than expressing it. They said that when a person is angry, the brain lets out the same hormones that are produced during tense situations. They speed the heart rate, raise blood pressure, and narrow the blood vessels. In general, the person feels excited and ready to act.

    Doctors said that controlling these feelings only makes the feelings continue. And this can lead to many medical problems. Doctors thought a person could prevent these problems by letting the anger out by expressing it freely. But recently some doctors held a different view. They said that people who express anger too often and violently did become, in fact, more and not less angry. They said this, too, can cause medical problems.

    Some doctors say that both controlling and expressing anger can be dangerous. They believe that those who express anger strongly may be more likely to develop heart disease, and they believe that those who keep their anger inside may face a greater danger of high blood pressure.

    Doctors say the solution is learning how to deal with anger. They say the first step is to admit that you are angry and to recognize the real cause of the anger, then decide if the cause is serious enough to get angry about. If it is, they say, “Do not express your anger while angry. Wait until your anger has cooled down and you are able to express yourself calmly and reasonably.”

    Mountaineers have noted that as they climb, for example, up to the 12,633­foot Humphreys Peak in Arizona, plant life changes greatly. In the Sonoran Desert, one climbs into a pine forest at 7,000 feet and a treeless tundra(冻土带) on the top of the mountain. It may seem that plants at a given altitude are associated in what can be called “communities” －groupings of species. The idea is that over time, plants that require particular climate and soil conditions come to live in the same places, and are frequently to be found together. Scientists study the history of plant life and build up a picture of how groups of plants have responded to climate changes and how ecosystems develop. But are these associations, which are real in the present, permanent?

    A great natural experiment took place on this planet between 25,000 and 10,000 years ago, when small changes in the earth's orbit caused great sheets of ice to spread from poles. These glaciers(冰川) covered much of North America and Europe to depths of up to two miles, and then, as the climate warmed, they retreated. During this retreat, they left behind newly uncovered land for living things to occupy, and as those living things moved in they laid down a record we can read now. As the ice retreated and plants started to grow near a lake, they release pollen(花粉). Some would fall into the lake, sink to the bottom and mix with the sand. By drilling into the lake bottom it is possible to read the record of the plant life around the lake. The fossil record seems clear; there is little or no evidence that entire groups of plants moved north together. Things that lived together in the past don't live together now, and things that live together now didn't live together in the past. Each individual living things moved at its own pace. The fossil record seems to be telling us that we should be thinking about preserving species by giving them room to move about－to respond to environmental changes.

    Chinese writers seldom win a big prize in the world. One of those prizes is the Hans Christian Andersen Prize, the highest honor in the world that can be given to an author and an illustrator of children's books. No Chinese writer had ever won it, until April 4, 2016, when 62-year-old Cao Wenxuan received the prize. Cao received the honor at the Bologna Children's Book Fair in Italy.

    Patricia Aldana praised Cao's “deeply humanistic” books. These novels admit that life can be sad for children.

    Instilling children with good virtues for the sake of humankind is something that Cao stresses. He said, “It's time for us to alter our understanding of reading. Books should bring not only joy to young readers, but also have their ideas about life.”

    That feature of his works has touched many adults too. “The common choice of the judges, Cao writes beautifully about the lives of children facing great challenges,” said Aldana.

    After his success, Cao praised good translation for bringing attention to his work. Chinese children's literature could get high honor in the world if it were correctly translated in a style that could be easily understood, he said.

    Other writers, including Jin Bo, have also blamed poor translation as the reason why Chinese literature fails to get honor in the world. Jin was named for the Hans Christian Andersen Prize in 1992, but at that time, he had to translate, in a hurry, several paragraphs from his book to give to the judges. "On one hand, the jury has little knowledge of Chinese authors. On the other hand, it is we ourselves who didn't introduce our work and promote (促进) ourselves enough," he said in a class in 2013.

    One afternoon I toured an art museum while waiting for my husband to finish a business meeting. I was looking forward to a quiet view of the art works.

    A young couple viewing the paintings ahead of me chatted nonstop between themselves. I watched them a moment and decided the wife was doing all the talking. I admired his patience for putting up with her continuous talk. Distracted by their noise, I moved on.

    I met with them several times as I moved through the different rooms of art. Each time I heard her constant burst of words, I moved away quickly.

    I was standing at the counter of the museum gift shop making a purchase when the couple came near to the exit. Before they left, the man reached into his pocket and pulled out a white object. He extended it into a long stick and then tapped his way into the coatroom to get his wife's jacket.

    "He's a brave man.," the clerk at the counter said, "Most of us would give up if we were blinded at such a young age. During his recovery, he made a promise that his life wouldn't change. So, as before, he and his wife come in whenever there's a new art show."

    "But what does he get out of the art?" I asked. "He can't see."

    "Can't see? You're wrong. He sees a lot. More than you or I do," the clerk said. "His wife describes each painting so he can see it in his head."

    I learned something about patience, courage and love that day. I saw the patience of a young wife describing paintings to a person without sight and the courage of a husband who would not allow blindness to change his life. And I saw the love shared by two people as I watched this couple walk away.

    Despite what so many people would love to believe，NASA hasn't discovered any evidence of past or present intelligent life on Mars. Therefore, when the Curiosity rover  (好奇号探测器)found something suspicious on the Red Planet's surface, they were not only surprised but also a little bit worried.

    The thin fragment (碎片)was suspicious enough to guarantee its own name, with NASA's Curiosity rover team calling it the “Pettegrove Point Foreign Object Debris，” named for where it was discovered. With no idea what it was or where it came from, the rover's handlers began to worry that it might actually be a piece of the rover itself，suggesting some unseen damage or other issue with the robot. Thankfully，those concerns seem to have been unfound.

    In a new update from NASA the object has now been identified as a natural piece of rock rather than a piece of any man-made craft or vehicle. The team analyzed the unusual object with a tool called the Chem Cam RMI. The instrument uses a laser (激光器)to sniff out the makeup of anything that is pointed at, and the results for this particular piece of debris revealed that it's actually just a very thin piece of rock.

    NASA describes the inspection: The planning day began with an interesting result from the previous plan's Chem Cam RMI analysis of a target that was referred to as “Pettegrove Point Foreign Object Debris”(PPFOD)，and supposed to be a piece of spacecraft debris fact. In fact it was found to be a very thin slice of rock, so we can all rest easy tonight. Curiosity has not begun to shed its skin!

    How this particularly thin sliver of rock got to where it is—and why it seems to be a different colour than the surrounding sand and debris—remains unexplained, but at least the rover isn't falling apart.

    Just ask any new parent: Adding a baby to a household can also add stress to a career. Now, a new study backs that up with some astonishing numbers: After science, technology, engineering, and mathematics(STEM)professionals become parents, 43%of women and 23% of men switch fields, transition(转变)to part-time work, or leave the workforce entirely.

    Many researchers and parents already knew that STEM can be unwelcoming to parents, particularly mothers. But" the considerable departure was astonishing, "says Erin Cech, an assistant professor of sociology at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor and lead author of the study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. For both genders, "the proportions were higher than we expected."

    The surprisingly high reduction rate for men also highlights that" parenthood in STEM is not just a mothers' issue; it's a worker issue, "Cech says. She hopes that the findings" might motivate changes, "such as more paid parental leave from both government and employers and policies that better support flexible work time without a tight routine. "We are not suggesting that people who want families should avoid STEM; that's not the solution," she emphasizes.

    By 2018, 78% of new fathers were still working in STEM, the vast majority full time. For new mothers, 68% were still in STEM, but only 57% worked full time. For professionals without children, on the other hand, 84% of men and 76% of women were predicted to still be working in STEM full time in 2018. For the new parents across all fields, 16% of women were working part-time and 15% had left the workforce, as compared with just 2% and 3%, respectively, for men. These sharp differences make clear that, even though the reduction rate for fathers is higher than expected, mothers still face particular career challenges.