The hottest“green”toy in Germany isn't made of organic or recycled materials.This one has a solar panel and only runs if kids remember to insert bright red “energy stones”that power the space station.Germany，a pioneer in many renewable energy initiatives，is also at the forefront of creating environment­friendly toys aimed at making kids think about where energy comes from and how much of it they can use，raising awareness through play.A number of high­tech green toys are on display at this year's Nuremberg toy fair，which runs through Sunday.

    Among them，there are hydroelectric­powered(水电动力的)toy cars，and doll houses with wind turbines and rainwater catchers.The bright green “Future Planet”space station features an inner atrium(中庭)with a fan that is powered by a functioning solar cell.Its aim is to get kids to use their imagination about how energy will be created in the future.

    Makers and retailers believe such toys will play an increasingly important role in their future—and that of our kids.“Energy is the question of the future and we are definitely thinking about this as we move ahead，”said Judith Schweinitz，a spokeswoman for Playmobil，maker of the solar panel­fitted space station.“It is increasingly being brought into our play concept.”Green toys—which range from those made of sustainable materials to ones like the space station that just raise environmental awareness—make up only a sliver of the $ 84 billion international toy market，but their share is growing，studies indicate.Environmental research firm Earthsense，based in Syracuse，New York，predicts that green toys will account for about $ 1 billion，or 5 percent of U．S.toy sales in the next five years.Parents are smart and they want information about what's in the product.That's what's really driving the market.

    As more and more schools rush to put digital devices（数码设备）in the hands of every student, many parents are becoming increasingly concerned about the quality of their children's education. The promise of increased student academic（学业上的）achievement through the use of technology hasn't produced any significant results in the past 20 years.

    Researchers at the University of California Los Angeles conducted a study in 2014 to determine if the social skills of elementary students were blocked by screen time. Two groups of sixth grade students were compared. One group was sent to an outdoor camp for one week with no screen time, while the control group live life as normal. After one week, the students at camp had made significant improvements over their peers（同龄人）. The good news is that when we limit access to screen time and give children the opportunity to interact face to face, they quickly become better at reading the emotional state of others. The bad news is that we have a generation of children that struggle with this basic emotional intelligence skill.

    Too much screen time has been linked to childhood obesity, sleep disorders, behavior problems, and academic challenges. But is there a difference between schoolwork and entertainment media?

    When students are using technology for academic work they are more likely to be communicating with peers, working cooperatively, and developing other important skills. However, all these are impossible when students watch entertainment media. They just sit and watch!

    Parents have right to be concerned about their children's screen time at school, but they should begin by discussing the use of digital media at home. Some parents are continuously engaged in their own devices, responding to every ring of their phones, receiving and sending messages. How can they expect their children to do better?

    Life can be so wonderful, full of adventure and joy. It can also be full of challenges, setbacks and heartbreaks. Whatever our circumstances, we generally still have dreams, hopes and desires —that little something more we want for ourselves and our loved ones. Yet knowing we can have more can also create a problem, because when we go to change the way we do things, up come the old patterns and pitfalls that stopped us from seeking what we wanted in the first place.

    This tension between what we feel we can have and "what were seemingly able to have is the niggling suffering, the anxiety we feel. This is where we usually think it's easier to just give up. But we're never meant to let go of the part of us that knows we can have more. The intelligence behind that knowing is us—the real us. It's the part that believes in life and its possibilities. If you drop that, you begin to feel a little "dead" inside because you're dropping "you".

    So, if we have this capability but somehow life seems to keep us stuck, how do we break these patterns?

    Decide on a new course and make one decision at a time. This is good advice for a new adventure or just getting through today's challenges.

    While, deep down, we know we can do it, our mind—or the minds of those close to us—usually says we can't.

    That isn't a reason to stop, it's just the mind, that little man or woman on your shoulder, trying to talk you out of something again. It has done it many times before. It's all about starting simple and doing it now.

    Decide and act before over-thinking. When you do this you may feel a little, or large, release from the jail of your mind and you'll be on your way.

A Letter that Changed My Life

    I was about 30 years old and was working as a firefighter in the South Bronx's Engine Co. 82. It was a restful Sunday and between alarms I rushed to the office to read a copy of the New York Times. I read an article on the Book Review section which openly stated what I took to be a calumny – that William Butler Yeats had gone beyond his Irishness and was forever to be known as a universal poet. As I read it, my blood began to boil.

    There were few things I was more proud of than my Irish heritage, and ever since I first picked up a book of his poems from a shelf when I was in the military, Yeats had been my favorite Irish writer, followed by Sean O'Casey and James Joyce.

    I grabbed a piece of paper and wrote out a letter of anger to the editor. Throughout Yeats' poetry, his view of the world and the people in it was basically Irish. He had lived his life and written his poetry through the very essence of his Irish sensibility. It was offensive to think Irishness was something to be transcended(超越).

    I don't know why I felt it my duty to safeguard the reputation of the world's greatest poet. I just knew that I had to write that letter.

    After my letter got published, I received a letter from The New Yorker, asking for an interview. When my article Fireman Smith appeared in that magazine, the editor of a large publishing firm called me, asking if I was interested in writing a book about my life. I had little confidence to write a whole book, though the subject was worthy. I wrote Report From Engine Co. 82 in six months, and it sold really well. In the years that followed, I wrote three more best-sellers.

    Being a writer had been far from my expectations. How had it happened? I often found myself thinking about it, and my thoughts always came back to that letter to the New York Times. For me, the writing was a natural consequence of the passion I felt and the subjects represented the great values burning within me as I wrote.

    Over the years, my five children have come to me with one dilemma or another. My answer is always the same. Think about what you're feeling and measure the heat of the fire in your heart, for that is your passion. Your education and your experience will guide you toward making a right decision, but your passion will enable you to make a difference in whatever you do. That's what I learned the day I stood up for Ireland's greatest poet.

    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.

    It's common knowledge that the woman in Leonardo da Vinci's most famous painting seems to look back at observers, following them with her eyes no matter where they stand in the room. But this common knowledge turns out wrong.

    A new study finds that the woman in the painting is actually looking out at an angle that's 15.4 degrees off to the observer's right­well outside of the range that people normally believe when they think someone is looking right at them. In other words, said the study author, Horstmann, "She's not looking at you." This is somewhat ironic, because the entire phenomenon of a person's gaze (凝视) in a photograph or painting seeming to follow the viewer is called the "Mona Lisa effect" . That effect is absolutely real, Horstmann said. If a person is illustrated or photographed looking straight ahead, even people viewing the portrait from an angle will feel they are being looked at. As long as the angle of the person's gaze is no more than about 5 degrees off to either side, the Mona Lisa effect occurs.

    This is important for human interaction with on-screen characters. If you want someone off to the right side of a room to feel that a person on-screen is looking at him or her, you don't cut the gaze of the character to that side­surprisingly, doing so would make an observer feel like the character isn't looking at anyone in the room at all. Instead, you keep the gaze straight ahead.

    Horstmann and his co-author were studying this effect for its application in the creation of artificial-intelligence avatars(虚拟头像) when Horstmann took a long look at the "Mona Lisa" and realized she wasn't looking at him.

    To make sure it wasn't just him, the researchers asked 24 people to view images of the "Mona Lisa" on a computer screen. They set a ruler between the viewer and the screen and asked the participants to note which number on the ruler intersected Mona Lisa's gaze. To calculate the angle of Mona Lisa's gaze as she looked at the viewer, they moved the ruler farther from or closer to the screen during the study. Consistently, the researchers found, participants judged that the woman in the "Mona Lisa" portrait was not looking straight at them, but slightly off to their right.

    So why do people repeat the belief that her eyes seem to follow the viewer? Horstmann isn't sure. It's possible, he said, that people have the desire to be looked at, so they think the woman is looking straight at them. Or maybe the people who first coined the term "Mona Lisa effect" just thought it was a cool name.