Men are spending more and more time in the kitchen encouraged by celebrity (名人) chefs like Gordon Ramsay and Jamie Oliver, according to a report from Oxford University.

    The effect of the celebrity role models, who have given cooking a more manly picture, has combined with a more general drive towards sexual equality and men now spend more than twice the amount of time preparing meals than they did in 1961.

    According to the research by Prof. Jonatahn Gershuny, who runs the Centre for Time Research at Oxford, men now spend more than half an hour a day cooking, up from just 12 minutes a day in 1961.

    Prof. Gershuny said, “The man in the kitchen is part of a much wider social trend. There has been 40 years of sexual equality, but there is another 40 years probably to come.”

    Women, who a generation ago spent nearly two hours a day cooking, now spend just one hour and seven minutes—a great fall, but they still spend far more time in the kitchen than men.

    Some experts have named these men in aprons as “Gastrosexuals (men using cooking skills to impress friends)”, who have been inspired to pick up a kitchen knife by the success of Ramsay, Oliver as well as other male celebrity chefs such as Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, Marco Pierre White and Keith Floyd.

     “I was married in 1974. When my father came to visit me a few weeks later, I was wearing an apron when I opened the door. He laughed,” said Prof. Gershuny. “That would never happen now.”

    Two-thirds of adults say that they come together to share at least three times a week, even if it is not necessarily around a kitchen or dining room table. Prof. Gershuny pointed out that the family meal was now rarely eaten by all of its members around a table—with many “family meals” in fact taken on the sofa in the sitting room, and shared by family members. “The family meal has changed a lot, and few of us eat—as I did when I was a child—at least two meals a day together as a family. But it has survived in a different format.”

    Last spring, I was fortunate to be chosen to join in an exchange study program. The moment I arrived in Paris, I was greeted by a nice French couple who would become my host parents. The bit of French I had taken in high school began coming out of my mouth; speaking the language would only become more natural over the course of the term. At the airport, we all got into the couple's car and began the journey to their townhouse. We talked the whole way, getting to know one another.

    Every day afterwards, I would eat breakfast with the two of them, and then we'd all go our separate ways for the day. In the evening, my host mother would make delicious dinners for the three of us. My experience was exciting until I received some shocking news from my program coordinator（协调人）: There had been a death in my host parents' family and they would have to go away for several weeks to deal with all the business that arises from the death. That afternoon, I had to move out of one family's house and into another.

    The coordinator told me I'd have a roommate and asked whether I would mind sharing a bedroom with an English speaker. To avoid speaking my native language, I asked not to be placed with an English-speaking roommate. When I got to my new room, I introduced myself to my new roommate Paolo, a Brazilian（巴西人）, the same age as I, whom I was surprised to find playing one of my favorite CDs on his computer! In just a few hours, we knew we'd be good friends for the rest of the term.

    I left France with many stories, so when people ask me what my favorite part of the trip was, they always hear about my Brazilian friend Paolo and the weekdays in class, weeknights on the town, and weekends exploring France we enjoyed together. I would recommend an exchange program to anyone who wants to experience foreign cultures and gain meaningful friendships.

    Welcome to your future life!

    You get up in the morning and look into the mirror. Your face is firm and young-looking. In 2035, medical technology is better than ever. Many people your age could live to be 150, so at 40, you're not old at all. And your parents just had an anti-aging(抗衰老的) treatment. Now, all three of look the same age!

    You say to your shirt, “Turn red.” It changes from blue to red. In 2035, “smart clothes” contain particles(粒子) much smaller than the cells in your body. The particles can be programmed to change clothes' color or pattern.

    You walk into the kitchen. You pick up the milk, but a voice says,“ You shouldn't drink that!” Your fridge has read the chip (芯片) that contains information about the milk , and it knows the milk is old . In 2035, every article of food in the grocery store has such a chip.

    It's time to go to work. In 2035, cars drive themselves. Just tell your “smart car” where to go. On the way, you can call a friend using your jacket sleeve. Such “smart technology” is all around you.

    So will all these things come true? “For new technology to succeed,” says scientist Andrew Zolli ,”it has to be so much better that it replaces what we have already.” The Internet is one example—what will be the next?

    Like many other people, I love my smart phone, which keeps me connected with the larger world that can go anywhere with me. I also love my laptop，because it holds all of my writing and thoughts. In spite of this love of technology, I know that there are times when I need to move away from these devices and truly communicate with others.

    On occasion, I teach a course called History Matters for a group of higher education managers. My goals for the class include a full discussion of historical themes and ideas. Because I want students to thoroughly study the materials and exchange their ideas with each other in the classroom, I have a rule —no laptop, iPads, phones, etc. When students were told my rule in advance of the class, some of them were not happy.

Most students assume that my reasons for this rule include unpleasant experiences in the past with students misusing technology. There's a bit of truth to that. Some students assume that I am anti-technology. There's no truth in that at all. I love technology and try to keep up with it, so I can relate to my students.

    The real reason why I ask students to leave technology at the door is that I think there are very few places in which we can have deep conversions and truly engage complex ideas. Interruptions by technology often break concentration and allow for too much dependence on outside information for ideas. I want students to dig deep within themselves for inspiration and ideas. I want them to push each other to think differently and make connections between the course materials and the class discussion.

I've been teaching my history class in this way for many years and the evaluations reflect student satisfaction with the environment that I create. Students realize that with deep conversation and challenge, they learn at a level that helps them keep the course materials beyond the classroom.

I'm not saying that I won't ever change my mind about technology use in my history class, but until I hear a really good reason for the change, I'm sticking to my plan. A few hours of technology-free dialogue is just too sweet to give up.

    Annette Larkins is an incredible woman who looks like a healthy 40-year-old, although she just turned 70. She follows a special raw diet and only drinks rainwater.

    She looks so young that people mistake her to be the daughter, when she's out with her husband of 54 years, but I suppose he isn't complaining.

    Mrs. Larkins says the secret to her beauty lies in her special diet, consisting of organic vegetables, fruits, seeds and nuts grown in her own garden; she calls it the "fountain of youth". The woman doesn't touch anything that has been cooked.

    And another strange thing she does is to collect rainwater, to keep her garden blossoming, but also to drink. But the residents of Miami-Dade County, Florida, didn't always have such a healthy lifestyle. In fact, she consumed meat regularly, as her husband used to own a meat factory way back in the 1960s. It was then that she decided to change her eating habits forever. And what a great decision that was. I mean, just look at her!

    When she started off, Mrs. Larkins was just looking for a few health benefits and never anticipated that she would look like a 40-year-old at the age of 70. Over the 27 years that she has been eating raw, Mrs. Larkins has written two booklets railed Journey to Health and also produced a DVD containing all her healthy secrets.

    Her husband, Mr. Larkins, wishes he had followed her example, because now he looks much, much older and also suffers from diabetes (糖尿病) and high blood pressure. He takes prescription medicine every day, but Annette doesn't even take an aspirin.

Many scientists today are convinced that life exists elsewhere in the universe—life probably much like that on our own planet. They reason in the following way.

    As far as astronomers can determine, the entire universe is built of the same matter. They have no reason to doubt that matter obeys the same laws in every part of the universe. Therefore, it is reasonable to guess that other stars, with their own planets, were born in the same way as our own solar system. What we know of life on earth suggests that life will arise wherever the proper conditions exist.

    Life requires the right amount and kind of atmosphere. This eliminates(除去) all those planets in the universe that are not about the same size and weight as the earth. A smaller planet would lose its atmosphere; a larger one would hold too much of it.

    Life also requires a steady supply of heat and light. This eliminates double stars, or stars that flare up suddenly. Only single stars that are steady sources of heat and light like our sun would qualify.

    Finally, life could evolve(进化) only if the planet is just the right distance from its sun. With a weaker sun than our own, the planet would have to be closer to it. With a stronger sun, it would have to be farther away.

    If we suppose that every star in the universe has a family of planets, then how many planets might support life? First, eliminate those stars that are not like our sun. Next eliminate most of their planets; they are either too far from or too close to their suns. Then eliminate all those planets which are not the same size and weight as the earth. Finally, remember that the proper conditions do not necessarily mean that life actually does exist on a planet. It may not have begun yet, or it may have already died out.

    This process of elimination seems to leave very few planets on which earthlike life might be found. However, even if life could exist on only one planet in a million, there are so many billions of planets that this would still leave a vast number on which life could exist.