Television has turned 88 years old onSeptember 7, 2015, and it has never looked better. In its youth, television wasa piece of furniture with a tiny, round screen showing unclear pictures oflow-budget programs. In spite of its shortcomings, it became popular. Between1950 and 1963, the number of American families with a television jumped from 9%to 92% of the population.

    As the audience got larger, thetechnology got better. Television sets became more reliable through the 1960s.The reception (接收效果) improved. The picture improved. The major networks started broadcastingprograms in color.

    Even greater improvements were comingaccording to Sanford Brown, who wrote an article for the Post in 1967. Surprisingly, just about every prediction he made in the article became areality. For example: All sets in the not-distant future will be colorinstruments. He also predicted that TV sets would become smaller, simpler, morereliable and less expensive and may forever put the TV repairman out of work.Smaller sets do not, of course, mean smaller screens. TV engineers expectscreens to get much bigger. However, today's 3-D TV is even farther away, if it's coming at all. There is some doubt whether the public would be eager topay for it, in view of people's cold reception given to 3-D movies.

    But the technology with the greatestpotential, according to Brown, was cable television (有线电视), whichwas still in its early stages then. As he predicted, the future of cabletelevision was highly interactive (互动的). It wasn't cable television that gaveAmericans their electronic connection to the world, however. It was theInternet. He even foresaw the future office: using picture phones, big-screentelevisions for conferences, and computers providing information at the touchof a button.

    Brown ever said, “The future oftelevision is no longer a question of what we can invent. It's a question ofwhat we want.”

    It is good to get in touch with your inner child from time to time，and obviously some people are willing to pay big money for the chance to do so in a proper environment．A Brooklyn-based adult preschool is charging customers between $333 and $999 for the chance to act like a kid again．

At Preschool Mastermind in New York adults get to participate in show—and—tell，arts—and—crafts such as finger paint，games like musical chairs and even take naps．The month-long course also has class picture day where the adults are expected to have a field trip and a parent day.30-year-old Michelle Joni Lapidos，the brain behind the adult preschool，studied childhood education and has always wanted to be a preschool teacher．She's always on the lookout for new ways to get people in touch with the freedom of childhood．A friend encouraged her to start the mastermind course instead．

    According to Candice，her blogger friend，Preschool Mastermind gives adults a chance to relearn and master the things that they failed to understand as children．“I realized all the significances of what we learn in preschool，”said founder Michelle Joni，“People come here and get in touch with their inner child．It's magical．We are bringing ourselves back to another place，another time with ourselves when we are more believing in ourselves，more confident and ready to take on the world.”

    “One person's here because they want to learn not to be so serious．”Michelle said．“Another's here to learn to be more confident.” She explained that most of the classes were planned．However，Joni added that while the planned activities were fun，it was often the spontaneous(自发的)moments that attracted students．“It's the things you don't plan for，the sharing between friends and learning from each other.''

    A team of engineers at Harvard University has been inspired by Nature to create the first robotic fly. The mechanical fly has become a platform for a series of new high-tech integrated systems. Designed to do what a fly does naturally, the tiny machine is the size of a fat housefly. Its mini wings allow it to stay in the air and perform controlled flight tasks.

    “It's extremely important for us to think about this as a whole system and not just the sum of a bunch of individual components (元件),” said Robert Wood, the Harvard engineering professor who has been working on the robotic fly project for over a decade. A few years ago, his team got the go-ahead to start piecing together the components. “The added difficulty with a project like this is that actually none of those components are off the shelf and so we have to develop them all on our own,” he said.

    They engineered a series of systems to start and drive the robotic fly. “The seemingly simple system which just moves the wings has a number of interdependencies on the individual components, each of which individually has to perform well, but then has to be matched well to everything it's connected to,” said Wood. The flight device was built into a set of power, computation, sensing and control systems. Wood says the success of the project proves that the flying robot with these tiny components can be built and manufactured.

    While this first robotic flyer is linked to a small, off-board power source, the goal is eventually to equip it with a built-in power source, so that it might someday perform data-gathering work at rescue sites, in farmers' fields or on the battlefield. “Basically it should be able to take off, land and fly around,” he said.

    Wood says the design offers a new way to study flight mechanics and control at insect-scale. Yet, the power, sensing and computation technologies on board could have much broader applications. “You can start thinking about using them to answer open scientific questions, you know, to study biology in ways that would be difficult with the animals, but using these robots instead,” he said. “So there are a lot of technologies and open interesting scientific questions that are really what drives us on a day to day basis.”

    Believe it or not, the size of the human brain has become smaller over the past 20,000 years. Scientists argue over whether this means we are becoming more or less intelligent as a species.

    “I'd call that a major downsizing in an evolutionary eye blink (眨眼),” John Hawks told Discover magazine.

    Why is the brain becoming smaller?

    There are different theories to explain it. One is that tens of thousands of years ago, before the decline began, to survive in cold and dangerous conditions, humans needed a stronger and larger body and therefore, a larger head. Also they had to chew the tough meat of rabbits, foxes and horses. As conditions improved, the brain stopped growing, according to supporters of this theory.

    Another theory comes from a recent study by David Geary and Drew Bailey. They found that brain size decreased as population density(密度) increased.

    “As complex societies appeared, the brain became smaller because people did not have to be as smart to stay alive.” Geary told AFP.

    But smaller brain size does not necessarily mean that modern humans are less smart than their ancestors. “Modern humans simply developed different, more complex forms of intelligence,” said Brian Hare.

    Hare's studies focus on two types of great apes: chimpanzees and bonobos. Both are much like humans, but are physically quite different from one another. The bonobo has a smaller brain than the chimpanzee, and is also much less aggressive and more tolerant.

    “When it comes to working out a problem,” Hare said, “chimpanzees are much less likely to accomplish it if it involves working together. Not so with bonobos.”

The smaller brain in modern humans may be evidence that we can cooperate,” Hare told the US National Public Radio.

    It's really true what people say about English politeness: it's everywhere. When squeezing past someone in a narrow aisle, people say "sorry". When getting off a bus, English passengers say "thank you" rather than the driver. In Germany, people would never dream of doing these things. After all, squeezing past others is sometimes inevitable, and the bus driver is merely doing his job. I used to think the same way, without questioning it, until I started travelling to the British Isles and came to appreciate some more polite ways of interacting with people.

    People thank each other everywhere in England, all the time. When people buy something in a shop, customer and shop assistant in most cases thank each other twice or more. In Germany, it would be unusual to hear more than one thank you in such a conversation. British students thank their lecturers when leaving the room. English employers thank their employees for doing their jobs, as opposed to Germans.

    Another thing I observed during my stay was that English people rarely criticize others. Even when I was working and mistakes were pointed out to me, my employers emphasized several times but none of their explanations were intended as criticism. It has been my impression that by avoiding criticism, English people are making an effort to make others feel comfortable. This also is showed in other ways. British men still open doors for women, and British men are more likely to treat women to a meal than German men.

    Boomerang children who return to live with their parents after university can be good for families, leading to closer, more supportive relationships and increased contact between the generations, a study has found.

    The findings contradict research published earlier this year showing that returning adult children trigger a significant decline in their parents' quality of life and wellbeing.

    The young adults taking part in the study were "more positive than might have been expected about moving back home—the shame is reduced as so many of their peers are in the same position, and they acknowledged the benefits of their parents' financial and emotional support. Daughters were happier than sons, often slipping back easily into teenage patterns of behaviour, the study found.

    Parents on the whole were more uncertain, expressing concern about the likely duration of the arrangement and how to manage it. But they acknowledged that things were different for graduates today, who leave university with huge debts and fewer job opportunities.

    The families featured in the study were middle-class and tended to view the achievement of adult independence for their children as a "family project". Parents accepted that their children required support as university students and then as graduates returning home, as they tried to find jobs paying enough to enable them to move out and get on the housing ladder.

    "However", the study says, "day-to-day tensions about the prospects of achieving different dimensions of independence, which in a few extreme cases came close to conflict, characterised the experience of a majority of parents and a little over half the graduates".

    Areas of disagreement included chores, money and social life. While parents were keen to help, they also wanted different relationships from those they had with their own parents, and continuing to support their adult children allowed them to remain close.