C

        A scientist working at her lab bench and a six-old baby playing with his food might seem to have little in common.After all,the scientist is engaged in serious research to uncover the very nature of the physical world,and the baby is,well, just playing…right? Perhaps,but some developmental psychologistshave argued that this“play”is  more like a scientific investigation than one might think.

Take a closerlookat the baby playing at the table.Each time the bowl of rice is pushed over the table edge,it falls in the ground—and, in the process, it belongs out important evidence about how physical objects interact ; bowls of rice do not flood in mid-sit, but require support to remain stable. It is likely that babies are not born knowing the basic fact of the universe; nor are they ever clearly taught it. Instead, babies may form an understanding of object support through repeated experiments and then build on this knowledge to learn even more about how objects interact. Though their ranges and tools differ, the baby's investigation and the scientist's experiment appear to share the same aim(to learn about the natural world ), overall approach (gathering direct evidence from the world), and logic (are my observations what I expected?).

Some psychologists suggest that young children learn about more than just the physical world in this way—that they investigate human psychology and the rules of language using similar means. For example, it may only be through repeated experiments, evidence gathering, and finally overturning a theory, that a baby will come to accept the idea that other people can have different views and desires from what he or she has. for example, unlike the child , Mommy actually doesn't like Dove chocolate.

Viewingchildhood development as a scientific investigation throws on how children learn ,but it also offers an inspiring look at science and scientists. Why do young children and scientists seem to be so much alike? Psychologists have suggested that science as an effort —the desire to explore, explain, and understand our world—is simply something that comes from our babyhood. Perhaps evolution provided human babies with curiosity and a natural drive to explain their worlds, and adult scientists simply make use of the same drive that served them as children. The same cognitive systems that make young children feel good about feel good about figuring something out may have been adopted by adult scientists. As some psychologists put it, ”It is not that children are little scientists but that scientists are big children.”

    Wondering where to watch the fireworks on the fourth Friday of July? Here are some restaurants where you can sit, grab a bite to eat and watch the show.

    The Roof on Wilshire offers a view of the city, so chances are that you'll be able to catch a fireworks show while you're up there. The restaurant will also offer an all-you-can-eat menu for $20 that includes all beef hot dogs and sweet potato chips. The festivities will take place from 2 to 11 pm. Reservations are recommended. 6317 Wilshire Blvd. Los Angeles, (323) 852-6002.

    Whiskey Red's is located in Marina Del Rey. Beginning at 5:30 pm, it will include live music from Jack of Hearts. The event is free and open to the public. Guests can make reservations from 5:30 to 10 pm. It costs $59 to reserve a seat on the patio(露台) and $49 for indoor seating. Kids aged 5 to 12 need $25 for a seat outside and $20 for an indoor seat. Kids aged four and below are free. 13813 Fiji Way, Marina Del Rey, (310) 823-4522.

    High Rooftop lounge in Venice at the top of the Hotel Erwin offers views of the Venice coastline. The fireworks show starts at 9 pm. The rooftop lounge (休息室) offers a full menu of cocktails and a selection of snacks. 1697 Pacific Avenue, Venice Beach, (800) 786-7789.

    The last one is Carbon Beach Club at the Malibu Inn. Here you can see fireworks from a seat on the restaurant's oceanfront balcony from 6 to 9:30 pm. Reservations are recommended. 22878 Pacific Coast Hwy, Malibu, (310) 456-6444.

    Robots make me nervous — especially the ones which seem to think for themselves. I was embarrassed to admit this till I heard that Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, felt the same way.

Gates said in an interview with the social networking and news website Reddit: "I am in the camp that is concerned about super intelligence. First the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent. That should be positive if we manage well. A few decades after that though the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern."

    Well, maybe I don't have to worry about my computer and kitchen equipment yet. After I use them I can always pull the plug. But in the future, machines might find a way to prevent us from switching them off. There's a terrible thought!

    Maybe the problem with computers too clever for us is not that they are evil like some we've seen in sci-fi movies. What could put us in danger is that they might be too efficient. That's what philosopher Nick Bostrom from Oxford University believes. He says that machines are indifferent to humans and in pursuit of their own goals, the destruction of people might be just additional damage. Bostrom gives us an example: A machine which might have as its only goal to produce as many paperclips as possible might look at human bodies as extra material for paperclips and go after you. Because it is, well, a machine, it would not take pity on you.

    It's a good thing that American writer Isaac Asimov thought about how far robots can go and left us his three rules of robotics. They state that a robot may not hurt a human being or allow the human being to come to harm.

I'm glad my machines at home are "dumb". All my cleaner wants to take over is the carpet in my living room. Let's hope they don't create an appliance which wants to take over the world!