Living among trees, plants and flowers can fill your life with beauty. And if you are a woman, it can also help you live longer. Researchers found that women who live in homes surrounded by plants appear to have lower death rates than women who live in areas with fewer plants.

    Researchers at Harvard University's T.H. Chan School of Public Health reported the finding. They looked at the information from one of the largest and oldest investigations of the women's health: the Nurse's Health Study. It began 40 years ago. It now has information on nearly 200,000 women.

    For the new study, the team looked at the death rates of more than 100,000 women between the years 2000 and 2008. Then the researchers compared the death rates of these women to the plants around their homes. The researchers also considered other things, such as the age of the women, money they earn and race. They also looked at whether or not the women smoked.

    The study found that the death rate among women who lived in the greenest spaces was 12% lower than those from the least green areas. The researchers were surprised to find such a strong connection between high vegetation levels and low death rates.

    The study suggested that living among trees, flowers and other plants lowered levels of depression. Researchers said women in greener areas spent more time with other people and exercised more. It is common knowledge that plants can help the environment in many ways. The new finding also suggested ways to the government and the city planners to grow even healthier living areas.

    Are you a problem shopper? The answer is “Yes”, if you or someone else thinks that you sometimes get carried away with shopping. In other words, do you or does someone else think you are occupied in extreme shopping? If people have regrets later about their shopping, or have an “out-of-control” feeling about the quantities of what they buy or the amount of credit they use, they may be considered to be problem shoppers.

    Extreme shopping can lead to a more serious problem — addictive shopping. Addictive shoppers feel driven by the desire to shop and spend money. They experience great tension which drives them to shop and spend money and they feel a “rush” during the time they are occupied with the shopping activity.

    Extreme or addictive shopping may result from long-time unpleasant feelings, of which anxiety, pain and shame are common ones. When we feel bad inside, we often do something to make ourselves feel better. In this case, we often go shopping.

    A few people shop to relieve their boredom or emptiness. For some people, the motivation is a desire for status, power, beauty or success. Some love to shop as it makes them feel valued in the eyes of the shop assistants. Others shop simply because it makes them forget, at least temporarily, tension, fear or unhappiness in their life.

    Besides, shopping malls are designed to encourage continual shopping. For instance, there are some malls where you can't see clocks displaying the time because they don't want you to become too aware of the time you spend there. What's more, food courts, coffee shops and restrooms are provided, so you don't have to leave the mall because of your physical needs.

    Therefore, once you become aware of how market forces work, you will certainly come to control your shopping behavior. For example, how much time you will spend and what areas you will visit can be decided before you enter the mall. Keep a written account of what items you will buy and how much money you will spend. Make a plan for what you are going to buy before you feel the urge to shop and then stick to it. That is vital for gaining self-control.

    In its early history, Chicago had floods frequently, especially in the spring, making the streets so muddy that people, horses, and carts got stuck. An old joke that was popular at the time went something like this: A man is stuck up to his waist in a muddy Chicago street. Asked if he needs help, he replies,“No, thanks. I've got a good horse under me.”

    The city planners decided to build an underground drainage(排水) system, but there simply wasn't enough difference between the height of the ground level and the water level. The only two options were to lower the Chicago River or raise the city.

    An engineer named Ellis Chesbrough convinced the city that it had no choice but to build the pipes above ground and then cover them with dirt. This raised the level of the city's streets by as much as 12 feet.

    This of course created a new problem: dirt practically buried the first floors of every building in Chicago. Building owners were faced with a choice: either change the first floors of their buildings into basements, and the second stories into main floors, or hoist the entire bulidings to meet the new street level. Small wood-frame buildings could be lifted fairly easily. But what about large, heavy structures like the Tremont Hotel, which was a six-story brick building?

    That's where George Pullman came in. He had developed some house-moving skills successfully. To lift a big structure like Tremont Hotel, Pullman would place thousands of jackscrews(螺旋千斤顶) beneath the building's foundation. One man was assigned to operate each section of roughly 10 jackscrews. At Pullman's signal each man turned his jackscrew the same amount at the same time, thereby raising the building slowly and evenly. Astonishingly, the Tremont Hotel stayed open during the entire operation, and many of its guests didn't even notice anything was happening.

    Some people like to say that every problem has a solution. But in Chicago's early history, every engineering solution seemed to create a new problem. Now that Chicago's waste water was draining efficiently into the Chicago River, the city's next step was to clean the polluted river.

    We all think plants were expected to get larger with increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but changes in temperature, humidity(湿度)and nutrient availability seem to have trumped the benefits of increased carbon dioxide" said researchers from the National University of Singapore.

    45 percent of the species studied now reach smaller adult sizes than they did in the past. The researchers pointed out that warmer temperatures and changing habitats, caused by climate change, are possible reasons for shrinking creatures.

    " We do not yet know the mechanisms(机制)involved, or why some organism are getting smaller while others are unaffected," the researchers said. "Until we understand more, we could be risking negative consequences that we can't yet quantify."

    The change is big in cold-blooded animals. Only two decades of warmer temperatures are enough to make retiles (爬行动物)smaller. An increase of only 1 degree centigrade caused nearly a 10 percent increase in metabolism(新陈代谢). Greater use of energy resulted in tiny tortoises and little lizards. Fish are smaller now too. Though overfishing has played a part in reducing numbers, experiments show that warmer temperatures also stop fish growing.

    Warm-blooded animals aren't immune(免除)from the size change caused by climate change. Many birds are now smaller. Soay sheep are thinner. Red deer are weaken And polar bears are smaller, compared with historical records.

    This is not the first time this has happened in Earth's history. 55 million years ago, a warming event similar to the current climate change caused bees, spiders and ants to shrink by 50 to 75 percent over several thousand years. That event happened over a longer time than the current climate change.

    The speed of modem climate change could mean organisms may not respond or adapt quickly enough, especially those with long generation times climate change will be shown in the future.

    Oh, the places you'll go!

    When it comes to habitat, human beings are creatures of habit. It has been known for a long time that, whether his habitat is a village, a city or, for real globe-trotters (周游世界者), the planet itself, an individual person generally visits the same places regularly. The details, though, have been surprisingly obscure. Now, thanks to an analysis of data collected from 40,000 smartphone users around the world, a new property of humanity's locomotive (移动的) habits has been revealed.

    It turns out that someone's "location capacity", the number of places which he or she visits regularly, remains constant over periods of months and years. What constitutes a "place" depends on what distance between two places makes them separate. But analyzing movement patterns helps illuminate the distinction and the researchers found that the average location capacity was 25. If a new location does make its way into the set of places an individual tends to visit, an old one drops out in response. People do not, in other words, gather places like collector cards. Rather, they cycle through them. Their geographical behavior is limited and predictable, not fancy-free.

    The study demonstrating this, just published in Nature Human Behavior, does not offer any explanation for the limited location capacity it measures. But a statistical analysis carried out by the authors shows that it cannot be explained solely by constraints on time. Some other factor is at work. One of the researchers draws an analogy. He suggests that people's cognitive capacity limits the number of places they can visit routinely, just as it limits the number of other people an individual can routinely socialize with. That socialization figure, about 150 for most people, is known as the Dunbar number, after its discoverer, Robin Dunbar.

    Lehmann says his group is now in search of similar data from other primates (灵长目动物), in an attempt to work out where human patterns of mobility have their roots. For those, though, they will have to rely on old-fashioned methods of zoological observation unless they can work out a way to get chimpanzees to carry smartphones.