Lots of people find it hard to get up in the morning and put the blame on the alarm clock. In fact, the key to easy morning wake-up lies in resting your body clock{#blank#}1{#/blank#} Here is how to make one.

    ● {#blank#}2{#/blank#} In order to make a change, you need to decide why it's important. Do you want to get up in time to have breakfast with your family, get in some exercise, or just be better prepared for your day? Once you are clear about your reason, tell your family or roommates about the change you want to make.

    ● Rethink mornings. Now that you know why you want to wake up, consider re-arranging your morning activities. If you want time to have breakfast with your family, save some time the night before by setting out clothes, shoes, and bags.{#blank#}3{#/blank#}That's a quarter-hour more you could be sleeping if you bought a coffee maker with a timer.

    ● Keep your sleep/wake schedule on weekends. If you're tired out by Friday night, sleeping in on Saturday could sound wonderful. But compensating on the weekends actually feeds into your sleepiness the following week, a recent study found. {#blank#}4{#/blank#}

    ● Keep a record and evaluate it weekly. Keep track of your efforts and write down how you feel. After you've tried a new method for a week, take a look at your record.{#blank#}5{#/blank#}If not, take another look at other methods you could try.

    Part of the fun of watching sports events is following an exciting rivalry (竞争关系).

    But where do all these rivalries come from?

    Some rivalries start because athletes spend a lot of time close to opponents (对手).

    Other rivalries get personal. Things that one rival says that are thought to be not respectful to the other can cause a rivalry, even if the words are misunderstood. And sometimes, rivalries grow just because the athletes don't like each other's personalities.

    Some sports may also be more likely than others to cause rivalries. “Some sports only meet a few times, so there is less chance for rivalries to build,” For example, in sports where athletes perform on their own, such as diving, rivalries might also take longer to appear than in sports in which athletes compete at the same time. But in tennis, players often face each other, and rivalries are more likely to happen.

    So do the rivalries do good or harm to the athletes?

    Some believe that rivalries can be a good thing because they encourage athletes to try harder to win. But rivalries can also become too personal, taking athletes' attention away from their sports.

    Keegan agreed that rivalries often do athletes more harm than good. “They can be a huge distraction (分散注意力的事) and lead to focusing on the opponent more than the game,” he said.

    “Top athletes often have physical and mental training that they follow in order to worry less and prepare to compete”, Gould further explained. An important part of that preparation is preventing from distractions, including rivalries.

    “The better athletes don't care too much about a rivalry – they try to treat every competition the same,” Gould told LiveScience.

    Bad news sells.If it bleeds,it leads.No news is good news,and good news is no news.Those are "the classic rules for the evening broadcasts and the morning papers.But now that information is being spread amt monitored（监控）in different ways,researchers are discovering new rules.By tracking people's e-mails and online posts,scientists have found that good news can spread faster and farther than disasters and sob stories.

    "The ‘if it bleeds 'rule works for mass media,"says Jonah Berger,a scholar at the University of Pennsylvania. "They want your eyeballs and don't care how you're feeling.But when you share a story with your friends,you care a lot more how they react.You don't want them to think of you as a Debbie Downer."

    Researchers analyzing word-of-mouth communication—e-mails,Web posts and reviews,face-to-face conversations—found that it tended to be more positive than negative,but that didn't necessarily mean people preferred positive news.Was positive news shared more often simply because people experienced more good things than bad things?To test for that possibility,Dr.Berger looked at how people spread a particular set of news stories: thousands of articles on The New York Times' website.He and a Penn colleague analyzed the "most e-mailed" list for six months.One of his first findings was that articles in the science section were much more likely to make the list than non-science articles.He found that science amazed Times' readers and made them want to share this positive feeling with others.

    Readers also tended to share articles that were exciting or funny,or that inspired negative feelings like anger or anxiety,but not articles that left them merely sad.They needed to be aroused（激发）one way or the other,and they preferred good news to bad.The more positive an article,the more likely it was to be shared as Dr.Berger explains in his new book,"Contagious: Why Things Catch On."

Life in the Clear

Transparent animals let light pass through their bodies the same way light passes through a window. These animals typically live between the surface of the ocean and a depth of about 3,300 feet—as far as most light can reach. Most of them are extremely delicate and can be damaged by a simple touch. Sonke Johnsen, a scientist in biology, says, "These animals live through their life alone. They never touch anything unless they're eating it, or unless something is eating them."

And they are as clear as glass. How does an animal become see-through? It's trickier than you might think.

    The objects around you are visible because they interact with light. Light typically travels in a straight line. But some materials slow and scatter (散射) light, bouncing it away from its original path. Others absorb light, stopping it dead in its tracks. Both scattering and absorption make an object look different from other objects around it, so you can see it easily.

    But a transparent object doesn't absorb or scatter light, at least not very much. Light can pass through it without bending or stopping. That means a transparent object doesn't look very different from the surrounding air or water. You don't see it you see the things behind it.

    To become transparent, an animal needs to keep its body from absorbing or scattering light. Living materials can stop light because they contain pigments (色素) that absorb specific colors of light. But a transparent animal doesn't have pigments, so its tissues won't absorb light. According to Johnsen, avoiding absorption is actually easy. The real challenge is preventing light from scattering.

Animals are built of many different materials—skin, fat, and more—and light moves through each at a different speed. Every time light moves into a material with a new speed, it bends and scatters. Transparent animals use different tricks to fight scattering. Some animals are simply very small or extremely flat. Without much tissue to scatter light, it is easier to be see-through. Others build a large, clear mass of non-living jelly-like (果冻状的) material and spread themselves over it.

    Larger transparent animals have the biggest challenge, because they have to make all the different tissues in their bodies slow down light exactly as much as water does. They need to look uniform. But how they're doing it is still unknown. One thing is clear: for these larger animals, staying transparent is an active process. When they die, they turn a non-transparent milky white.

    Christmas is a time for eating great food, giving and receiving presents, and most importantly spending time with your family watching some classic Christmas movies.

The Grinch (2000)

    This is a Christmas must-watch and one of Jim Carrey's best performances. It was also originally a nursery tale book written by Dr Seuss. It's the story of a green monster who wants to ruin Christmas but who in the end discovers the power of love and generosity. I promise it's a great film with plenty of laughs along the way.

    Love Actually (2003)

    While this is not a personal favourite of mine, people in the UK absolutely love this film. It has many featuring actors and actresses. It might be a little difficult to follow as there are complex plots, so I recommend watching a translated version or enabling subtitles (字幕) in your native language. However, the heart-warming elements of the film make it worth watching.

    Home Alone (1990)

    This amusing masterwork is one of my favourite films of all time. It tells the story of a boy, Kevin, who is left alone in his house when his large family forgets to take him on vacation with them. While the families are away, burglars try to rob the house and Kevin must protect his home by setting traps. The trips, falls and traps will have you laughing out loud as you watch a 10-year-old boy beat two grown men.

    Miracle on 34th Street (1994)

    You can't have Christmas in an English-speaking country without watching this movie. It's not funny like Home Alone or The Grinch, but it is incredibly touching. It's about a man who claims to be Santa, but nobody believes him except a lawyer and a little girl. The story-line may seem a little childish but you can enjoy it at any age.

    When a driver slams on the brakes to avoid hitting a pedestrian crossing the road illegally, she is making a moral decision that shifts risk from the pedestrian to the people in the car. Self-driving cars might soon have to make such ethical (道德的)judgments on their own — but settling on a universal moral code for the vehicles could be a tough task, suggests a survey.

    The largest ever survey of machine ethics, called the Moral Machine, laid out 13 possible situations in which someone's death was unavoidable. Respondents were asked to choose who to spare in situations that involved a mix of variables: young or old, rich or poor, more people or fewer. Within 18 months, the online quiz had recorded 40 million decisions made by people from 233 countries and territories.

    When the researchers analyzed these answers, they found that the nations could be divided into three groups. One contains North America and several European nations where Christianity has been the dominant (占支配地位的)religion; another includes countries such as Japan, Indonesia and Pakistan, with strong Confucian or Islamic traditions. A third group consists of countries in Central and South America, such as Colombia and Brazil. The first group showed a stronger preference for sacrificing older lives to save younger ones than did the second group, for example.

    The researchers also identified relationships between social and economic factors in a country. They found that people from relatively wealthy countries with strong institutions, such as Finland and Japan, more often chose to hit people who stepped into traffic illegally than did respondents in nations with weaker institutions, such as Nigeria or Pakistan.

    People rarely face such moral dilemmas, and some cities question whether the possible situations posed in the online quiz are relevant to the ethical and practical questions surrounding driverless cars. But the researchers argue that the findings reveal cultural differences that governments and makers of self-driving cars must take into account if they want the vehicles to gain public acceptance.

    At least Barbara Wage, who heads a group working on autonomous-vehicle ethics at Audi in Ingolstadt, Germany, says such studies are valuable. Wage argues that self-driving cars would cause fewer accidents, proportionally, than human drivers do each year—but that people might focus more on events involving robots.

    Surveys such as the Moral Machine can help to begin public discussions about these unavoidable accidents that might develop trust. "We need to come up with a social consensus," she says, "about which risks we are willing to take."