Did you know that something as simple as the wallpaper on your computer can tell people a lot about you? According to researcher Donna Dawson,our computers say something about what we're like because they are part of our “personal space.”

    A picture of a child or family on the screen often means the person cares deeply about their loved ones.A photo of the person surrounded by friends shows they value their popularity and probably work well with other people.On the other hand,pictures showing examples of past successes,like winning a prize may mean a person is only interested in themselves.

    Pictures of nature and natural scenery tell people that you are driven to succeed and use the pictures to relax and remove the pressure（压力）in your life.Cityscapes,pictures of cities or towns,show that you enjoy travel and adventure.Most people with cityscapes as their wallpaper are optimistic（乐观的）,happy people who feel even better thinking about the places they've visited or want to visit.

    Pictures of animals show that you are optimistic and kind-hearted.You are often happy and you enjoy life and act young.Cartoons（漫画）or drawings show that you are a multitasker,someone who does many things at once.You have many responsibilities,but you deal with them well.That's one reason you like having something to smile about when you look at your computer wallpaper.

    Then,what does plain blue wallpaper tell us about a person?According to Dawson,a person with plain blue wallpaper probably values their privacy and keeps work from becoming too personal,

    Diamonds are considered the most famous and valuable jewel in the world. The precious stone for its great value is believed to be the symbol of wealth. Diamonds were made as a result of great volcanic beat and pressure. When a volcano is active, it sometimes explodes and causes great damage to the nearby towns.

    However, at the same time of such a disaster, diamonds were pushed towards the surface of the earth by a number of great volcanic explosions millions of years ago. Thus, it may be very likely to find a diamond after a volcanic eruption. Besides, diamonds are also found among the sand and stones of certain river beds, and in a few places on the floor of the sea, for they were washed down the mountain sides by the rain.

    Diamonds are very rare. There are not many places that produce such precious things in the world. During the last century adventurers from Europe went to Brazil, because they had heard that there were diamonds in the River Amazon. Many of these early diamond miners died of illness or were lost forever in the great forests. But some returned home rich.

    The earliest known diamonds were found in India many centuries ago. The most recent and exciting discoveries have been made in eastern Russia. But most of the world's diamonds now come from the Congo, from Tanzania-which has the largest diamond mine in the world and also from South Africa.

    One day, I received a call from a colleague. He was about to give a student a zero for his answer to a physical problem， while the student claimed a perfect score. I was elected as their arbiter. I read the examination problem: “Show how it is possible to determine the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer(气压计).” The student had answered: “Take the barometer to the top of the building，attach a long rope to it，lower it to the street， and then bring it up, measuring the length of the rope. The length of it is the height of the building. ”

    The student had really answered the question completely, but the answer didn't confirm his competence in physics. I suggested the student try again. I gave him six minutes to answer the question, warning that the answer should show some knowledge of physics. Five minutes later, he said he had many answers and clashed off one, which read： “Take the barometer to the top of the building and lean over the edge of the roof. Drop the barometer, timing its fall with a stopwatch. Then, use the physical formula (公式）to calculate the height of the building. ”

    At this point, my colleague had to accept it, and then the student made almost full marks. I couldn't help asking the student what the other answers were. He listed many others ，and then added “Probably the best is to take the barometer to the administrator and said to him，' Sir, here is a fine barometer. If you tell me the height of the building, I will give it to you.，”

    Then, I asked the student if he really did not know the conventional answer to this question. He admitted that he did, but said that he was fed up with high school and college instructors trying to teach him how to think.

    The name of the student was Bohr who later was famous all over the world. He won the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1922.

    A month before my first marathon, one of my ankles was injured and this meant not running for two weeks, leaving me only two weeks to train. Yet, I was determined to go ahead.

    I remember back to my 7th year in school. In my first P.E. class, the teacher required us to run laps and then hit a softball. I didn't do either well. He later informed me that I was "not athletic".

    The idea that I was "not athletic" stuck with me for years. When I started running in my 30s, I realized running was a battle against myself, not about competition or whether or not I was athletic. It was all about the battle against my own body and mind. A test of wills!

    The night before my marathon, I dreamt that I couldn't even find the finish line. I woke up sweating and nervous, but ready to prove something to myself.

    Shortly after crossing the start line, my shoe laces(鞋带) became untied. So I stopped to readjust. Not the start I wanted!

    At mile 3, I passed a sign: "GO FOR IT, RUNNERS!"

    By mile 17, I became out of breath and the once injured ankle hurt badly. Despite the pain, I stayed the course walking a bit and then running again.

    By mile 21, I was starving!

    As I approached mile 23, I could see my wife waving a sign. She is my biggest fan. She never minded the alarm clock sounding at 4 a.m. or questioned my expenses on running.

    I was one of the final runners to finish. But I finished! And I got a medal. In fact, I got the same medal as the one that the guy who came in first place had.

    Determined to be myself, move forward, free of shame and worldly labels(世俗标签), I can now call myself a "marathon winner".

    Cooperation at work is generally seen as a good thing. The latest survey by the Financial Times of what employers want from MBA graduates found that the ability to work with a wide variety of people was what managers wanted most. But managers always have to balance the benefits of teamwork, which help ensure that everyone is working towards the same goal, with the dangers of “groupthink” when critics are reluctant to point out a plan's drawbacks for fear of being kept out of the group. The disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in 1961 was a classic case of groupthink. Skeptics were reluctant to challenge John F. Kennedy, the newly elected American president.

    Modern communication methods mean that cooperation is more frequent. Workers are constantly in touch with each other via e-mail messaging groups or mobile calls. But does that improve, or lower performance? A new study by three American academics, tried to answer this question. They set a logical problem (designing the shortest route for a travelling salesman visiting various cities). Three groups were involved: one where subjects acted independently; another where they saw the solutions posted by team members at every stage; and a third where they were kept informed of each other's views only intermittently.

    The survey found that members of the individualist group reached the premier solution more often than the constant cooperators but had a poorer average result. The intermittent cooperators found the right result as often as the individualists, and got a better average solution. When it comes to ideal generation, giving people a bit of space to a solution seems to be a good idea. Occasional cooperation can be a big help: most people have benefited from a colleague's brainwave or (just as often) wise advice to avoid a particular course of action.

    Further clues come from a book, Superminds, by Thomas Malone of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He says that three factors determine the collective intelligence of cooperating groups: social intelligence (how good people were at rating the emotional states of others); the extent to which members took part equally in conversation (the more equal, the better); and the cooperation of women in the group (the higher, the better). Groups ranked highly in these areas cooperated far better than others.

    In short, cooperation may be a useful tool but it doesn't work in every situation.

Colorado's grays peak rises 14,278 feet above sea level, high enough that trees can't grow toward the top, though there are plenty of shrubs and rocks. It was in this unforgiving landform that Bev Wedelstedt was unlucky enough to get seriously injured in her left knee.

It was August 2018, and Wedelstedt, 56, was on her way back down the trail with three friends. A storm was brewing, and they were anxious to get off the mountain. When they approached a rocky drop of a couple of feet, Wedelstedt decided to leap. She landed on her left leg. Then she heard the snap. Every step after that was agony（剧痛）. Before long, she had to stop. As one friend ran down to get help, a number of other hikers, all strangers, attempted to help Wedelstedt down the narrow trail by walking on either side of her to support her weight, but that proved slow and dangerous. "One man was so close to the edge that I could see rocks falling down from where he stepped on them." Wedelstedt says.

Finally, one hiker, Matt, asked her, "How do you feel about a fireman's carry?" Before she knew it, he had lifted her over his shoulder. "Now, I'm not tiny," says Wedelstedt, a former college basketball star. Matt clearly couldn't carry her all the way down by himself. So six hikers and one of her friends took turns carrying her while she tried to make light of a difficult situation: "I told them I wanted to meet a lot of guys, but this isn't the way I wanted to do it." Three hours and two rock-strewn miles later, this human conveyor belt finally met the medics, who took Wedelstedt to the hospital.

She stayed in hospital for a period time. Now she has mostly recovered from her ill-fated hike, but Wedelstedt knows she'll never shake one thing from that day: the memory of the band of strangers who came to her rescue. "I'm still in awe."