何毓琦的个人博客分享 http://blog.sciencenet.cn/u/何毓琦 哈佛(1961-2001) 清华(2001-date)

留言板

facelist

您需要登录后才可以留言 登录 | 注册


[217]吴中祥   2017-2-12 09:37
   你好!请予指正、讨论!
  
[216]魏焱明   2016-9-28 04:47
歡迎砥礪我的新作
我發動了科學史上的秋收起義--碩果累累的金秋 http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-2339914-1005320.html
[215]LairdUnlimited   2016-9-27 02:47
Just finished reading your article 'On election to IFAC'.  There is a delay in peer recognition apart from public recognition in scientific fields of inquiry, is it not?  How many truly peerless scientists left almost nothing but relics and mystery to this world we inherit, apart from Saints recognized oddly under Catholic and Apostolic Church? I am trying to locate reference to this iconic imagery. http://nunia.sdf-us.org/trans/RG/lbdbpajcelegiabd.jpg  Any idea, if this is linked to St. Olga of Kiev or not?  curious.
我的回复(2016-9-27 20:35):Thank you. But I'll let my article stand as it is.
[214]sslv123   2016-8-20 08:49
数学揭示量子纠缠与一种暗物质有直接关系,请何教授考虑下物理实验室是否要证实这种暗物质的存在,这种暗物质一旦被证实存在,对数学也会造成较大影响。请查看http://bbs.sciencenet.cn/thread-3093226-1-1.html
我的回复(2016-8-20 11:16):I am no expert in this topic and cannot really comment.
[213]scienceusa   2016-8-12 15:52
何老师,您好!欢迎加我的微信 。微信号 :cc_cl_lcy_czx_chz_18
谢谢关注
我的回复(2016-8-13 01:48):I am an technological dinosaur. You have to explain 微信号 to me.
[212]shenlu   2016-7-11 17:44
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-38450-803272.html
我的回复(2016-7-11 18:09):Thank you for the reference. Good luck on your development of the science of science and technology.
[211]许培扬   2016-5-29 09:04
敬爱的何院士,您好。我经常拜读您的精彩博文,受教良多,衷心感谢您。
我儿子告诉我前段时间去参加了哈佛大学的毕业典礼活动,我们分享了他的哈佛照片。
看到在哈佛大学求学的优秀中国学子,我们感到十分高兴。谢谢您对中国学子的关心。
问候您夫人和全家,祝您合家生活幸福,贵体健康!
北京  许培扬   陈东福
我的回复(2016-5-29 11:39):Many thanks for your greetings. YCH
[210]张鹰   2016-5-1 23:50
Dear Prof. Ho,
Thank you very much for putting time into reading my blog and your prompt reply. Your experience of major making very little difference in life is very reasonable. Top scholars in whatever fields will emerge, and they don't seek for money and are mainly driven by internal curiosity. But normal students (within 1 standard deviation above average) can benefit from a relative hot major (computer engineering) and then find a better career. In that sense, it will invoke competition in hot majors and allocate education resources slightly better. That is probably not your aim of your blog, and I apologize for this proposal.
It would be very interesting to read articles at a high level describing the difference between science and engineering science, which is my selfish side. I will read your blog articles in more details and try to connect the dots from your experience.
I really appreciate your reply and very grateful that you share your life experience.
Best,
Ying
我的回复(2016-5-2 21:10):Dear Dr. Zhang, I was not a special case. Most people in the US change careers or jobs several time in their lives. What they do in their adult lives often has little to do with their college major. The most important goal of a university education is to teach the student "how to learn on their own". The world is changing fast. The latest technology you learned in school can become obsolete as soon as you graduate. One cannot rely on one set of skills for 30-40 years. The only important skill is "THE SKILL TO LEARN NEW THINGS.
[209]张鹰   2016-5-1 13:26
Dear Prof. Ho,
Have you ever considered writing an introductory article for senior high school students. Most Chinese high school students have no clue what to study in college after the college entrance examination. 12 years hardworking followed by a random choice for college major is kind of sad.
I am wondering whether Sciencenet can put collective efforts in writing intro articles for different fields of scientific study for 12th grade students. You are a member of the US National Academy of Engineering, and have a good grasp in differentiating the difference between engineering and science majors. Does this sound like a good idea?
I wrote a Chinese blog about it, but not sure whether you can read the simplified Chinese characters.
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-3116575-973976.html
Best wishes,
Ying
我的回复(2016-5-1 20:59):Dear Dr. Zhang,
Thank you for the suggestion. Yes, I can read simplified Chinese with only occasional difficulties and guessing. Your idea is well thought out. However, my own experience and knowledge about the American environment are that it makes relatively little difference in life what one studied in college (I have even written previously in these blog pages about my personal life experience)Thus, I cannot be a convincing spokesperson for your ideas even though I am all for popularizing science to high school students. YCHo
[208]LongLeeLu   2016-4-29 10:37
Dear Dr. Larry, I'm sure you do that "I am reading enough elsewhere to satisfy myself. " I gotta clarify my point: What I asked was for the readers of your blogs - e.g., I constantly follow your blog posts like Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman's posts in New York Times. If the SciNet editors over sight and not left up your posts in the headlines, I can't find your posts, a loss for me as well as for many other readers, I's told. Well, after all, it's your call, freedom of blogger, for all of us to enjoy, no obligations :-)
我的回复(2016-4-29 10:54):Dear Dr. Lee, I understand your point . Then it is the job of ScienceNet to make things easier for the readers. It is entirely within their power and judgement to do or not do this. I appreciate your request. But I am sure you are not asking me, a volunteer, to do something that it is against my stated principles.
[207]LongLeeLu   2016-4-29 05:49
Dear Professor/Academician Larry Ho,
I'd like to suggest you to open up to accept 好友 (fans) links to your blog posts, alerting your posts in the future and tracking down back to your old insightful posts. I've noticed many of your later posts didn't surface on the headline page so I missed that. Alerting via "好友" of your new posts helps us to read your new posts. Honestly, I didn't manage my fans http://weibo.sciencenet.cn/?LongLeeLu with 10229 fans (sorry I can't keep track of all of them), but I do know they benefit from reading my posts. many blessings to you and your family. - Lee
我的回复(2016-4-29 07:59):Dear Dr. Lee, I know you meant well. However, I write blogs not as a professional columnist but to help people who wants to be helped, to inform people who wants to be informed, and to enjoy myself during retirement. There is no hidden agenda nor am I seeking rewards or glory. What you suggest has merit and make life a bit easier for the readers. But I don't feel that is my obligation nor my job. I do read other blogs I am interested in by go to other blog pages myself with only minimal effort. Yes, I may miss some other articles. But I am reading enough elsewhere to satisfy myself. Thanks again.
[206]fransis2015   2016-4-25 17:24
体系论认为人类社会也是一个生物,与细胞、动植物一样,并提出新概念“生物体系”——细胞为第一级生物体系,动植物为第二级生物体系,人类社会体系是第三级生物体系,其中第一级生物 细胞组成第二级 动植物,第二级中的人类组成第三级生物 人类社会。
在此基础上对生物和社会演化进行分析,发现了种内演化和升级演化(这是新的发现,有别于业内早就发现的个体演化和种类演化)以及其他很多信息、智能、社会、经济、哲学方面的新东西。
这里简单的讲述一下体系论的核心思想,你若有空的话,学生还是很希望您能看看博客中体系论的详细内容,说不准会有别样的发现。
[205]fransis2015   2016-4-25 17:13
谢谢何老。体系论是一个全新的理论,它可以很好的解释生物和社会的演化,对信息系统和智能的研究也有很多启发,其观点是鲜明的,证据是确凿的。现在我们是要推广这个理论,让大家知道,获取业内的认可。
历史上很多新思想、新理论都要经过怀疑、反对,甚至打击,最终才会被人们所认可。一百年前的相对论和量子力学就是这样。
现在,体系论也是要重复这条道路。我们需要一个支点,或者说一个伯乐,来加速其进程。
[204]fransis2015   2016-4-25 12:12
谢谢何老师的回复,学生是一个中国的90后,目前所受专业训练有限,英文水平也有待提高,只写出了体系论的中文版。有心发表,但囿于文章较长,且里面观点敏感(文中论述了唯物主义和唯心主义的辩证统一、资本主义和社会主义的殊途同归,与国内gcd的核心信仰有冲突),处处碰壁,只好在科学网上公布出来供大家评判。
虽然学生经过十年的认真思考,对这个理论很有信心,但不知是否能得到业内的认可,很希望何老师有空了可以看看,或者推荐给其他人看看,多多指点。若这个理论将来被发现确实有些价值也算是大家对科学的一份贡献。
学生完全是一片赤子之心,若有打扰到您,还请多多见谅。
我的回复(2016-4-25 16:52):Any new idea in science must be subjected to PROOF and be able to PREDICT. Otherwise it is more philosophy than science.
[203]fransis2015   2016-4-24 23:16
何老您好,上次留言请您指点体系论所阐述信息系统和智能方面的新观点,不知是否有看过,学生非常期待能聆听前辈教诲
我的回复(2016-4-25 08:03):THank you for the reference. However, these are outside my expertise and controversial. I cannot intelligently comment. But I'll read and think about the papers more carefully in time. In the mean time, you must try to publish them in the leading journals of your discipline and be peer-reviewed.
[202]fransis2015   2016-4-8 10:25
   喜欢读您的博客。我这里也有几篇关于信息系统和智能的,希望您有空可以看看,指点一二。
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-2534064-965543.html
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-2534064-965520.html
http://blog.sina.com.cn/u/2359047340
我的回复(2016-4-8 19:47):Thank you for the reference. Give me sometime to digest them.
[201]lxj1166   2016-2-24 22:27
何老您好!谢谢您及时指教!我会检查论文不对之处。再次感谢您!李小坚
[200]lxj1166   2016-2-24 22:25
何老先生好!谢谢您及时指教!我会仔细检查我的论文。再次感谢您!李小坚
[199]lxj1166   2016-2-24 22:25
何老先生好!谢谢您及时指教!我会仔细检查我的论文。再次感谢您!李小坚
[198]lxj1166   2016-2-24 21:40
何老您好!我多次给你发消息,多有打搅您,深表歉意!
因为,我觉得有必要向您介绍一个对国家,对民族有重大意义的学术体系。

但我有一事不明白:我满腔热情,探索真理,为国分忧,却遇到这样的怪事:

我近来写了一个系列的《创新物理学》九章,《跨界物理学》一章。
这些完全是正面的科学创新和传播正常文章,而且对国家有重大意义!
然而,今天晚上7点被通知三日内删除全部内容。
请您查看一下,本博客内容,查询一下因何而违反何法令。
博客地址如下 :
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/u/lxj1166

如有任何违法行为,本人愿意承担全部法律责任。

李小坚
我的回复(2016-2-24 22:02):I must confess that even though I am not a physicist I do not agree with you view about the contribution of Chinese "YEEQING" to science. While you are entitled to your belief and opinions. But you are not entitled to your own facts. Obviously the editorial department of ScienceNet does not think your articles on physics qualify as science. You must win them and the scientific public over. We are all in the market and competition of ideas.

Archiver|手机版|科学网 ( 京ICP备14006957 )

GMT+8, 2019-10-23 18:09

Powered by ScienceNet.cn

Copyright © 2007- 中国科学报社

返回顶部