2009年2月9日 星期一

分享有趣的科學新聞



在這裡分享一篇我在紐約時報上看到的科學新聞,我覺得蠻有趣的
Reinvent Wheel? Blue Room. Defusing a Bomb? Red Room.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/scien ... ef=science
這一篇文章的結論就是下面這一句
If a new study is any guide, the color red can make people’s work more accurate, and blue can make people more creative.

至於為什麼,下面是他的解釋
“When you feel that the situation you are in is problematic,”“you are more likely to pay attention to detail, which helps you with processing tasks but interferes with creative types of things.”Many people link red to problematic things, like emergencies or X’s on failing tests, experts say. Such “associations to red — stop, fire, alarm, warning — can be activated without a person’s awareness, and then influence what they are thinking about or doing,”Blue seems a weaker effect than red, but blue skies, blue water are calm and positive, and so that effect makes sense too.”

最後照例來一個片語吧
For what it’s worth---------"What I'm saying isn't worth much" or "This may not help, but . . ." or "This may not be relevant, but maybe you can extract some guidance from it" or "This goes partway toward a conclusion but doesn't prove the case.",解釋了一大些,也不知道它在講什麼,我自己把它翻成姑妄聽之,準不準我不負責

For what it’s worth, many newsroom walls at The New York Times are bright tomato-soup red. The newspaper’s facilities department says there are no blue rooms in the place.