Sunday, October 15, 2017
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
给我妹妹邮件的部分
我认为大学生若想了解书本外的事情，比如说社会，
学期内功课紧，如想有所触及书本外的事情，难以把握平衡；
假期一整块时间，若有兴趣可以做些别的 -- 比如说支教，实习，打工，义工等等 -- 社会上多的是供你体验的机会，只要你有心；
我这些看法像西方的做法；这边很多学生假期都是忙碌过来的，
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Friday, October 31, 2008
杂谈
真没想到，两个星期前漫天遍野的黄叶红花，
一周后就凋零作土，
丰满了大地，赤裸了枝桠。
枝桠只寂寞了一周，
又与白雪冰露结了新欢。
那是一个周四的晨早，
空中纷扬的雪子飘向飞速的自行车后，
感觉是那么的surreal。
看到白白的雪灰灰的天，我就会联想到冬日的武汉。
类似的场景，不同的是没有过年。
欣慰的是，这边的雪说来就来，
没有武汉白雪的忸怩。
同样的是这里的晴日蓝天：
一年三百六十天，三百都是晴空万里，
不像广州蓝天的奢侈。
然而，
忸怩过后弥足珍贵，奢侈得来方知珍惜，
所以，
武汉每一场皑皑白雪都那么记忆犹新，
广州每一个秋日蓝天都那么激动欣喜。
一周后就凋零作土，
丰满了大地，赤裸了枝桠。
枝桠只寂寞了一周，
又与白雪冰露结了新欢。
那是一个周四的晨早，
空中纷扬的雪子飘向飞速的自行车后，
感觉是那么的surreal。
看到白白的雪灰灰的天，我就会联想到冬日的武汉。
类似的场景，不同的是没有过年。
欣慰的是，这边的雪说来就来，
没有武汉白雪的忸怩。
同样的是这里的晴日蓝天：
一年三百六十天，三百都是晴空万里，
不像广州蓝天的奢侈。
然而，
忸怩过后弥足珍贵，奢侈得来方知珍惜，
所以，
武汉每一场皑皑白雪都那么记忆犹新，
广州每一个秋日蓝天都那么激动欣喜。
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Why biology is more than genetics and biochemistry?
The caption is the subtitle of a talk given by Eric Siggia. If ever there is talk that is deeply influential to me, I bet it is this one. If ever there is a single quote that keeps me contemplating for long and (maybe in the years to come), it is this quote.
When I was a second-year undergrad, I was obsessed in natural history, studying insects all the time. I was committed to study ecology then. Later, when I was in my third year, I met Chung-I Wu, who told me that genetics, which attempts to link phenotypes with genotypes, is the most fundamental subject in biology. I took it as true and decided to be a geneticist instead.
The birth of genetics surely marks a big leap in the history of biology. The later discovery of DNA as the genetic material is even exciting, indicating that the remarkable diversity exhibited by the organisms inhabiting this planet, from bacteria to plant, from fungi to vertebrates, share the same form of code of inheritance, and it is the change of this code that leads to the change of life form, hence the diversity. What a beautiful unity biology has achieved thus far!
The physicist and Nobel laureate Jean Perrin once said that the essence of scientific progress is to be able "to explain the complex visible by some simple invisible." Under such an insightful distillment, disovering DNA as the genetic material is surely a feat of scientific progress. The principle of natural selection brought up by Charles Darwin is undeniably another milestone of this kind, which is able to explain the diverse phenomena in biological world by a simple rule.
However, links between DNA and phenotypes, as genetics studies, are neither invisible nor simple. For the visibility, we know for sure there are macromolecular interactions in action down beneath the cell membrane; we can see them either through advanced microscopes directly or via experiments indirectly. For the complexity, generations of biochemists, cell biologists, and most importantly, geneticists, dedicate themselves to unveil the links, but, a bit discouragingly, we still don't know much about how genes conspire to produce phenotypes, especially when it comes to complex traits in higher eukaryotes.
For long it has baffled me that a great amount of graduate students are willing to spend their entire degree research on a couple of proteins and their interactions. An even more brash thought is, even they have discovered many important pathways, so what? It certainly sounds arrogant for the time being, when we are still naive about the physical basis of life and are making efforts to discover them. However, if we take understanding how life really works as our ultimate goal, I would think discovering some pathways can be, at best, some minor, if not trivial, success.
If one seeks to know how life really works, s/he is actually asking why, instead of how (as genetics/biochemistry/... pursue). In my opinion, knowing the answer to the why questions represents a big conceptual progress, while knowing to answer the how questions is not now.
That is why I have been thinking about moving to the bacteria/virus/yeast systems, after thinking about being a fly evolutionary geneticist for years. I think there is a spectrum of model organisms in biology. One one end is mammals like rats, which are extremely complex yet very similar to human so that studies of them can have promising applications in medicine, pharmacology, etc. On the other end are those microbes, which have beautiful simplicity, have been subject to most thorough studies and are the most probable for quantifications. If any true insight of the working of life can emerge, it most likely comes from them.
Biology is now in an era of rapid expansion, with many researchers with different backgrounds entering it each year. Among the other disciplines, I think engineering is the most useful as a tool and perspective for biologists. While scientists discover features and rules of natural systems, engineers invent systems with desired features under the same set of rules. Their perspectives are reverse and hence potentially complementary. At some points it may be rewarding to think in an engineering way of biological systems, and we may break a crack on the why questions.
Life is short. Besides doing what one is capable of, s/he should be more encouraged to do what s/he likes. Having a natural tendency of exploring things at a fundamental level, I look forward to such a move. It will be tough, but I just like it.
When I was a second-year undergrad, I was obsessed in natural history, studying insects all the time. I was committed to study ecology then. Later, when I was in my third year, I met Chung-I Wu, who told me that genetics, which attempts to link phenotypes with genotypes, is the most fundamental subject in biology. I took it as true and decided to be a geneticist instead.
The birth of genetics surely marks a big leap in the history of biology. The later discovery of DNA as the genetic material is even exciting, indicating that the remarkable diversity exhibited by the organisms inhabiting this planet, from bacteria to plant, from fungi to vertebrates, share the same form of code of inheritance, and it is the change of this code that leads to the change of life form, hence the diversity. What a beautiful unity biology has achieved thus far!
The physicist and Nobel laureate Jean Perrin once said that the essence of scientific progress is to be able "to explain the complex visible by some simple invisible." Under such an insightful distillment, disovering DNA as the genetic material is surely a feat of scientific progress. The principle of natural selection brought up by Charles Darwin is undeniably another milestone of this kind, which is able to explain the diverse phenomena in biological world by a simple rule.
However, links between DNA and phenotypes, as genetics studies, are neither invisible nor simple. For the visibility, we know for sure there are macromolecular interactions in action down beneath the cell membrane; we can see them either through advanced microscopes directly or via experiments indirectly. For the complexity, generations of biochemists, cell biologists, and most importantly, geneticists, dedicate themselves to unveil the links, but, a bit discouragingly, we still don't know much about how genes conspire to produce phenotypes, especially when it comes to complex traits in higher eukaryotes.
For long it has baffled me that a great amount of graduate students are willing to spend their entire degree research on a couple of proteins and their interactions. An even more brash thought is, even they have discovered many important pathways, so what? It certainly sounds arrogant for the time being, when we are still naive about the physical basis of life and are making efforts to discover them. However, if we take understanding how life really works as our ultimate goal, I would think discovering some pathways can be, at best, some minor, if not trivial, success.
If one seeks to know how life really works, s/he is actually asking why, instead of how (as genetics/biochemistry/... pursue). In my opinion, knowing the answer to the why questions represents a big conceptual progress, while knowing to answer the how questions is not now.
That is why I have been thinking about moving to the bacteria/virus/yeast systems, after thinking about being a fly evolutionary geneticist for years. I think there is a spectrum of model organisms in biology. One one end is mammals like rats, which are extremely complex yet very similar to human so that studies of them can have promising applications in medicine, pharmacology, etc. On the other end are those microbes, which have beautiful simplicity, have been subject to most thorough studies and are the most probable for quantifications. If any true insight of the working of life can emerge, it most likely comes from them.
Biology is now in an era of rapid expansion, with many researchers with different backgrounds entering it each year. Among the other disciplines, I think engineering is the most useful as a tool and perspective for biologists. While scientists discover features and rules of natural systems, engineers invent systems with desired features under the same set of rules. Their perspectives are reverse and hence potentially complementary. At some points it may be rewarding to think in an engineering way of biological systems, and we may break a crack on the why questions.
Life is short. Besides doing what one is capable of, s/he should be more encouraged to do what s/he likes. Having a natural tendency of exploring things at a fundamental level, I look forward to such a move. It will be tough, but I just like it.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Summer
It seems that today is the first day of summer, as it has the strongest summer flavor -- brilliant sunshine, gentle breeze, hot air, etc. The endless rain just ended.
I have been rather loose recently, mainly because of the thought that I am about to leave and should have some fun. However, as being about to leave means a new challenging life is about to start, I am beginning to realize that I'd better retrieve a good state and work hard on things that I am supposed to do before having some rest.
BTW, I have bought the plane ticket of 7.15 to Chicago. I will stay there until late August when I go to Cornell. So the last month comes.
I have been rather loose recently, mainly because of the thought that I am about to leave and should have some fun. However, as being about to leave means a new challenging life is about to start, I am beginning to realize that I'd better retrieve a good state and work hard on things that I am supposed to do before having some rest.
BTW, I have bought the plane ticket of 7.15 to Chicago. I will stay there until late August when I go to Cornell. So the last month comes.
Saturday, May 31, 2008
媒体的职业道德
事件具有代表性，我为其写三次。
Sharon Stone 的发言如下：
“Well you know it was very interesting because at first, you know, I am not happy about the ways the Chinese were treating the Tibetans because I don’t think anyone should be unkind to anyone else. And so I have been very concerned about how to think and what to do about
that because I don’t like that. And I had been this, you know, concerned about, oh how should we deal with the Olympics because they are not being nice to the Dalai Lama, who is a good friend of mine.
And all these earthquake and stuff happened and I thought: Is that karma, when you are not nice that bad things happen to you?
And then I got a letter, from the Tibetan Foundation that they want to go and be helpful. And that made me cry. And they ask me if I would write a quote about that and I said, “I would.” And it was a big lesson to me, that some times you have to learn to put your head down and be of service even to people who are not nice to you. And that’s a big lesson for me...”
5月24日，莎朗・斯通出席戛纳为艾滋病筹款的慈善晚会，在红地毯上被记者问起对四川汶川地震的看法。莎朗・斯通先是称自己“不喜欢中国”，地震很“有趣”，随后又称被地震中的人和事感动，考虑为地震灾区“做点什么”。
http://msn.yoka.com/renren/shotmessage/2008/052766634.shtml
我想类似例子绝不匮乏。
中国人屁股摸不得，中国媒体缺道德。
Sharon Stone 的发言如下：
“Well you know it was very interesting because at first, you know, I am not happy about the ways the Chinese were treating the Tibetans because I don’t think anyone should be unkind to anyone else. And so I have been very concerned about how to think and what to do about
that because I don’t like that. And I had been this, you know, concerned about, oh how should we deal with the Olympics because they are not being nice to the Dalai Lama, who is a good friend of mine.
And all these earthquake and stuff happened and I thought: Is that karma, when you are not nice that bad things happen to you?
And then I got a letter, from the Tibetan Foundation that they want to go and be helpful. And that made me cry. And they ask me if I would write a quote about that and I said, “I would.” And it was a big lesson to me, that some times you have to learn to put your head down and be of service even to people who are not nice to you. And that’s a big lesson for me...”
5月24日，莎朗・斯通出席戛纳为艾滋病筹款的慈善晚会，在红地毯上被记者问起对四川汶川地震的看法。莎朗・斯通先是称自己“不喜欢中国”，地震很“有趣”，随后又称被地震中的人和事感动，考虑为地震灾区“做点什么”。
http://msn.yoka.com/renren/shotmessage/2008/052766634.shtml
我想类似例子绝不匮乏。
中国人屁股摸不得，中国媒体缺道德。
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)