On the Everettian Epistemic Problem

Recent work in the Everett interpretation has suggested that the problem of probability can be solved by understanding probability in terms of rationality. However, there are two problems relating to probability in Everett—one practical, the other epistemic—and the rationality-based program directly addresses only the practical problem. One might therefore worry that the problem of probability is only ‘half solved’ by this approach. This paper aims to dispel that worry: a solution to the epistemic problem follows from the rationality-based solution to the practical problem.     

A History of the Surrey Institution

The Surrey Institution, Blackfriars, founded in 1808, was, after the Royal Institution and London Institution, the third establishment in London aimed at fostering and disseminating scientific, technical, and literary knowledge and understanding among a wider public. The Institution offered its proprietors and subscribers the use of an extensive reference library and reading rooms and, most importantly, the opportunity to attend courses of lectures on scientific, technological, and other subjects. Though popular in approach, the lectures conformed to high educational standards and were delivered by recognized authorities in their fields. In the Surrey Institution's celebrated auditorium, the 'Rotunda', there appeared over the years such notable scientists as Accum, Thomson, and Gurney on chemistry, Millington, Mason Good, and Woodward on natural philosophy, Bakewell on geology, and Shaw on natural history; literature was brilliantlyrepresented by Coleridge and Hazlitt. During its relatively brief life-span (1808-23)-cut short by financial stringencies-the Surrey Institution provided access to scientific knowledge and thinking to a wide and appreciative audience. As a meeting place fo scientists and men of business with mercantile and manufacturing interests, it performed an important function in cross-fertilizing and reinforcing ideas on innovation and enterprise against the background of the ongoing Industrial Revolution. The present article attempts to supply a historical account, so far lacking, of the foundation, activities and achievements of this significant Institution of the metropolis.     

科学历史的启迪

十九世纪末物理天空中那两朵著名的“乌云”来源于当时的经济结构的生长点之上，类似地，20世纪末，迅速发展的信息技术，生物技术和材料科学，这三个当前经济结构中的生长点之上，也可以看到现今的物理天空中也存在着好几朵“乌云”，如：手征性，晶体分类的时空背景的两重性，生物密码三维结构的左手四重性，等等。再联系到量子力学基础研究中的最新进展，作者根据三十多年探索，认为这一切皆导致复合时空论，在此基础上，可导致科学中的重大突破。     

A Companion to the History of Science

Snell's law of refraction did not affect the study of optics until twenty‐five years after its publication in 1637 and by then its universality threatened to break down already. Two optical phenomena—colour dispersion and strange refraction—were discovered that did not conform to the sine law. In the early 1670s, Isaac Newton and Christiaan Huygens respectively investigated these phenomena. They tried to describe the irregular behaviour of light rays mathematically and to reconcile it with ordinary refraction. This paper discusses their investigations and aims at throwing new light on the history of seventeenth‐century optics. Both initially approached the problem in a mathematical way in which they built on Descartes' analysis of refraction. This is surprising because it contradicts their earlier dismissal of Descartes' account and it does not fit our picture of them as mathematical physicists. By looking more closely at their early investigations it becomes clear that Newton and Huygens first had to develop the approach to optics of their later writings. After Descartes placed the issue of the physical nature of light rays on the scientific agenda in 1637, they recognized its purport in their struggles with colour dispersion and strange refraction. It was at this point that their physical optics evolved from the traditional geometrical optics with which they had started.     

脊椎动物基因注释中的大基因问题

为了找出编码蛋白质的基因，注释流程结合了“从头开始的基因预测方法”和“与已知基因相似性比较”这两种方法。“从头开始的基因预测方法”虽然有很高的假阳性但是假阴性却很低；相形之下，结合了相似性比对的方法之后虽然能够降低假阳性，但是却大大提高了假阴性。我们发现，在这当中与基因预测正确率相关的最重要因素就是基因大小(包括内含子在内)——大基因尤其容易产生预测错误。