中国西部城镇化发展的“三分”构想

在经济全球一体化和经济区域化已成为当今世界经济发展大势的背景下，西部区域经济之所以发展不利，根本原因是区域经济理论陈旧落后，缺乏创新的区域发展思维。这些深层次的问题得不到解决，西部的城镇化水平和区域经济难以得到快速发展。因此，“三分构想”的提出是十分必要和迫切的。     

曲棍球赛场技战术的计算机分析系统

介绍在ＩＢＭ－ＰＣ／ＸＴ计算机上实现的曲棍球赛场统计系统的研制过程、设计思想、采用的方法、软件设计与功能、技术指标操作步骤以及使用效果。     

高效液相色谱法测定制剂中生长抑素的含量

介绍了一种用高效液相色谱法测定制剂中生长抑素含量的新方法,该法测定准确,操作简便,重现性好.     

老式油压材料试验机测试系统的技术改造

对老式油压材料试验机进行技术改造的方案是利用原试验机结构框架和加载系统。改进落后的测试系统使其达到现代科技水平。本文论述了进行改造的项目、工作原理、实施方法。方案一经买施．对拥有大量老式油压材料试验机的我国．其社会效益和经济效益都将是十分可观的。     

OPTIMAL SETTING-UP OF KNITTING ELEMENTS AND ITS EFFECT ON TENSION VARIATION

The dynamic yarn tension variations during knitting cycle are very difficult to control and be-come one of barriers to knitting on modern warp knitting machine.Examination of experimentaldata and theoretical analysis show that the relative position of spring rail to knitting elements suchas needle,guide as well as their displacement has noticeable effect on tension variation so that theknitting condition can be much improved by rearrangement of the knitting elements and theirmovement within a knitting cycle.     

独立数≤5的3-边连通简单图的上可嵌入性

结合边连通度，本文探讨了3-边连通简单网的独立数与上可嵌人性的关系，我们得到了下列结果：设G是一个3-边连通简单图，α（G）是G的独立数，若α／（G）≤5，则G是上可嵌入的，同时我们又得到了两个在3-边连通意义下最小的非上可嵌入图例．     

Ruin Probability with Variable Premium Rate and Disturbed by Diffusion in a Markovian Environment

We consider a risk model with a premium rate which varies with the level of free reserves. In this model, the occurrence of claims is described by a Cox process with Markov intensity process, and the influence of stochastic factors is considered by adding a diffusion process. The integro-differential equation for the ruin probability is derived by a infinitesimal method.     

小窑采空区在地震勘探时间剖面上的解释

从山西晋城小窑采掘现状入手，结合钻探制作煤全采、未采、半采三种模型的合成地震记录换层分析，分析其波形特征，标定了时间剖面上的采空区段与矿方实际采空区基本吻合。     

Newton's Easy Quadratures ``Omitted for the Sake of Brevity'

In the 1687 Principia, Newton gave a solution to the direct problem (given the orbit and center of force, find the central force) for a conic-section with a focal center of force (answer: a reciprocal square force) and for a spiral orbit with a polar center of force (answer: a reciprocal cube force). He did not, however, give solutions for the two corresponding inverse problems (given the force and center of force, find the orbit). He gave a cryptic solution to the inverse problem of a reciprocal cube force, but offered no solution for the reciprocal square force. Some take this omission as an indication that Newton could not solve the reciprocal square, for, they ask, why else would he not select this important problem? Others claim that ``it is child's play' for him, as evidenced by his 1671 catalogue of quadratures (tables of integrals). The answer to that question is obscured for all who attempt to work through Newton's published solution of the reciprocal cube force because it is done in the synthetic geometric style of the 1687 Principia rather than in the analytic algebraic style that Newton employed until 1671. In response to a request from David Gregory in 1694, however, Newton produced an analytic version of the body of the proof, but one which still had a geometric conclusion. Newton's charge is to find both ``the orbit' and ``the time in orbit.' In the determination of the dependence of the time on orbital position, t(r), Newton evaluated an integral of the form ∫dx/x <sup>n</sup> to calculate a finite algebraic equation for the area swept out as a function of the radius, but he did not write out the analytic expression for time t = t(r), even though he knew that the time t is proportional to that area. In the determination of the orbit, θ (r), Newton obtained an integral of the form ∫dx/√(1−x<sup>2</sup>) for the area that is proportional to the angle θ, an integral he had shown in his 1669 On Analysis by Infinite Equations to be equal to the arcsin(x). Since the solution must therefore contain a transcendental function, he knew that a finite algebraic solution for θ=θ(r) did not exist for ``the orbit' as it had for ``the time in orbit.' In contrast to these two solutions for the inverse cube force, however, it is not possible in the inverse square solution to generate a finite algebraic expression for either ``the orbit' or ``the time in orbit.' In fact, in Lemma 28, Newton offers a demonstration that the area of an ellipse cannot be given by a finite equation. I claim that the limitation of Lemma 28 forces Newton to reject the inverse square force as an example and to choose instead the reciprocal cube force as his example in Proposition 41. (Received August 14, 2002) Published online March 26, 2003 Communicated by G. Smith