例题1

TPO 28  L1 第三题

文中：“We get knowledge from our sense”

选项：“Knowledge acquired through the senses”

例题2

TPO 29  L4 第四题

文中：“That’s about how high an object would have to be orbiting straight up from the equator to constantly remain directly above the exact same spot on the rotating planet Earth.”

选项：“A satellite orbiting at this height can remain directly above one location on Earth.”

例题3

TPO 30  L1 第四题

文中：“But there was a problem, other researchers protested that the response is simply a learned or conditioned response.”

选项：“The study did not distinguish between learned and higher-level responses.”

例题1

TPO 21 Lecture 1

Narrator Listen to part of a lecture in a history of science class. Aristarchus-Heliocentric Theory

Professor: Ok, we have been talking about how throughout history, it was often difficult for people to give up ideas, which have long been taken for granted as scientific truth, even if those ideas were false. In Astronomy, for example, the distinction between the solar system and the universe wasn’t clear until modern times. The ancient Greeks believed that what we called the solar system was in fact the entire universe, and that the universe was geocentric. Geocentric means Earth-centered, so the geocentric view holds that the Sun, the planets, and the stars, all revolve around the Earth, which is stationary. Of course, we now know that the planets, including Earth, revolve around the Sun, and that the solar system is only a tiny part of the universe.

So, why did the ancient Greeks believe that the Earth was the center of the universe? Well, it made sense to them. Observations of the sky make it appear as if the Sun, the moon, and the stars all revolve around the Earth everyday, while the Earth itself stayed in one place. And this view is also supported by their philosophical and religious beliefs about the origin and structure of the universe. It was presented in the works of well-known Greek philosophers as early as the fourth century B.C.E., and the geocentric theory continue to prevail in Western thought for almost 2,000 years, until the 17th century.

Now, what’s especially interesting is that when astronomical observations were made that seemed to be inconsistent with the geocentric view, the ancient Greeks did not really consider alternative theories. It was so intuitive, so sensible that the Earth was the center of the universe that astronomers found ways to explain those seemingly inconsistent phenomena within the geocentric view. 

For example, Greek astronomers made excellent, very accurate observations of the movements of the planets, but the observations revealed a bit of a problem. The geocentric theory said, that the planets would move around the Earth in one direction. However, astronomers noticed that at times, several planets seem to stop moving in one direction and start moving backward in their orbits around the Earth, and they came up with a theory that these planets themselves moved in smaller circles called epicycles as they travelled around the Earth. Here’s a picture of what they imagined. You see how this epicycle theory could account for the seemingly backward motion of the planet. Of course, today we know that this appearance of backward motion is caused by the fact that Earth, as well as other planets, all move in their own orbits around the Sun, and the relative movements of the planets with respect to each other can get quite complex. 

However, there were a few astronomers in Greece and other places who didn’t agree with the geocentric view, for example, a Greek astronomer who lived in the third century B.C.E. He proposed the theory that our planetary system might be heliocentric, his name was Aristarchus. Heliocentric means Sun-centered, that the Earth revolves around the Sun. Aristarchus recognized from his calculations that the Sun was much larger than the Earth and other planets. It was probably this discovery that led him to conclude that the universe is heliocentric. I mean, isn’t it more sensible to think that a smaller heavenly body would orbit a larger one, rather than the opposite? 

However, his proposition was rejected largely based on other scientific beliefs held at the time, which all made sense in a way even if they were incorrect. Let me mention two objections Greeks made to Aristarchus’s theory. First, they believe that everything that moves creates its own wind, so to speak, everyone has this experience when you are running, right? So, they thought that if the Earth itself was moving, there would have to be a constant wind blowing, sweeping them off their feet, and of course there wasn’t. And second, the idea of an Earth that moved didn’t fit in with the ancient Greeks’ understanding of gravity. They thought that gravity was basically a natural tendency of all things to move towards the center of the universe, which was the Earth, or the center of the Earth, so that explains why apples and other falling objects were falling straight down. If the Sun was at the center of the universe, things would fall toward the Sun and away from the Earth, which of course they didn’t. So these were some of the reasons they rejected the heliocentric theory. 

Why does the professor discuss the epicycle theory? 

·To explain why early astronomers started measuring the velocity of the planets 

·To explain why the astronomer Aristarchus rejected the geocentric model 

·To show how early astronomers explained the apparent backward motion of some planets 

·To show that early astronomers believed that all planets moved in their own orbits around the Sun 

例题2 

TPO23 Lecture l 

Narrator: Listen to part of a lecture in an archaeology class. 

Professor: I was talking to one of my colleagues in the physics department the other day, and we ended up discussing how one discovery can change everything. My colleague mentioned how the theory of relativity completely changed the field of physics. At any rates, that conversation got me thinking about archaeological finds that really changed our understanding of ancient civilizations. So I want to talk about the discovery of the Antikythera Mechanism. 

The Antikythera Mechanism was found a hundred years ago, under water in an ancient Greek shipwreck in the Mediterranean Sea. It was in extremely poor condition and in many corroded pieces. But once we figured out what it was and reconstructed it. Well, I simply don't have the words to convey how extraordinary this find was. 

The Antikythera Mechanism is a relatively small device, roughly the size of a shoebox, made of gears fitted inside a wooden case. In its original state, there were rotating dials and other indicators on the top, with letters and drawings showing the Sun, the phases of the moon and different constellations. Inside the box, bronze gears would have rotated the displays. The displays, uh, the indicators of the Antikythera Mechanism, would then moved to show the motion of the Sun and moon relative to the planets and stars. The device could be used to tell the different phases of the moon and much more. 

Well, scientists have recently analyzed the inscriptions on the mechanism and re-examine the other cargo in the ship wreck, and the evidence makes an absolute case that this device dates back to ancient Greece somewhere between 150 and 100 B.C.E. What makes that so fascinating is that before we found the Antikythera Mechanism, the earliest device we had that could track the Sun and moon like this was invented over 1,000 years later. So when this was first found, people literally would not believe it. Some of my colleagues insisted it had to have been made well after 100 B.C.E. But this physical evidence was conclusive. It was that old. 

Of course part of what made this find so unusual is that the Antikythera Mechanism is constructed of bronze. Now, it is not that bronze was all that rare in Greece then, it is just that bronze was valuable and could easily be recycled. It would have been relatively easy for a person with knowledge of metals to melt down bronze objects and forge them into ? well, say, coins. Bronze was used to made money back then. Or mold the bronze into anything else of value for that matter. 

We are very fortunate that the device ended up under water, because otherwise it probably would have ended up recycled into ? who knows what. Now, it was a challenge to figure out the Antikythera Mechanism. It spent over 2,000 years at the bottom of the sea before it was discovered. And even after it was discovered, it was still a number of years before we really understood what it was. You see, the mechanism had corroded underwater, and many of the gears were stuck together in a mass. Cleaning it was only partly successful. We could only get a good look at the structure of the gears after gamma-rays were used to see inside, very similar to the way X-rays are used to see your bones. 

Now, once we got a good look inside, we saw a really complex device. The many gears not only moved in a way that could indicate the phases of the moon. The Antikythera Mechanism also tracked both the lunar year and the solar year. Additionally, the gears also moved to match the motions of the planet and predicted eclipses. But one thing that is particularly notable is that the mechanism was so precise that it even took into account a particular irregularity in the moon's orbit, which requires some very complex math to replicate in mechanical device. 

You could say that the Antikythera Mechanism was a very precise calendar, which stands to reasons calendars were very important to ancient peoples. Religious festivals had to be held at the right time of year, crops needed to be planted at the right time as well. And let's not forget that eclipses in planetary motions had important symbolic meanings. 

What does the professor imply about the ancient Greeks when she says this? 

·They were the first to observe the irregularly in the Moon’s orbit. 

·They might not have been the inventors of the Antikythera Mechanism 

·They were more scientifically advanced than is commonly thought. 

·They appeared to have made some errors in their calculations. 

例题3 

TPO 24 Lecture4 

Narrator: Listen to part of a lecture in an astronomy class. 

Professor: Many people have been fascinated about Venus for centuries because of its thick cloud cover, this so-called planet of mystery and all of that. Well, what's under those clouds? What's the surface of the planet like? Some questions about the surface are still unresolved, but we have learned a lot about it in the past several years. 

First of all, let me talk about how we have been able to get past those clouds. First, there were Soviet modules2 that landed directly on the surface and sent back some images of what was around them. Second, we did some radar imaging from satellites from above. Radar can get through the clouds. So what have we learned? Yes, Karen? 

Student: Well, I remember reading that there's not really a lot going on, that the surface of Venus is just flat and smooth in a lot of places. 

Professor: Yeah, smooth in a lot of places. But that's not, um... that's not the whole picture. In other areas, you've got canyons, ripped valleys, meteo craters, uh, lava domes, these lava formations that look like giant pancakes. And also volcanoes. 

Well, one of the most interesting features on the surface are in fact the shield volcanoes. Shield volcanoes formed when magma comes out of the ground in the same spot over and over again. Remember, magma is hot molten rock that's underground, and it is called lava when it reaches the surface. Uh, so the lava builds up, and hardens, and a volcano forms.

Now, the lava on Venus is thin. It spreads out easily. So shield volcanoes have very gentle sloping sides. They are called shield volcanoes, because viewed from above, they kind of resemble shields, you know, like a warrior's shield. 

But what's particularly interesting about these volcanoes is that most of the volcanoes here on Earth are not shield volcanoes. Instead, they are other volcano types, like strata volcanoes, for example, which are a result of tectonic plate movement. Remember tectonic plates? 

Underneath the Earth's crust, there are a number of shifting slabs or plates that are slowly moving. And in the zones on the edges of the plates where different plates meet and interact, that's where we get most of Earth's volcanoes.

On Venus, however, volcanoes are not clustered in discrete zones like they are on Earth. Instead, they are more or less randomly scattered over Venus's surface. Well, that's significant. Venus has mostly shield volcanoes, and they are randomly scattered, that indicates that Venus does not have moving tectonic plates, and that's a big difference compared to Earth. Here on Earth, moving tectonic plates are a major geological element, just crucial for the whole surface dynamic, right? 

So why doesn't Venus have them? Well, there are a few theories. One of them is that this has to do with the fact that Venus has no surface water that's needed to kind of lubricate the movement of the plates, you know, like oceans on Earth. Yeah, I forgot to spell that out. Uh, Venus has no surface water. 

Student: Wait a second. Did you say we have shield volcanoes on Earth? Can you give an example?

Professor: Sure. The volcanoes in the Hawaii islands, in the Pacific Ocean are shield volcanoes. They are formed over a hot spot of magma. So while on Earth we have several types of volcanoes, on Venus there's mostly the one type. Uh, Eric? 

Student: Are the volcanoes on Venus still active? 

Professor: Well, that's an interesting question. There is still some discussion on that point. But here's what we do now. First, the level of sulfur dioxide gas above Venus's clouds shows large and very frequent fluctuations. It is quite possible that these fluctuations, the huge increase and decrease of sulfur dioxide, happening again and again. It's quite possible that this is due to volcanic eruptions, because volcanic eruptions often emit gases. If that's the case, volcanism could very well be the root cause of Venus's thick cloud cover. And also we have observed bursts of radio energy from the planet's surface. These bursts are similar to what we see when volcanoes erupt on Earth. So this too suggests ongoing volcanic activity. But although this is intriguing evidence, no one's actually observed a Venus volcano erupting yet, so we can't be positive. 

What differences between volcanoes on Venus and those on Earth does the professor mention? Click on 2 answers 

·Volcanoes on Venus are mostly shield volcanoes 

·Volcanoes on Venus emit thicker lava 

·Many volcanoes on Earth are concentrated in specific zones. 

·Many volcanoes on Earth show no volcanic activity