Pain is a dangerous signal. When you place your hand on a hot stove, for example, a network of neurons in your brain activates to send a【C1】________: Something is very wrong.

Studies suggest that when we experience rejection, our brains【C2】_____similarly to the way they do when we’re in physical pain. In 2011, psychologists used a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) machine to scan the brains of 40【C3】__participants, all of whom had recently【C4】__an unwanted breakup. Inside the scanner, the participants gazed at photos of the partner who had【C5】__them, while thinking about the rejection.【C6】_____, the individuals focused on photos of close friends while imagining a happy memory of that friendship.

Finally, the psychologists scanned the participants’ brains【C7】_____they experienced painful and pleasant physical【C8】__: a hot (but not burning) object,【C9】__by a pleasantly warm object, placed on their arms. The results found that both the【C10】__of an ex-partner and the feeling of the hot object activated areas of the brain【C11】__with pain, but the photo of a friend and the pleasant warmth did not. A review of 524 other neuroscience studies on experiences【C12】__from pain to memory【C13】__the psychologists’ results. The same areas of the brain were connected with pain in【C14】_____88％ of the studies they reviewed, the team reported in the study.

Many psychologists think the experience of emotional pain “piggybacked” onto the already【C15】_____physical pain system in the brains of our early ancestors. The pain you feel after a fight with a close friend is quite real, but it’s not【C16】__the same as physical pain. We see that【C17】__in fMRI studies. The parts of the brain activated by these two different experiences have some【C18】_____, but they’re not identical.

General heartache may hurt, but the next time you’re【C19】_____the pain of loss or rejection, you can take【C20】_____in the fact that the ability to feel this kind of pain likely evolved to help us survive.

It is pretty mucha one-way street. While it may be common for university researchers to try their luck in the commercial world, there is very little traffic in the opposite direction. Pay has always been the biggestdeterrent, as people with families often feel they cannot afford the drop in salary when moving to a university job. For some industrial scientists, however, the attractions of academia (学术界) outweigh any financial considerations.

Helen Lee took a 70％ cut in salary when she moved from a senior post in Abbott Laboratories to a medical department at the University of Cambridge. Her main reason for returning to academia mid-career was to take advantage of the greater freedom to choose research questions. Some areas of inquiry have few prospects of a commercial return, and Lee’s is one of them.

The impact of a salary cut is probably less severe for a scientist in the early stages of a career. Guy Grant, now a research associate at the Unilever Centre for Molecular Informatics at the Universityof Cambridge, spent two years working for a pharmaceutical (制药的) company before returning to university as a post-doctoral researcher. He took a 30％ salary cut but felt it worthwhile for the greater intellectual opportunities.

Higher up the ladder, where a pay cut is usually more significant, the demand for scientists with a wealth of experience in industry is forcing universities to make the transition (转换) to academia more attractive, according to Lee. Industrial scientists tend to receive training that academics do not, such as how to build a multidisciplinary team, manage budgets and negotiate contracts. They are also well placed to bring something extra to the teaching side of an academic role that will help students get a job when they graduate, says Lee, perhaps experience in manufacturing practice or product development. “Only a small number of undergraduates will continue in an academic career. So someone leaving university who already has the skills needed to work in an industrial lab has far more potential in the job market than someone who has spent all their time on a narrow research project.”

“Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man,” wrote Robert Heinlein, a science-fiction writer. Until the 18th century, global GDP per person was stuck between $725 and $1,100, around the same income level as the World Bank’s current poverty line of $1.90 a day. But global income levels per person have since accelerated, from around $1,100 in 1800 to $3,600 in 1950, and over $10,000 today.

Economists have long tried to explain this sudden surge in output. Most theories have focused on the factors driving long-term economic growth such as the quantity and productivity of labor and capital. But a new paper takes a different tack (思路): faster growth is not due to bigger booms, but to less shrinking in recessions. Stephen Broadberry of Oxford University and John Wallis of the University of Maryland have taken data for 18 countries in Europe and the New World, some from as far back as the 13th century. To their surprise, they found that growth during years of economic expansion has fallen in the recent era—from 3.88％ between 1820 and 1870 to 3.06％ since 1950—even though average growth across all years in those two periods increased from 1.4％ to 2.55％.

Instead, shorter and shallowerslumpsled to rising long-term growth. Output fell in a third of years between 1820 and 1870 but in only 12％ of those since 1950. The rate of decline per recession year has fallen too, from 3％ to 1.2％.

So why have these “growth reversals” decreased in length and depth? In another paper Broadberry and Wallis find that conventional explanations—such as demographic change or a sectoral shift from volatile (不稳定的) agriculture to the more stable services sector—do not fully explain the shift.

More important is the rise of the rule of law, enabling disputes to be settled by impartial courts. Before the modern era, elites would fight between themselves for the spoils of growth and send the economy back to square one through wars, corruption and the like. Respect for courts to resolve disputes prevents this from happening. With populist (民粹主义的) politicians challenging the authority of judges once again across the world, that is food for thought.

In the battle for the young soda drinkers of China, U.S.-based Pepsi-Cola may have found a powerful new weapon: young street sellers toting (背负) backpack soda dispensers.

It may sound trivial, but in China’s crowded cities, getting cold carbonated drinks into the hands of the young can be a struggle. Vending machines are often out of order, hawkers with pushcarts can’t keep drinks cold enough, and the friendly mom-and-pop corner stores just don’t cut it with teenagers trying to act hip.

The backpack dispensers are the latest twist in a continuing battle between Pepsi-Cola and rival Coca-Cola for China’s soda drinkers. Since 1996, Pepsi has virtually conceded dominance to Coca-Cola in all but a few international markets. Among the exceptions is China, where Pepsi-Cola believes it can make a last stand by appealing to youth. So far, however, it hasn’t gained much ground. Research firm AC Nielsen says a January survey indicated Coca-Cola had captured 47％ of China’s market for carbonated beverages—Sprite and Fanta. Pepsi-Cola’s share lagged well behind at 19％, most of which was due to Pepsi, followed by 7-Up and Mountain Dew. Globally, Coca-Cola had a 51％ share of beverage sales last year, compared with 21％ for Pepsi-Cola.

Coca-Cola’s China marketing director in Hong Kong, John Cheung, says his firm tried backpack dispensers in China a few years ago but decided they weren’t paying off because the drinks warmed up too quickly. But Pepsi-Cola’s Tan says the dispensers his company uses—made by U.S.-based Thirst Enders International—keep the rate of warming to a minimum: two degrees an hour on a hot day. With shoppers in Chengdu gulping down the 32 cups in each tank within an hour, the drinks are always cool.

Cheung admits that another reason for Coca-Cola’s disappointing results was that it picked older, unemployed adults to wear the dispensers, rather than upbeat young people. Pepsi-Cola avoided that mistake by recruiting from universities. “We want people who can be identified by the young customers with selling the drinks,” says Tan. “They need to be young, energetic and outgoing.”

Pepsi-Cola also has used the dispensers in the Philippines and Singapore for promotions and sporting events. In China, it may start using them at soccer games—it sponsors the country’s premier league. Tan says he wants to take the packs nationwide “as soon as possible”. That will mean convincing bottlers and distributors to stump up $1,000 for each pack. (Under Pepsi-Cola’s arrangements with its local partners, the partners bear the full cost.)

Coca-Cola’s Cheung admits he’s watching Pepsi-Cola’s gambit (策略) carefully. “If the day comes that the backpack is such a big advantage,” he says, “We’ll use them too.”

One night in the early 1600s Galileo got tired of using the newfangled (新花样的) telescope to spot ships and pointed it to the heavens instead. Suddenly the moon had mountains. A fleet of moons encircled Jupiter. And people would never again gaze at the night sky in the same way.

Now astronomers looked 8,000 light-years into the cosmos with the Hubble Space Telescope. Orbiting 370 miles up, above city lights and the rippling atmosphere, Hubble has confirmed the existence of black holes, revealed a gallery of bizarre galaxies, and chronicled the catastrophic (灾难的) explosions of dying stars.

Not bad for a satellite that in the beginning had something of a catastrophic reputation itself, Hubble was lifted into orbit with great expectation by the space shuttle Discovery in April 1990. Almost immediately it was clear that the primary mirror was misshapen (变形的)—not to the extreme but enough to pull some lace curtainsacross Hubble’s “window on the universe.” The telescope’s true golden age began in December 1993, when the crew of the shuttle Endeavor rode to the rescue.

With hinged doors and modular (组合式的) parts, Hubble was designed to be serviced in space. Like roadside mechanics, the astronauts pulled up to Hubble, opened the hood, and installed replacement parts. They included corrective mirrors that canceled out the existing mirror flaw. In the following months astronomers marveled at razor-sharp views of a universe dizzy with exploding stars and colliding galaxies, stretching off from here to the edge of eternity.

When you look into space, you are looking back through time. Even at 186,000 miles a second, light requires a measurable amount of time to get from one place to another. Sunlight bounced off the moon requires a second to reach earth, so when you look at the moon, you are actually looking at the moon a second ago. With its unobstructed view, Hubble can look back some 11 billion years—just two billion years or so after the creation of the universe—to see galaxies already forming. These galaxies are speeding away from us. The farther they are, the faster they’re going—the most distant approach the speed of light. In the 1920s astronomer Edwin Hubble came up with a formula that expresses the proportional relationship of distances between clusters of galaxies and the speeds at which they are moving.

For the rest of us Hubble is simply the greatest tour guide ever. The Eagle Nebula’s towering pillars evoke the same awe as any ancient temple. The violence of Eta Carinae’s explosion is as heart-stopping as the eruption of a volcano. And thanks to Hubble we can begin to register the notion that while earth is our local address, we have an entire universe that we can call home.

[A] The visa system is not perfect.

[B] The selling of visa is on the rise.

[C] Auction has many advantages.

[D] Selling visas is beneficial to Britons.

[E] Methods to rectify the flaw of visa system.

[F] Immigration brings negative economic impact.

[G] Auction may be a solution to current visa system.

Should the British government be in the business of selling visas? In effect it already is. For years wealthy folk who invest in the country have been given permission to live there. But according to a report released on February 25th by the Migration Advisory Committee, an independent group, Britain could do it better.

【R1】________

At present migrants who invest substantial sums in gilts or in British registered companies can apply for permanent residence. A million pounds ($1.7m) gets them leave to remain after five years; £5m reduces the waiting time to three years and £10m to two. They need not speak English and can bring their families. Between 2009 and 2013 Britain flogged 1,628 such visas. The market is heating up: 560 went last year.

【R2】________

This system is deeply flawed. The minimum investment level has not gone up since 1994. Because the value of an investment must remain above £1m until residency is granted, most applicants pile into low-risk gilts, for which buyers are already plentiful. Investors are likely to sell those gilts when they obtain settlement. Rich foreigners, who prize London’s private schools and England’s legal system, are benefiting more than the country that hosts them, thinks the committee.

【R3】________

To redress this, it recommends raising the threshold to £2m and expanding the range of qualifying investments to include venture-capital schemes and infrastructure bonds. Gilts might be excluded. The committee also suggests introducing “premium” visas, which would entail quick settlement rights and less onerous residency requirements. These could be auctioned off with a reserve price of £2.5m.

【R4】________

An auction would have two clear advantages over the current system: the number of visas could be easily controlled, and they would sell for more. A revenue-maximising government should prefer an auction based on single sealed bids, as the committee suggests. More than an “English” auction, where bids are public, this would play on applicants’ fear of missing out, encouraging high rollers to bid closer to what they are willing to pay, rather than just a fraction more than their competitors, says Paul Klemperer, an auction theorist at Oxford University. To keep people guessing, and prices high, the government could keep the winning bids secret.

Auctions would also enable would-be settlers to weigh Britain against other countries. Portugal offers residency to those who buy property worth €500,000 (£412,000). Malta offers citizenship for €1.15m in return for a combination of cash, property purchases and investment.

Still, the committee’s proposals could be improved upon. More than venture capital or private infrastructure investment, and much more than foreign property buyers, Britain needs cold cash. Instead of trying to determine what is and is not a useful investment, it could auction all rich folk visas and spend the proceeds.

【R5】________

A government obsessed with cutting immigration is unlikely to follow the committee’s advice, let alone economic theory. But mere talk of selling settlement is healthy. More than half of Britons believe immigrants have a negative economic impact. A bidding war for British visas, with the proceeds going to hospitals and schools, might disabuse them of that notion. It might even make them feel better about the country where they live.