ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
楼主: Charyll
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[备考日记] 『Cheryll备考日记』最后一拼了不然就回家高考吧你。

[复制链接]
31#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-20 17:27:12 | 只看该作者
于是想起来自己每天希望完成的工作。

高分120的conversation部分都做完了。

[明天开始lecture。然后做老托。 然后delta的4个test。]

<C1: 错2. 主旨题也错。Q4错在pay the fine什么的是他需要做的。copy only what..是图书管理员建议他做的。我觉得这两题目不明不白的。答案也曲折。)
  C2:错2。Q2错在知道有提到这个信息点,但是没听懂信息点的内容。而且这是在前几句反复出现。 Q4错在听漏了最后一两句。结尾肯定出考点的,不能到后面就放松了。
  C3:错3。Q2,多选题,一定不能选重复意思的信息点!必然有微小的不同混淆视线。 Q3听了没听懂。Q5 选对了又改成错的了。直觉还是相当重要。
  C4:好像错1。Q3,信息点没对应好,细节性的信息缺失和听不懂
>

=============
听力不会的:
qualify as 作为...合适
expert 专家,能手
prospective 预期的
disqualify 使丧失资格
relocation
take action
forfeit 丧失
relocate 重新部署
make up one's mind
go with 与...相配
32#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-21 13:14:42 | 只看该作者
1020

听力: 高分120

阅读:没

口语:TPO5一套

写作:一篇

单词:早上背了王玉梅的list1-2。
33#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-21 13:15:24 | 只看该作者
1021

听力:高分120的lecture。 错地太稳定了。 三篇,都是每篇2个。

阅读:没做。

口语:做了几个题目。

写作:一篇。分析高分作文。

每天再不照计划进行我就去死。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。
神马人阿事阿都是浮云阿,作业阿,不停的作业才可以给我80分阿。。。差距好大。。。
真的想上个正常的学校吗!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
34#
发表于 2010-10-22 03:03:11 | 只看该作者
lz什么时候考?加油!我来看你的帖子找动力呢.
35#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-22 05:27:33 | 只看该作者
5555555555555... 我下个月。
我根本就没在做什么作业...............不然你也来写备考,互找打击和动力
36#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-22 15:56:10 | 只看该作者
提醒一下自己!!!

每天希望做完的事:
听力:TPO1套加分析。老托听力。(老托完了就要去弄Barron)
阅读:TPO1套加分析。看Scienfic American。
口语:看黄金80的答案。
写作:一篇。晚上还有一篇要写。分析高分作文。
?一直被指出中式表达太过严重的问题。?

只要蓝色部分是完成了的。
明天开始每天抽1个小时背SAT8000基础词汇。
37#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-23 10:44:09 | 只看该作者
突然感觉好久没读。

Hawking versus God: What Did the Physicist Really Say about the Deity?

Has Stephen Hawkingoverreached? The publication in September of The Grand Design, a book the British physicist co-authored with Leonard Mlodinow of Caltech, raised hackles as some saw it as denying the existence of God based on scientific arguments.

Physics, the book states, can now explain where the universe came from and why the laws of nature are what they are. The universe arose “from nothing” courtesy of the force of gravity, and the laws of nature are an accident of the particular slice of universe we happen to inhabit. “It is possible to answer these questions purely within the realm of science, and without invokingany divine beings,” the authors wrote. (An adaptation of the book appeared in the October Scientific American.)

Theologians were incensed, saying that the existence of a creator is by definition就定义来outside science’s domain. Some, including Reverend Robert E. Barron, a theology professor at the University of St. Mary of the Lake near Chicago, also complained that the book is philosophically naive. For example, Barron says, the existence of the laws that caused the appearance of the universe must have predated the big bang. “The ‘laws of gravity’ seem to be something other than nothing.”

As the media frenzy spread from bloggers and tweeters to prime-time黄金时段television, the authors countered that they never meant to claim that science proved that there is no God. “God may exist,” Hawking told CNN’s Larry King, adding, “but science can explain the universe without the need for a creator.”

“We don’t say we’ve proved that God doesn’t exist.” Mlodinow says. “We don’t even say we’ve proved that God hasn’t created the universe.” As for the laws of physics, he says, some may choose to call those God. “If you think that God is the embodiment of quantum theory, that’s fine.”

On the other hand, the scientific account of the origin of the universe may not be as complete as Hawking represents. It is based on string theory and on an even more mysterious—and just as untested—version of it called M-theory, as well as on Hawking’s own cosmological thoughts. “The theories that Hawking and Mlodinow use to base their arguments on have as much empirical evidence as God,” wrote cosmologist Marcelo Gleiser on an NPR.org blog. Moreover, Gleiser added, “because we don’t have instruments capable of measuring all of nature, we cannot ever be certain that we have a final theory.”

Stanford University theoretical physicist Leonard Susskind, whose 2006 book The Cosmic Landscape also questioned the need for a creator in the account of creation, agrees. “Not all physicists think the quest for a complete theory is over,” he says. “I don’t think we are anywhere near it.” Whether or not there is a God, his or her handiwork is certainly not easy to understand.

...好吧。不明白。 有上帝就有呗- -。 没有就没有呗- -。为什么这样。
造物主 真的存在吗,不是说是迷信吗,到底什么才是真相阿- -。算了。
38#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-23 10:51:54 | 只看该作者
1023

听力:高分120(lecture5个,TTC课程)
阅读:老托阅读3篇了
口语:看黄金80的答案。
写作:2篇。分析高分作文。
单词:SAT8000基础+高频(前言的一)
         词以类记(宗教+自然+植物学)
王玉梅+阅读单词(至少花3个小时特别来弄)

只有蓝色是有做的。

最近生活乱死了。 果然觉得作文口语和阅读听力不能兼顾。 果断得不写作文几天去研究下表达。
39#
发表于 2010-10-23 14:53:13 | 只看该作者
发现每天看LZ经济学人文章里的highlight很有意思
40#
 楼主| 发表于 2010-10-23 16:33:53 | 只看该作者
哈哈哈 为什么
还有我看的大多是Scientific American。
不知道为什么有一段时间很爱经济学人。现在不爱了。
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

所属分类: TOEFL / IELTS

近期活动

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-4-24 23:51
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部