issue25 G-89-互助社-18日自由练习

keeyangUID：2120118

issue 25

Anyone can make things bigger and more complex. What requires real effort and courage is to move in the opposite direction—in other words, to make things as simpl
e as possible.

关于对题意的理解：是应该侧重写简化的好处，还是侧重写为什么简化要花费功夫？有的范文写的前一个意思，我的理解如果那样写则是 what is worth the effort了，所以找后一个意思写的，不知对不对
issue有人打扰，后来改了一下，主要是写了一下开头结尾，写得很烂，那位给一些建议，谢谢了？

Whether does to make things simple require more hard work than to increase their complexity, as the speaker asserts? I fundamental agree with this assertion for two considerations: that the simplicity comes from and thus is superior to the complexity and that simplification is more creative.

To begin with, simple discoveries are constructed on the basis of complex things. To discover simpler findings means that at the beginning one have to gain and master a large amount of specific facts and data, which alone requires great effort. For example, physicians often spend a lot of time in experiment to collect data while biologist first collects various samples of species before classification.

Second, after one has got the necessary data, that is no more than a mixture of both gold and sand, one needs to analysis these data, abandons the peripheral material, sustain the potential useful ones, and only based on this work, can one discern some basic ideas which hides in the tremendous amount of complex nebula. Then, via a process of comprehension and abstraction, some basic rules can be established. The history of classic physics development provides a good example to illustrate point. In the 17th century, a Danish artronomist Digu obserced the motion of the solor system for 20 years, but he themselves lacks the ability to theorize. Then, his students Kapler worked on these data for another 20 years and finally he established three impertant laws name after his name, these three laws are able to discript the solor system and other similar astronomical systems in a simple and elegant mathematical way. Those distant stars, that stimulate the imagination and puzzle of human beings for thousans years, is understood by people with great ease. But, this story resumed with Isaac Newton who inherited Kapler's achievements and developed into his famous universal force law, which cound explain nearly all machemisn phenomena, whether small as dust or large as stars. In short, the process of simplification requires intuition, careful examination of the specific details and ability to correlate seemly unrelated things, and thus it is more creative and more difficult.      

Finally, moving into the opposite direction often make us get bogged down in the dazzling ideas, phenomenon, and information, from which we can not make any correct decisions. And we can not make sure that a rather complicated knowledge system is self-consistent. Take ether, a presuming substance allowing light travel through before the realization of the nature of light, for example, whenever a experiment result reveals something contracting to the established features of ether, physicians will add some new feature to it, and finally make ether an extremely confusing. No one except Einstein had tried to simplify these things from another way, that is the relative theory consisting only three basic prepositions, very simple but very powerful.

In sum, we gain simple understanding of the nature from the basis of much complex details, which helps us to understand the real world. Such simplification requires great effort and is worthy the work.

dennyaimarUID：191857

我觉得是需要侧重courage & endeavor的

dennyaimarUID：191857

Whether(没有这么用的吧？) does to make things simple require more hard work than to increase their complexity, as the speaker asserts? I fundamental agree with this assertion(前面是一个疑问，这里怎么能肯定) for two considerations: that the simplicity comes from and thus is superior to the complexity and that simplification is more creative.

To begin with, simple discoveries are constructed on the basis of complex things. To discover simpler findings means that at the beginning one have to gain and master a large amount of specific facts and data, which alone requires great effort. For example, physicians often spend a lot of time in experiment to collect data while biologist first collects various samples of species before classification. （简单一定是来自复杂吗？这个推断有待推敲。有些事情本来就很简单，但是不能说所有简单都是从复杂变来的啊。）

Second, after one has got the necessary data, that is no more than a mixture of both gold and sand, one needs to analysis these data, abandons the peripheral material, sustains the potential useful ones, and only based on this work, can one discern some basic ideas which hides in the tremendous amount of complex nebula. Then, via a process of comprehension and abstraction, some basic rules can be established. The history of classic physics development provides a good example to illustrate point. In the 17th century, a Danish astronomer Digu observed the motion of the solar system for 20 years, but he themselves lacks the ability to theorize. Then, his students Kapler worked on these data for another 20 years and finally he established three important laws name after his name, which are able to descript the solar system and other similar astronomical systems in a simple and elegant mathematical way. Those distant stars, that stimulate the imagination and puzzle of human beings for thousand years, are understood by people with great ease. But, this story resumed with Isaac Newton who inherited Kapler's achievements and developed into his famous universal force law, which could explain nearly all mechanism phenomena, whether small as dust or large as stars. In short, the process of simplification requires intuition, careful examination of the specific details and ability to correlate seemly unrelated things, and thus it is more creative and more difficult. （我觉得你用的两个例子不恰当，他们的理论之间的联系不是简单化的过程，牛顿可能是借鉴了开普勒的理论，但是并不是把他完全简化为自己的，应该是没有完全涵盖，不能作为简单化的例子）     

Finally, moving into the opposite direction often make us get bogged down in the dazzling ideas, phenomenon, and information, from which we can not make any correct decisions. And we can not make sure that a rather complicated knowledge system is self-consistent. Take ether, a presuming substance allowing light travel through before the realization of the nature of light, for example, whenever a experiment result reveals something contracting to the established features of ether, physicians will add some new feature to it, and finally make ether an extremely confusing. No one except Einstein had tried to simplify these things from another way, that is the relative theory consisting only three basic prepositions, very simple but very powerful.

In sum, we gain simple understanding of the nature from the basis of much complex details, which helps us to understand the real world. Such simplification requires great effort and is worthy the work.

你虽然意识到了文章的重点应该放在论述努力和勇气上面，但是你的文章却没有体现你的初衷，完全没有涉及到courage方面，你的例子选择有问题，可以参考一下我的I25
我那篇虽然PARA2写的很烂，但是后面的para3.4的例子我觉得用的比较贴切，虽然表达不够理想
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=319799

dennyaimarUID：191857

花了挺大劲写的observation
http://edu.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=322136   i-157     dennyaimar