同學(xué)們大家好，今天學(xué)姐來為大家探討一下關(guān)于美國高中留學(xué)生在自然科學(xué)這門課程中遇到的知識點難點，同時為大家梳理一下思路，其實這門學(xué)科總體來說并不難學(xué)，把課堂上老師講到的歸納清楚，再加上自己的理解，多進行實踐分析，難題將不復(fù)存在。

如何才能完成自己的高中課程是關(guān)鍵，美國高中生課程先對來說還是比較重要的，希望大家不要掛科，將所學(xué)專業(yè)課程融合自己的實驗總結(jié)，開展發(fā)散性思維，學(xué)姐下面給大家講講這門課程的專業(yè)知識，希望大家喜歡。

自然科學(xué)的核心課程

生命物理學(xué)

我們探索從力學(xué)到原子物理的物理學(xué)如何應(yīng)用于生命科學(xué)。應(yīng)用的例子有:生物有機體中的流體流動和熱量調(diào)節(jié)，神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)中的靜電學(xué)，以及聽覺和視覺中的波動現(xiàn)象。

宇宙物理學(xué)

我們用引力和電磁相互作用作為物理學(xué)如何獲取實驗證據(jù)的代表，然后將其編碼成一個理論框架，可以用來對新現(xiàn)象進行預(yù)測和推斷。該課程強調(diào)開發(fā)描述自然物理結(jié)構(gòu)所需的工具，然后使用這些工具來推斷物理理論的有效范圍以及超出這些范圍的內(nèi)容。

地球周期的含義

地球系統(tǒng)是從它的起源到今天的功能來研究的。從宇宙的起源和恒星中元素的創(chuàng)造開始，這門課程發(fā)展到對太陽系和產(chǎn)生可居住行星的條件的理解。地球從一個沒有生命的、還原的行星演化為一個復(fù)雜的、氧化的行星，可以支持人類等高級生命。本課程的一個目標(biāo)是將人類置于一個普遍和行星的背景下，并將行星進化的步驟視為我們今天與地球關(guān)系的一個重要視角。

跨多種規(guī)模的發(fā)展

進化是所有生物過程的統(tǒng)一原則。詳細探索細胞、個體和生態(tài)群落中的基本過程是如何被進化變化的基本機制解釋的，包括突變、自然選擇和遺傳漂變。探索最新技術(shù)如何揭示所有生物系統(tǒng)的相互聯(lián)系以及生物圈和地球過程之間的相互作用。

化學(xué)結(jié)構(gòu)和反應(yīng)性

本課程探索基于分子、原子和亞原子結(jié)構(gòu)的自然物理和化學(xué)性質(zhì)，重點是結(jié)構(gòu)如何決定反應(yīng)性。經(jīng)驗觀察將與化學(xué)和物理原理相結(jié)合，以理解支撐各種尺度現(xiàn)象的自然微觀屬性。完成本課程的學(xué)生將能夠產(chǎn)生強有力的機械化學(xué)解釋，并將其應(yīng)用于高級化學(xué)、物理、地球科學(xué)和生物課程。

To answer this question,we first have to understand how (or even whether) science progresses in its acquisition of knowledge. At first sight,this seems obvious: surely we discover new ideas about the natural world,and add it to what we already know,to build up a broader and clearer picture. Then we find more knowledge,and the picture becomes even more extensive. This is how it works in your own studies: you go from knowing very little about a subject,to building up a large body of knowledge about it. Correspondingly,your files go from being thin or non-existent,to bulging at the seams,so that when you come to revise for your exams,the amount of knowledge you have is annoyingly large. This simple accumulation of knowledge is called a linear progression of knowledge.

But as soon as you think about the linear progression of knowledge,you realise that it doesn’t work that way when it comes to natural sciences. We have already seen that scientific theories can’t be proven true,they can only be proven false (indeed,they have to be potentially falsifiable,as Karl popper said,in order to qualify as proper scientific theories),and this is what often happens: a new scientific theory comes along to replace them.

So science clearly doesn’t just proceed in a simple linear fashion. New ideas replace old ideas,and sometimes the whole way we view the world is shifted,rather than just modified. Unfortunately,human nature being what it is,people are often reluctant to accept this shift in the way we view the world. As Max planck said,‘A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing opponents and making them see the light,but rather because its opponents eventually die,and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.’

Kuhn and paradigm shifts

This led the scientific philosopher Thomas Kuhn to propose that science progresses as a result of a series of revolutions. Kuhn said that these revolutions happen after a period of ‘normal science’ in which we view the world in a certain way (this way of viewing the world is called a ‘paradigm’),and practice our science to fit in with that paradigm. When a new idea is proposed that refutes the paradigm,usually it isn’t immediately adopted; rather,the scientist who came up with it is told that his ideas are wrong.

But if other scientists have similar hypotheses,there is a build up of opposition to the existing paradigm. This may take years or even decades to gain momentum,but eventually,they will overcome the existing paradigm,and lead to what Kuhn termed a ‘paradigm shift’. Then scientists (and us) will look at the world in a different way,through a new paradigm.

probably the best example to apply Kuhn’s paradigm shift model to is the replacement of the geocentric paradigm with the heliocentric paradigm (but we use this purely as an illustration – be more original in your TOK essay or presentation!).

It is clear why people since prehistoric times have believed that the earth is static,and the celestial bodies revolve around us. We don’t seem to move,whilst the stars do. ptolemy,a Roman citizen living in Egypt (who wrote in Greek…) laid down a seemingly scientific set of observations to confirm this fact in the second century AD,which became known as the geocentric theory.

ptolemy’s paradigm was that the earth was at the centre of the universe,therefore his problem was to come up with a set of rules to work out how the planets revolved around the earth. This he seemed to do after years and years of calculations. Because gravity played (obviously) no part in his paradigm,he could do basically what he wanted with the planets,so their orbits could involve moving at inconsistent speeds and even reversing at points.

ptolemy’s calculations seemed to work,and were adopted by the Christian Church,forming a vital part of their paradigm about the universe and our place within it. Since the Church preached that God had created the universe and the earth,we,as his most important creations,must have been placed firmly at the centre,and ptolemy’s calculations seemed to confirm this. As Chronicles 16:30 states,“the world also shall be stable,that it be not moved.”

But the ptolemaic system was never built on solid foundations,and it was only a matter of time before someone came up with something better. Suggestions that the sun rather than the earth was at the centre of the universe – the ‘heliocentric theory’ had been proposed sporadically since the Greek era,but it was the polish astronomer Copernicus who did the most extensive research on the problem,and came up with calculations and observations to support his idea. He published his findings in what is probably the most famous scientific book ever published,De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (‘On the revolutions of the heavenly spheres’) in 1543.

Although Copernicus’s ideas were also filled with problems – for example,the sun was the centre of the universe and the orbits of the planets were circular – his proposals represented a revolution in how we saw the world,and meant,if accepted,that God had not placed human beings in the centre of the universe. But contrary to popular belief,the Catholic Church did not oppose his ideas,and even encouraged him to publish further works.

Even the modifications made by Galileo in the early 17th century were initially accepted by the Church – it was only after Galileo had supposedly made fun of the pope Urban VIII in a book weighing up the pros and cons of heliocentrism that the theory was condemned by the Church.

paradigm shifts and our perception of reality

There are other examples of how scientific revolutions have in an intellectually violent way moved on our understanding of the world – evolution is probably the other best known example.

But how does this change our perception of reality? One of the problems is that it’s hard to see the world through another paradigm. Consequently,it’s hard to imagine a world which is characterised by a belief in the geocentric theory,and,for most of us,it’s hard to conceive of an understanding of nature in which God created everything in six days (and rested on the seventh) – evolution,in other words,has become for most of us the paradigm of how we view t

上方是學(xué)姐用英文為大家找來的關(guān)于自然科學(xué)的一些知識點，相信大家都能夠看懂，如果同學(xué)們還有很多的專業(yè)課程疑問，留求藝美國留學(xué)生輔導(dǎo)老師會根據(jù)同學(xué)們目前所掌握的知識情況，進行定制化的詳細講解，學(xué)姐在最后預(yù)祝大家都能完成自己的高中學(xué)業(yè)，申請到理想的大學(xué)。