托福真經月報-2023年5月報

聽力題目逐字稿 Lecture:

In fact, the phenomenon of moving lights in wetlands remains a mystery. Though there have been several seemingly plausible explanations for the light, all of them have significant shortcomings that fail to adequately account for the phenomenon.

First, regarding the ignition of flammable gases such as hydrogen or methane, the problem is that this wouldn’t create the appearance of movement. It certainly is the case that marshes are the perfect environment to produce pockets of these gases that would indeed be quite flammable. But reports of moving lights in wetland areas always describe them as moving around. Gas pockets in the air would burn instantly and go out, while an underground pocket leaking out would appear stationary.

Second is the idea that electrical discharges might look like moving lights from a distance. In fact, wetlands are not an environment that might build up electrical charges. Because there is so much water vapor in the air, any electrical charge would be immediately dispersed throughout the air and into the ground and water. It simply wouldn’t charge enough to produce anything like a lighting strike, and certainly wouldn’t give off any light. And of course, even if plants were struck by lightning, they would be stationary and not move around as reported by observers of the wetland lights.

Finally, while there are some bioluminescent fungi that grow in marshes, there is no reason to believe that birds would allow them to grow on their feathers. Birds are fastidious creatures. They are nearly always cleaning and grooming themselves in order to stay healthy, and because they want to ensure they’re not carrying any excess weight when flying. Birds would not permit a fungus to grow on their feathers, so this also cannot explain the moving lights. For now, this mystery will remain a mystery.

The reading passage explores three possible explanations for the presence of moving lights in wetland areas. However, the professor in the lecture suggests that these theories have significant shortcomings and fail to adequately account for the phenomenon.

While the speaker in the listening passage agrees with the reading passage that while marshes are the perfect environment to produce pockets of methane and hydrogen, gas pockets in the air would burn instantly and go out, while an underground pocket leaking out would appear stationary. Therefore, the theory does not account for the reported movement of the lights.

The second theory discussed in the reading passage is that electrical flashes might look like moving lights from a distance. However, the speaker in the listening passage argues that wetlands do not build up electrical charges. Any electrical charge would be immediately dispersed throughout the air and into the ground and water, and it would not give off any light. Even if plants were struck by lightning, they would be stationary and not move around as reported by observers of the wetland lights. Therefore, this theory cannot explain the phenomenon of moving lights.

Finally the reading passage suggests that a fungus that grows on bird feathers might emit a soft, blue-green light. The lecturer refutes this by stating that birds would not allow this fungus to grow on their feathers. Birds constantly clean and groom themselves to ensure they’re not carrying any excess weight when flying. Birds would not permit a fungus to grow on their feathers, so this theory also cannot explain the moving lights.

In conclusion, the listening passage refutes the theories presented in the reading passage for the existence of moving lights in wetland areas. The speaker argues that all the theories have significant shortcomings that fail to account for the phenomenon adequately.

The reading passage discusses three possible explanations for a phenomenon sometimes observed in wetland habitats, in which people have reported seeing lights that move among the trees or grasses. However, the professor in the listening finds fault in all three explanations.

First, the reading passage claims that wetland environments have the conditions to produce large pockets of methane and hydrogen gas, which then ignite and produce light. The professor assents that these gases are indeed produced in marshes, but says that they would either burn instantly or burn in one place. So, this explanation cannot account for the reported movement of the lights.

Second, the reading passage states that wetlands can produce electrical charges which then discharge in bright flashes, like lightning. However, the lecturer rejects this explanation on the grounds that no such charge could be generated. The amount of water vapor in the air would disperse the charge, making any electrical burst impossible. Therefore, the moving lights cannot be caused by electrical discharges.

Finally, the professor refutes the idea that a bioluminescent fungus on bird feathers might explain the moving lights due to the fact that birds would not permit this fungus to grow. She explains that birds are very clean animals and would not allow fungus to weigh down their wings. Thus, a glowing fungus cannot explain the phenomenon either.

Though each of the reading passage’s arguments regarding moving lights in wetlands seems plausible at first, the professor disproves each of them. Because burning gases would not move, electrical discharges are impossible, and fungi would not grow on bird feathers, the lecturer explains that for now this phenomenon will remain unexplained.

You are about to choose between two professors who will be teaching a course that you must take at your university. If the following statements are the only information available to you about the two professors, which professor would you choose?

a. One professor was voted most popular in a survey of students about their teachers.

b. One professor has just been given an award for outstanding research. (2023年5月真題)

When it comes to choosing a professor to teach a course that is mandatory for one’s academic progress, the decision should be based on various factors, but often students have only limited information. In this case, only two pieces of information are available about the two professors – one was voted most popular by students in a survey, while the other received an award for outstanding research. Of these, I would choose the professor who has just been given an award for outstanding research. First, while being voted most popular by students is certainly a desirable trait, it does not equate to being the best professor for a particular course. The reasons behind a professor’s popularity can vary, and it may not necessarily be related to their teaching abilities. Some professors may be popular because they are lenient with grading or because they offer extra credit opportunities, which are not always indicators of a well-structured course. So, I would not choose a professor based on student survey results. On the other hand, being recognized for outstanding research is a significant achievement that reflects a professor’s academic prowess and expertise in their field. This award indicates that the professor is at the forefront of their area of research and is making significant contributions to their field. Such a professor is likely to have a deep understanding of the subject matter and can offer students valuable insights and perspectives to students that may not be available elsewhere. Thus, this professor is the better choice of the two. Furthermore, an award for outstanding research may indicate that the professor is up-to-date with the latest advancements in their field, and they can incorporate this knowledge into their teaching. This can be particularly useful in courses that cover advanced topics, where staying current with the latest research can make a significant difference in the quality of education provided to students. I would choose this up-to-date professor over the other. In conclusion, while being popular among students is undoubtedly a positive attribute for a professor, it may not necessarily indicate their teaching abilities or the quality of the course content. Therefore, if I had to choose between two professors based on the information given, I would choose the professor who received an award for outstanding research. This award reflects the professor’s academic achievements and expertise, which can significantly benefit students taking the course.

Some people think with the development of technology and the internet, libraries will eventually disappear. Others think libraries are always necessary. Which do you agree with? Give specific details to support your opinion. (2023年5月真題）

I believe that libraries will remain necessary in the future, despite technological changes, for the following two reasons. First, even if people are checking out fewer physical paper books, they still need free access to knowledge, which can be provided through libraries. Many libraries are adapting to technological changes by offering e-books or subscriptions to online services. So these are still good places where you can get that access. Secondly, libraries serve as an important meeting place for communities. For example, many clubs, civic organizations and charitable institutions hold events and meetings at libraries. So that’s why I feel this way.

Geology Field Trip Location Change

We are excited to announce that this year’s geology field trip will be taking place at the museum instead of a national park! Previous trips to national parks have been hot and unpleasant, and this change in location will be more enjoyable for everyone. Not only will the museum offer a more comfortable environment, but it will also allow us to observe a wider variety of minerals. The museum has an extensive collection of minerals from all around the world, providing an excellent opportunity for students to see and learn about a diverse range of minerals that they may not have had the chance to observe otherwise.

A: Hey, have you heard about the geology field trip this year?

B: Yes, I have. I’m not too happy about it.

A: Really? Are you saying you want to be out in the summer heat?

B: Of course I don’t like being hot and sweaty, but it can still be a lot of fun to spend time outside. You get plenty of fresh air and some good exercise. In the park we would do a lot of hiking and get to connect with nature.

A: I see what you mean.

B: But really, I think the more important thing is that we won’t learn as much about geology in a museum.

A: Won’t we get to see all kinds of minerals from around the world?

B: Well, yes, but I just don’t think it’ll give us the same practical experience that visiting a national park would. We’ve spent a lot of time learning to identify minerals, and visiting a park gives us the chance to put those skills into practice.

A: And at the museum, they’ve already done the identifying for you.

B: Exactly. There’s a big difference between someone showing you a rock and going out into the wild to find minerals on your own. Going to a national park would give us good training for our future careers as geologists.

Habituation

Living organisms are constantly interacting with various stimuli in their environment. Some of these stimuli require a response in order for the organism to survive, such as the smell of a nearby predator or the sound of thunder, while others can be safely ignored, such as the feeling of a light breeze or the sound of birdsong. If an organism paid attention and responded to all stimuli, it would live in a state of constant anxiety. So, living creatures learn to ignore stimuli that are not threatening to their health and safety. Researchers refer to this learning as habituation.

Habituation is much more common in animals than plants, but there are some known examples in the plant kingdom too. Let’s look at an example relating to a plant called a touch-me-not. The reason for the name is that when something touches the plant’s leaves, they fold up to protect themselves from being eaten or damaged. Well, a few years ago researchers wanted to use touch-me-nots to study habituation in plants. They correctly thought that because the plants have an instant, physical response to outside stimuli, they would be easy to run experiments on. They took dozens of potted touch-me-nots and dropped them from a modest height onto the floor. The fall was too small to do any damage to the plants, but, unsurprisingly, the sensitive leaves folded up when the plants struck the floor on the first drop. However, the experiment didn’t stop there. The researchers continued dropping the plants from the same height. They found that after several drops, most of the plants no longer folded up their leaves. Now that the plants had learned that there was no danger from the drop, they no longer responded to the stimulus the same way. Now, what’s most fascinating about this is that touch-me-nots, like all plants, do not have a brain or a central nervous system. So the biological mechanism by which they habituate is a complete mystery.

The reading passage discusses the concept of habituation. It explains that some organisms will ignore stimuli that are not threatening to their health and safety. The professor provides a good example of the touch-me-not plant. This plant has leaves that fold up when they are touched in order to prevent them from being eaten or damaged. Some researchers chose touch-me-nots to study habituation in plants. They took several plants and dropped them from a low height, low enough so that the plants would not be hurt. The first time when the plants were dropped, they would all fold up their leaves, but after several drops, they stopped folding their leaves. This is because they had learned that this was not dangerous. And so, they habituated to the outside stimulus of being dropped from a low height. Interestingly, researchers do not know how they learn to do this.

Listen to a lecture in a business class:

Today, we will be discussing strategies for businesses to get consumers to purchase products with the highest profit margin. Some products are more expensive for a company to produce, and so the company does not earn as much profit from their sales. So companies want to find ways to convince consumers to purchase not just expensive goods, but products that will earn the company more money. So, what are some strategies that businesses can use to sell more products with a high profit margin? First, businesses try to attract consumers’ attention to high profit margin products. Let’s look at the restaurant industry for an example. Restaurants have long used a strategy of placing certain dishes in the center of the menu to draw attention to them. These dishes may not be the most expensive on the menu, but they do earn a lot of money. By placing them in a prominent location, restaurants are able to attract customers’ eyes and entice them to order these dishes. Restaurants will also often have a special box or a different background color around the dishes, or add a special symbol indicating that this food is a “chef’s favorite.” All of these draw attention to the dishes that make the most money. Another strategy that businesses can use is to print prices smaller on their menus or packaging. When prices are printed smaller, consumers may not focus on the cost of the product and instead are drawn in by pictures or descriptions of the product. Restaurants do this often as well, making prices very small and pictures much larger. This allows businesses to sell products at higher prices without deterring customers from purchasing the product. In fact, some restaurants don’t even give the price for some items, such as fish, allowing them to bump up prices without customers noticing.