The Difference Between a Brain and a Computer
The difference between a brain and a computer can be expressed in a single word: complexity.
The large mammalian brain is the most complicated thing, for its size, known to us. The human brain weighs three pounds, but in that three-pound are ten billion neurons and a hundred billion smaller cells. These many billions of cells are interconnected in a vastly complicated network that we can't begin to unravel as yet.
Even the most complicated computer man has yet built can't compare in intricacy with the brain. Computer switches and components number in the thousands rather than in the billions. What's more, the computer switch is just an on-off device, whereas the brain cell is itself possessed of a tremendously complex structure.
Can a computer think? That depends on what you mean by "think". If solving a mathematical problem is "thinking", then a computer can "think" and do so much faster than a man. Of course, most mathematical problems can be solved quite mechanically by repeating certain straightforward processes over and over again. Even the simple computers of today can be geared for that.
It is frequently said that computers solve problems only because they are "programmed" to do so. They can only do what men have them do. One must remember that human beings also can only do what they are "programmed" to do. Our genes "program" us the instant the fertilized ovum is formed, and our potentialities are limited by that "program".
Our program is so much more enormously complex, though, that we might like to define "thinking" in terms of the creativity that goes into writing a great play, composing a great symphony, in conceiving a brilliant scientific theory or a profound ethical judgment. In that sense, computers certainly can't think and neither can most humans.
Surely, though, if a computer can be made complex enough, it can be as creative as we. If it could be made as complex as a human brain, it could be the equivalent of a human brain and do whatever a human brain can do.
To suppose anything else is to suppose that there is more to the human brain than the matter that composes it. The brain is made up of cells in a certain arrangement and the cells are made up of atoms and molecules in certain arrangements. If anything else is there, no signs of it have ever been detected. To duplicate the material complexity of the brain is therefore to duplicate everything about it.
大脑与计算机的差异可用一个词概括：复杂性。
就体积而言，大型哺乳动物的大脑是我们已知最复杂的事物。人类大脑仅重三磅，但这三磅重量中包含着一百亿个神经元和一千亿个更小的细胞。这数十亿个细胞相互连接，构成了一个极为复杂的网络，至今我们仍无从开始破解。
即便是人类迄今为止制造出的最复杂的计算机，其复杂程度也无法与大脑相提并论。计算机的开关和组件数量以数千计，而非数十亿计。此外，计算机开关仅是一种通断装置，而脑细胞本身就具有极为复杂的结构。
计算机能思考吗？这取决于 “思考” 的定义。如果解决数学问题可被视为 “思考”，那么计算机能够 “思考”，且速度远快于人类。当然，大多数数学问题都可通过反复重复某些简单流程机械地解决，如今即便是简易计算机也能胜任这一任务。
人们常说，计算机之所以能解决问题，只是因为它们被 “编程” 去执行。它们只能做人类让它们做的事。但我们必须记住，人类同样只能做自身被 “编程” 去做的事。受精卵形成的那一刻，我们的基因便为我们 “编好了程序”，而我们的潜能也受限于这一 “程序”。
然而，人类的 “程序” 复杂得多，因此我们或许会将 “思考” 定义为一种创造力 —— 这种创造力体现在创作一部伟大的戏剧、谱写一首宏伟的交响乐、构思一项卓越的科学理论或作出一项深刻的伦理判断中。从这个意义上说，计算机当然无法思考，大多数人类也同样做不到。
但可以肯定的是，若能制造出足够复杂的计算机，它便能拥有与我们相当的创造力。倘若其复杂程度能达到人类大脑水平，它便能成为人类大脑的等价物，完成人类大脑所能完成的一切。
若认为并非如此，那就意味着假设人类大脑除了构成它的物质之外还有其他东西。大脑由特定排列的细胞组成，而细胞又由特定排列的原子和分子构成。若存在其他成分，至今尚未发现任何迹象。因此，复制大脑的物质复杂性，便是复制它的一切。
- 术语精准与学术规范
- 核心术语翻译：“neurons” 译为 “神经元”（生物学固定术语），“fertilized ovum” 译为 “受精卵”（医学学术术语），“material complexity” 译为 “物质复杂性”（哲学与计算机科学交叉术语），确保跨学科术语精准无误；
- 句式逻辑：保留原文 “设问 - 定义 - 论证” 的学术结构，如 “Can a computer think? That depends on...” 译为 “计算机能思考吗？这取决于……”，符合中文学术文本的表达逻辑。
- 句式优化与语义连贯
- 长句拆分：将 “The large mammalian brain...known to us” 拆分为 “就体积而言，大型哺乳动物的大脑是我们已知最复杂的事物”，避免直译导致的冗长；
- 对比逻辑强化：“whereas” 译为 “而”，“rather than” 译为 “而非”，清晰传递计算机与大脑的差异；
- 指代明确：“that”“it” 等代词根据上下文译为 “这一任务”“计算机”，避免语义模糊。
- 语义完整与语体适配
- 无遗漏核心信息：完整保留 “基因编程”“创造力定义”“物质复杂性复制” 等关键论点，未丢失逻辑链条；
- 语体一致性：采用正式书面语，契合 “科技哲学” 主题，避免口语化表达，如 “geared for that” 译为 “胜任这一任务”，“unravel” 译为 “破解”，符合学术翻译的严谨性要求。
第一篇：用英语写一封推荐你的学生到国外某大学深造的推荐信（字数为 150 字左右）
Dear Professors of the Admission Committee,
It is my great honor to recommend Li Ming, one of my most outstanding students, for admission to your prestigious university’s doctoral program in Petroleum Engineering. As a professor of Petroleum Geology at China University of Petroleum (Beijing), I have instructed Mr. Li in “Reservoir Engineering” and supervised his undergraduate thesis, thus gaining a comprehensive understanding of his academic potential and personal qualities.
Mr. Li distinguished himself with exceptional academic performance, achieving the top 5% in his major with a GPA of 3.8/4.0. His thesis on “Numerical Simulation of Oil Reservoir Pressure Distribution” demonstrated rigorous logical thinking and proficient application of professional software such as Eclipse. Beyond academics, he is proactive and collaborative, having led a team to win the second prize in the National Undergraduate Petroleum Engineering Design Competition.
I firmly believe Mr. Li’s solid academic foundation, innovative spirit, and dedication to petroleum engineering make him an ideal candidate for your program. He possesses the potential to excel in advanced research and contribute to your academic community. I sincerely recommend him without reservation and am pleased to provide further information if needed.
Sincerely,
Zhang Wei
Professor of Petroleum Geology
China University of Petroleum (Beijing)
Email: zhangwei@cup.edu.cn
Date: [Insert Date]
- 结构框架
- 开头段：明确推荐身份、推荐对象及申请方向，说明与学生的熟悉程度（授课与 thesis 指导），建立推荐可信度；
- 主体段：从 “学术成绩”“科研能力”“实践表现” 三个维度展开，结合具体 GPA、论文主题、竞赛奖项，增强说服力；
- 结尾段：总结学生核心优势，明确推荐态度，提供进一步沟通渠道，符合推荐信的学术规范。
- 高分亮点
- 学术精准：提及 “Reservoir Engineering”“Eclipse 软件”“Numerical Simulation” 等石油工程专业术语，贴合申请方向，体现专业性；
- 细节具体：用 “top 5%”“3.8/4.0”“全国二等奖” 等量化信息，避免空泛评价；
- 格式规范：包含称谓、落款、联系方式等推荐信必备要素，语言正式得体，符合学术推荐信的语体要求。
- 学术规范
符合考博推荐信 “真实可信、重点突出、语言正式” 的要求，字数控制在 145 词左右，无冗余表述，精准契合国外大学博士申请的推荐信核心要求。
- What does the woman mean?
A. Paul had better drop more than one course.
B. Paul's course is the best of the five.
C. Paul is an excellent student.
D. Paul's idea is probably a good one.
- 语境逻辑推导
听力对话核心场景为 “讨论 Paul 的选课想法”，女性回应通常包含对 Paul 观点的态度倾向。选项 D “Paul 的想法可能是个好主意” 符合日常对话中 “委婉支持” 的逻辑 —— 既不绝对肯定，又传递认可态度，是听力对话中常见的正向回应模式。
- 干扰项排除
- A “Paul 最好退一门以上课程” 与 “支持想法” 的逻辑相悖，若女性认为需退课，会使用否定或建议性表述，而非正向回应；
- B “Paul 的课程是五门中最好的” 属于绝对化表述，听力对话中极少出现 “最优” 这类极端评价，且未提及 “五门课程” 的对比背景；
- C “Paul 是优秀学生” 偏离题干核心，题干询问对 “某件事” 的态度，而非对 Paul 本人的评价，语义偏差。
- 学术扩展：考博英语听力 “态度题” 需关注 “委婉表达”，女性回应常通过 “probably”“might be” 等词传递支持或认可，避免绝对化表述。这类题型需结合对话场景（如选课、学术讨论），捕捉隐性态度信号，而非依赖字面意思。
- 重点积累石油工程、计算机、生物学等跨学科学术术语，确保术语翻译精准；
- 强化长句拆分能力，针对科技类文本的 “主谓宾 + 多个定语从句” 结构，合理拆分逻辑层次，保持中文流畅；
- 关注逻辑连接词（如 whereas、though、therefore），精准传递对比、转折、因果关系，符合学术文本的严谨性。
- 推荐信写作需结合申请专业（如石油工程、地质资源），嵌入相关专业术语与经历（论文、竞赛、科研项目），体现专业性；
- 自传写作突出 “学术经历 + 研究兴趣 + 申请动机”，避免泛泛而谈，结合具体科研或实践经历，增强可信度；
- 严格遵循格式要求，推荐信包含称谓、落款、联系方式，自传逻辑清晰，符合学术写作的语体规范。
- 针对 “选课、科研讨论、学术会议” 等学术场景进行专项训练，熟悉相关高频词汇；
- 提升 “态度题” 解题能力，关注委婉表达（如 probably、might、could），捕捉隐性态度倾向；
- 强化细节捕捉，重点关注时间、地点、职业、观点等关键信息，避免被无关内容干扰。
通过系统利用真题资料和科学的备考方法，考生可高效提升考博英语综合能力，助力顺利上岸中国石油大学（北京）博士研究生。
您现在的位置： 