For many years, a great number of scientists have accepted the idea that dinosaurs were killed by an asteroid (小行星), but another idea is now gaining attention. New research suggests that big volcanic eruptions (火山喷发) may have contributed to the end of dinosaurs.

About 66 million years ago, an asteroid hit the earth. The impact caused earthquakes and tsunamis(very large sea wave). Many scientists believe this allowed about 75% of all plants and animals on the earth to die off, including dinosaurs.

Now researchers from Dartmouth College in New Hampshire believe that the asteroid alone did not cause the mass extinction (灭绝) but that volcanoes may also have played a part. A team of scientists were studying the Deccan Plateau, a large mountainous area in southern India. They found signs of volcanic rock shaped into forms called basalt floods. Volcanic rocks are formed when a volcano erupts and sends out lava   (岩浆), which then cools and becomes solid. Basalt floods are formed when either several small eruptions or one extremely large eruption floods huge areas of land with lava. These eruptions can block out the sun with ash (火山灰), stop plants from growing, and kill off animals’ food supplies.

The scientists discovered that the basalt rocks formed at the time dinosaurs died out. This is a strong clue that a huge volcanic eruption could have contributed to the death of dinosaurs. The team called the eruption and asteroid a double-punch, which had dinosaurs wiped out from the planet completely.

There have been several mass extinctions, including the one that killed dinosaurs. Some of the other extinctions were caused by volcanoes, which supports the new idea that a volcano could have been involved in this one. Brenhin Keller said it is difficult to be sure which volcanic eruption caused which mass extinction. But, Keller said, “The results make it hard to pay no attention to the role of volcanism in extinction.”

Many of us are disgusted by spiders’ furry legs, or even afraid of them. We don’t like to touch them or go near them. But they are more complicated than we can even imagine. Spiders’ legs seem to have minds of their own. According to a new study, each leg of a spider functions as a semi-independent “computer”, with sensors reading the immediate environment and causing movements accordingly. This helps spiders quickly build perfect webs. The researchers imitated surprisingly simple rules to govern this complex behavior, which could eventually be applied to robotics.

The study involves “morphological computation (形态计算)”, the idea of a function controlled by a body part instead of relying on the brain for instructions. Examples include the human knee jerk reflex (膝跳反射) and the act of walking. “Basically there’s a shortcut, and the brain doesn’t even know what’s happening down there,” says Oxford biologist Fritz Vollrath, the lead author of the paper.

Roboticists also show interest in morphological computation: It saves computing power and time. But few studies have deeply looked at the phenomenon in nature. Spiders, Vollrath says, are ideal for an experiment to bridge this gap — not only because it is easy to spot design changes in their webs but also because spiders reproduce broken-off legs.

Vollrath and his co-author, Thiemo Krink, a computer scientist, filmed and digitized the movements of several cross spiders, each with partially reproduced, half-length legs at certain positions. These spiders built webs as quickly and perfectly as those with eight full-length legs. If the brain were computing how to compensate for shorter legs, the researchers say, they would have seen tiny but measurable delays in operation. Instead the study hints a spider’s leg receives basic brain commands but adjusts its movements based on local input from sensors, which include hairs and slits in the body covering.

The researchers tested the rules by programming a simulated virtual spider, and Vollrath says the next step is to build a physical spider robot.

“I find this work extremely interesting, telling us more about spiders and also about morphological computation,” says Cecilia Laschi, a bio-roboticist, now at the National University of Singapore, who wasn’t involved in the study. “You never know what amazing innovations basic science like this could bring.”

For decades, sociologists have been trying to understand why certain people rise to the top of their fields. A number of theories have emerged, so if you're struggling on the path of success, perhaps these will give you some new clues.

IQ is Overrated

A high IQ is necessary, but it is not adequate to predict executive competence and corporate success. While people with high test scores do have more opportunities, that doesn't mean that smart people are more successful. In fact, in many fields the link between success and intelligence is often weak or non-existent. Nobel Prize winning Israeli-American psychologist, Daniel Kahneman, found that people would rather do business with a person they like and trust rather than someone they don’t, even if the likeable person is offering a lower quality product or service at a higher price.

The 10,000 Hours Theory

A Professor at the University of Colorado named Anders Ericsson decided to look at the differences between amateurs and professionals. In 1993, he released a paper that found on average amateurs only got about 4000 hours of practice, but professionals had practiced for at least 10,000 hours. While there's some debate over whether 10,000 hours is a rule or just a theory, many experts agree that a significant number of people who are considered "great" have, on average, 10,000 hours of experience.

Deliberate Practice

If no one is born talented and you need 10,000 hours of practice, what's the most effective way of using those hours? One theory is something sociologists call "deliberate practice." Essentially, there are six elements. The practice needs to be meant to specifically improve performance, and is even more effective if there's coaching. It needs to be repeatable, and feedback regularly is crucial. It also has to be demanding, either physically or mentally. If you're doing all of this correctly, it shouldn't be a fun experience. An example would be a basketball player who isn't very good at free throws spending hours and hours just doing free throws while being coached. Not a great time no matter how big of a basketball fan you are.

No One Succeeds on Their Own

While it would be nice to succeed simply because we work hard, life doesn't work that way. We need help and support from friends, family and teachers, and then we need chances from employers and other key figures in the fields we choose to pursue. In order to succeed, the gifts and interests of a person need to be encouraged, especially at a young age. Then as they grow up, people need to be given opportunities, breaks and second chances. Without help from other people, it makes it impossible to succeed because as Gladwell points out, "… no one—not rock stars, not professional athletes, not software billionaires, and not even geniuses — ever makes it alone."

You Have Amazing Potential

On average, the human mind can remember a sequence of seven to nine numbers. After that it becomes incredibly hard to remember all the numbers in the right order. Researchers at Carnegie Mellon University wanted to know if someone of average intelligence could break that barrier with practice. Through a lot of tests, researchers discovered what they called "the remarkable potential of 'ordinary' adults and their amazing capacity for change with practice." Their research showed that even "ordinary" people have the potential to be great by challenging themselves. If you work hard, your goals can be more attainable than you thought.