你知道哈尔滨医科大学2020年推荐优秀应届本科毕业生免试攻读硕士学位研究生工作的申诉电话吗？

对军团菌肺炎，以下说法正确的是

A.发病多见于青年人
B.全身症状很轻
C-痰量多，多呈脓性
D. X线胸片表现为外周性斑片状肺泡内浸润，继而可实变

宏达汽车公司生产的小轿车都安装了驾驶员安全气囊。在安装驾驶员安全气囊的小轿车中,有50%安装了乘客安全气囊。只有安装乘客安全气囊的小轿车才会同时安装减轻冲击力的安全杠和防碎玻璃。如果上述断定为真,并且事实上李先生从宏达公司购进的一辆小轿车中装有防碎玻璃,则以下哪项断定一定为真?Ⅰ.这辆车一定装有安全杠。Ⅱ.这辆车一定装有乘客安全气囊。Ⅲ.这辆车一定装有驾驶员安全气囊。

A.只有Ⅰ
B.只有Ⅱ
C.只有Ⅲ
D.只有Ⅰ和Ⅱ
E.Ⅰ、Ⅱ和Ⅲ

主动脉瓣狭窄引起的心脏代偿反应最主要的是

A.心率加快
B.左心室肥厚
C.回心血量增加
D.左室腔扩大

The US$3-million Fundamental physics prize is indeed an interesting experiment,as Alexander Polyakov said when he accepted this year’s award in March.And it is far from the only one of its type.As a News Feature article in Nature discusses,a string of lucrative awards for researchers have joined the Nobel Prizes in recent years.Many,like the Fundamental Physics Prize,are funded from the telephone-number-sized bank accounts of Internet entrepreneurs.These benefactors have succeeded in their chosen fields,they say,and they want to use their wealth to draw attention to those who have succeeded in science.What’s not to like?Quite a lot,according to a handful of scientists quoted in the News Feature.You cannot buy class,as the old saying goes,and these upstart entrepreneurs cannot buy their prizes the prestige of the Nobels,The new awards are an exercise in self-promotion for those behind them,say scientists.They could distort the achievement-based system of peer-review-led research.They could cement the status quo of peer-reviewed research.They do not fund peer-reviewed research.They perpetuate the myth of the lone genius.The goals of the prize-givers seem as scattered as the criticism.Some want to shock,others to draw people into science,or to better reward those who have made their careers in research.As Nature has pointed out before,there are some legitimate concerns about how science prizes—both new and old—are distributed.The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences,launched this year,takes an unrepresentative view of what the life sciences include.But the Nobel Foundation’s limit of three recipients per prize,each of whom must still be living,has long been outgrown by the collaborative nature of modern research—as will be demonstrated by the inevitable row over who is ignored when it comes to acknowledging the discovery of the Higgs boson.The Nobels were,of course,themselves set up by a very rich individual who had decided what he wanted to do with his own money.Time,rather than intention,has given them legitimacy.As much as some scientists may complain about the new awards,two things seem clear.First,most researchers would accept such a prize if they were offered one.Second,it is surely a good thing that the money and attention come to science rather than go elsewhere,It is fair to criticize and question the mechanism—that is the culture of research,after all—but it is the prize-givers’money to do with as they please.It is wise to take such gifts with gratitude and grace.
The author believes that the now awards are

A.acceptable despite the criticism.
B.harmful to the culture of research.
C.subject to undesirable changes.
D.unworthy of public attention.