Диссертация (1173138), страница 33
Текст из файла (страница 33)
It is a very interesting presentation.It was a clear, interesting, friendly presentation.His speech was very clear, easy to understand and very inspiring.He is presenting in a very friendly manner and using body language alot. This presentation is really comfortable to listen to. It is easy tounderstand, and, what is more important, the speaker looks reallyinterested in his theme and successfully makes the audienceinterested too. Despite the accent, the speaker's speech was very pleasant. The pace,intonation, enthusiasm.
It was very nice and interesting to listen to him.It the beginning I could not understand what the presentation would beabout: at first, I expected to hear about solar airplanes, but then I've heardabout achieving the impossible, and then after some minutes he returnedagain to the solar aircraft. Suppose, that the audience welcoming was alittle long. However, despite the fact that I did not immediatelyunderstand what the main idea of the presentation, sometimes I feltadmiration and inspiration from certain phrases. Хорошо. Второе место среди трех.Эталон(носитель языкаBrad Holschuh) This speaks of him as a good speaker, able to respond quickly todifferent situations. Also, quite an interesting and clear talk. Sometimes too fast manner of speech. His tempo of speech was very good.
And he didn't confuse when thevideo didn't turn on and clearly described what was in that video. He is serious and convincing, so it makes the audience trust him. The presentation was very interesting, easy to understand, wellstructured. Unfortunately, there were no illustrations that he mentionedrecorded in the video. However, besides this fact, the speaker wasenthusiastic and charismatic, so it was interesting to listen to him. I suppose, it is the best speaker from the three. Even though there weresome problems with playing videos, the speaker did not get confused andgot out of the situation.
I really enjoyed every part of the presentation. Очень хорошо. Первое место среди трех.197Антиэталон(носитель языкаElon Musk) He stuttered quite often, it creates a bad impression. It was interesting and quite clear, but a little bit hard to listen because ofstammering. Sometimes he forgot his speech. Не интересно рассказывает. A slow hesitant manner of speech, very boring. I'm disappointed. Слишком много пауз. His speech was full of pauses and sometimes it makes difficult to notdistract. He seems to be a little bit nervous.
It influenced the way he presented. To my mind, the speaker was nervous a lot, so it made him difficulties. Up to my mind, the speaker was not enthusiastic enough. Moreover,frequent interruptions made perception of information more difficult.I suppose, if I was not interested in this theme myself, the presentationwould not have attracted my attention. The speaker slightly stuttered, but this did not greatly affect the qualityof the presentation. Elon Musk seems to be unprepared for this presentation, it is apparentthat he tried to improvise. Перенервничал, плохо подготовился, слушать было неудобно.Третье место среди трех.198ПРИЛОЖЕНИЕ 6.Таблица 6.1Образец текста выступления студента ЭГ с индивидуальнойинтонографической разметкойВступление (установление контакта)A weight limit emerges for neutron starsGood AFTERNOON, | ladies and GENTLEMEN.As a student of physics, | I should be able to interpret the experimentalDATA.||An amazing example of a scientific approach | is the recent research inASTROPHYSICS | based on observation of two stars MERGING.||We cannot find out | what happens after a human’s DEATH.||But NOW | we know more about the stars’ AFTERLIFE.||My GOAL today| is to inform you about the research | which explores themaximum mass of a NEUTRON STAR.||To FIND the answer,| we are going to cover three main POINTS.
||FIRSTLY, |I’ll give you a DEFINITION of a neutron star.||THEN, |you will hear about the OBSERVATION |that allowed scientists toanalyze the mass LIMIT. ||At the END,| you will get to know | HOW scientists evaluated the maximumMASS.||If you will have any questions,| please,| leave them until the end of myPRESENTATION.||SO, | shall we START? ||Основная часть (первый абзац)199FIRSTLY,| let’s dive into the concepts of ASTROPHYSICS.
||A dying star | can have one of three AFTERLIVES. ||A LIGHTWEIGHT star | shrinks into a white DWARF, | an Earth-sizesphere of CARBON. ||A HEAVY star | explodes when its massive core | collapses to anINFINITESIMAL point: |a BLACK HOLE.||A star in the MIDDLE range|—8 to 25 solar masses|—also explodes, | leavingbehind a F-A-N-T-A-S-T-I-C-A-L-L-Y dense sphere | of nearly pureneutrons| measuring a couple of dozen kilometers across: |а NEUTRONSTAR.||Of ALL the characteristics of a neutron star, |the two most important ARE |the MAXIMUM MASS | and the RADIUS.||These features | help theorists to understand | these mysterious OBJECTS.||Let’s take a CLOSER look | at the PHYSICS of the neutron stars.
||A neutron star | doesn’t collapse into the black hole | due to REPULSIVEeffect | of the strong nuclear force | which acts on the NEUTRONS. ||This repulsion | doesn’t allow a neutron star | to become DENSER. ||Roughly evaluating the upper limit of the /density, | in other words, | thelimit of speed of sound,| with the speed of light,| we can conclude | that aneutron star had to WEIGH LESS than ! 2.5! solar masses.
||Основная часть (второй абзац)200NOW, | when you understand what a neutron star IS | let’s turn to the NEXTpart of my talk – | the observation | which allowed to analyze the mass LIMIT.||The evaluations made earlier | were very ROUGH. ||That’s why | last year's observations | of two neutron stars MERGING |became the SENSATION. ||The new work| based on these observations |LOWERS the mass limitSUBSTANTIALLY.
||SURPRISINGLY, |the merger DIDN’T LEAD to immediately producedblack hole| but evolved along a more COMPLICATED path |that delayed thatCOLLAPSE.||It turned OUT | that the merger first produced a spinning,| overweightneutron star| momentarily propped up by centrifugal FORCE. ||This fact is confirmed by RIPPLES in space | sensed by gravitational-waveDETECTORS.||Magnitude of ripples points out | that combined mass | peg at 2.73 solarMASSES. ||THEN, |2 seconds after,| the object spewed material into SPACE. ||At FIRST,| telescopes gaged a powerful, |short GAMMA RAY BURST|which indicated the beginning of the COLLAPSING.
||The AFTERGLOW of the event | faded over several days| from bright blueto dimmer RED. ||ACTUALLY,| this afterglow | is a flow of newly formed radioactive elements| ejected into SPACE. ||The radiation | displays that at the moment the neutron star DID NOTCOLLAPSE into the black hole. ||OTHERWISE | the elements could not have ESCAPED.||By the color of the afterglow | it was possible to estimate the spewed mass |between 0.1 and 0.2 SOLAR MASSES. ||For EXAMPLE,| the initial blue tint | shows that at first | it lacked heavyelements | called LANTHANIDES. ||PRESUMABLY, |a radiated flux of particles |called neutrinos| slowedlanthanides’ FORMATION.||Основная часть (третий абзац)WELL, | now when we’ve looked at the observations made, | let’s move on tothe ANALYSIS of them.
||After the merger | scientists started to INTERPRET the numerical data. ||This WAY,| astrophysicists revealed more precise maximum mass of aneutron star|—about 2.2 TIMES OF SOLAR MASS | plus or minus a 10th.||To DERIVE the mass limits, |scientists had made an appropriate MODEL ofthe merger.||This model | suggests that the OUTER layers of the merged neutron star | arelikely to spun FASTER | than its CENTER||.THEN |it flung off material | and slowed to form a rigid spinning BODY.
||The fact | that this spinning neutron star | survived only momentarily |suggests that its mass | was close to the limit | for such a SPINNER.||That last inference is ESSENTIAL. ||The theory claims| that the mass of a rigidly spinning neutron star | canexceed that of a stationary one | by up to 18%.
||That scaling | allows researchers to infer the maximum mass of a stationary,|stable neutron STAR. ||The whole argument works | because the initial neutron stars weren't soMASSIVE| to immediately produce a black hole |or so LIGHT| to produce aspinning neutron star | that lingered LONGER. ||Заключение201As my time is running OUT, | I’d like to RECAP on the main points.||SO,| you got to know which possible afterlives a star can HAVE |whatblockbuster event | boosted interest of the SCIENTISTS | and HOW theyprocess the data | to find out the mass limit of a NEUTRON STAR.THANK you for your attention. ||NOW| I’m ready to answer your QUESTIONS.||202ПРИЛОЖЕНИЕ 7.Метод статистической обработки данных исходной диагностики уменийпросодического оформления публичных выступленийДля установления статистической достоверности данных, полученных врезультате аудиторского анализа, усредненные величины по исследуемымумениям (А1 – Б5) подвергались математико-статистической обработке.
Для этогоиспользовалсяКритерий Госсета () для независимыхвыборок, также называемый “двухвыборочным”, сравниваетсредние двух выборок. Цель этого критерия состоит в проверке, равны ли средниегенеральных совокупностей, из которых были взяты выборки. Предполагается, чточлены двух выборок не связаны между собой и выбраны из своих совокупностейнезависимо.
Кроме того, мы предполагаем, что генеральные совокупности имеютприблизительно нормальное распределение и дисперсии двух совокупностейприблизительно равны.Формула для расчетадля независимых выборок:где– объединенная дисперсия, которая считается по формуле:гдеигде– средние двух выборок, которые считаются по формуле:– объем выборки, аи– дисперсии двух выборок, которые считаютсяпо формуле:и– средние двух генеральных совокупностей.Заметим, что часто нулевая гипотезадля независимыхвыборок состоит в том, что разница между истинными средними равна 0, тогдаможно опустить.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
