土业园地 → 欢迎下载欣赏(更新时间:2014年6月19日)

F-013 土业园地 (第013期) 2009.9.14
Field for Artificial Soil TechnologyAST(№013)
作者:李鹏飞 AuthorLi Pengfei September 14, 2009
My Web:www.tuyelt.com Telephone Number:13043864167

主流学派与土业学派的差别
The difference between
mainstream school and soil school

    以中科院为代表的主流学派与以我为代表的土业学派之间,存在重大差别。
    我主张《土地资源不是有限的》,是可以通过工业化的方式,高速度、大规模增加的,在学术上其深度的思索是,人类是否能脱离自然界而存在,人类是否能不依靠地球资源而生存。在我读过的所有中外报刊、书籍及文献中,凡是涉及土地(指用于农业的耕地)之处,都写道《土地资源是有限的》,在有限与非有限之间是两个学派的分水岭,也是最根本的分歧。
    在研究方向上,我主张要敢于正视(面对)中国的问题与现实,不能脱离“人多地少”的基本国情,我国的四大问题,那是重中之重,应该排在一切“体系”、“系统”之前,优先解决。实际上,我国的四大问题不解决,什么“体系”、“系统”也建立不起来,即使建立起来也是虚的,没有什么实际意义,我认为路线图偏离了这个方向,值得进一步讨论。
    在方法上,我主张用一项技术解决多个问题,要统一解决,而不是分别治理,分头解决。世界本来是统一的,为什么一定要人为地分为农业、环保、水利、劳动就业呢。在我看来,这就是一个统称为中国问题,或者说中国问题的不同侧面。而现代科学的分科越来越细,门户之见争吵得很厉害,这都是不符合客观情况的。
    在因果关系上,我赞成无为而无不为的理念,我们看准的事情,就坚持做下去,只管耕耘不管收获,其结果是自然而然形成的东西。而现代科学的目的性极强,有严密的操作程序,这不能说不好,然而,适得其反的情况也不在少数。中科院的路线图,到2050年八大体系能否实现,我们拭目以待。

主流学派与土业学派的差别
The difference between
mainstream school and soil school

There is a big difference between mainstream school and soil school .The former is the Chinese Academy of Sciences as the representative and the latter is me as the representative.
I maintain that “land resources is not limited”, but can be regenerated and can be produced on a large scale and at high speed under factory conditions , Academically, the deeper idea is if man can exist without nature and if man can live without resources on the Earth. Among all the I newspapers and magazines and books as well as literatures that I have read, “land resources is limited” is the idea of all of them whenever talking about land(especially cultivated land). So yes or no is the most principle difference between mainstream school and the soil school. This point is the watershed demarcation and touchstone of the two schools.
In direction of research I maintain that we should face the most important and realistic problems in China and don't forget that “large population and a little land”is our national basic condition .To solve the four big problems in our nation is the most important task that needs to be put before every system .I think that road map loses contact with Chinese reality. In fact if we don't firstly solve the four big problems ,especially agriculture is the most important among the important issues ,it is not valuable to establish whatever“systems”.
In terms of method as soil school is a non pedantic or unacademic school, I maintain using one technology to solve many problems instead of solving one at a time separately. Because the world is unified and comprehensive, why do we have so many departments, such as agriculture, environmental protection, water conservancy, jobs and so on? In my view these problems are the different sides of the Chinese problem .But modern science is divided into more and more disciplines, and the fight and argument between different modern scientific system schools are getting more and more serious .These are not good things.
In terms of the relation between cause and effect, I approve of accomplishing everything by doing nothing. When we think something is correct, then we need to do it until it is completed. This is called “only ploughing without caring for the harvest” and then the results will come ?naturally. On the other hand, the target of modern science is very strong and its operating process is very clear. Although we cannot say it is not good, sometimes, the results run counter to one's desire. Up to 2050 we will wait and see if 8 large systems will be realized in the road map written by CAS.

 
 
Copyright © 2009 - 2010 tuyelt.com All Rights Reserved.
人造土壤技术专利 发明人:李鹏飞  联系电话:13043864167
注意:本站人造土壤专利技术禁止用在违反国家法律用途,否则发明人将由法律维权!