原发性肺结核，其自然演变过程中最常见的是A．血行播散 B．发展为肺门淋巴结结核 C．

有一化合物X，可发生如下的转化关系(部分反应物、生成物从略)。其中B、D、E、F均为无色气体，W、K为常见的金属单质，C为难溶于水的红褐色固体。在混合液中加入BaCl₂溶液可生成不溶于稀盐酸的白色沉淀，H和W反应可放出大量的热。

⑴X中滴入少量NaOH溶液的离子方程式为_______________________。

⑵B和D反应生成F的化学方程式为_____________________________。

⑶I转化为G的反应中，当有2 molG生成时，转移的电子数为_______。

⑷引发H和W反应的操作是____________________________________。

企业目标是指什么？

在经济活动中，诚信就是要求人们尊重事实，讲求信用，恪守诺言，诚实不欺，在不损害他人利益的前提下追求自己的利益。

In the idealized version of how science is done, facts about the world are waiting to be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientific method to can’y out their work. But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route. We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the context of our unique life experience. Prior knowledge and interest influence what we experience, what we think our experiences mean, and the subsequent actions we take. Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound.

Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience. Similar to newly staked mining claims, they are lull of potential. But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is the credibility process, through which the individual researcher’s me, here, now becomes the community’s anyone, anywhere, anytime. Objective knowledge is the goal, not the starting point.

Once a discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives intellectual credit. But, unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happens next. Within the complex social structure of the scientific community, researchers make discoveries; editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by controlling the publication process; other scientists use the new finding to suit their own purposes; and finally, the public (including other scientists) receives the new discovery and possibly accompanying technology. As a discovery claim works it way through the community, the interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefs about the science and the technology involved transforms an individual’s discovery claim into the community’s credible discovery.

Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First, scientific work tends to focus on some aspect of prevailing Knowledge that is viewed as incomplete or incorrect. Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what is already known and believed. The goal is new-search, not re-search. Not surprisingly, newly published discovery claims and credible discoveries that appear to be important and convincing will always be open to challenge and potential modification or refutation by future researchers. Second, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief. Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Azent-Gy6rgyi once described discovery as "seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought." But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what they have missed may not change their views. Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.

In the end, credibility "happens" to a discovery claim—a process that corresponds to what philosopher Annette Baier has described as the commons of the mind. "We reason together, challenge, revise, and complete each other’s reasoning and each other’s conceptions of reason.

Paragraph 3 shows that a discovery claim becomes credible after it（）

A. has attracted the attention of the general public

B. has been examined by the scientific community

C. has received recognition from editors and reviewers

D. has been frequently quoted by peer scientists

硅二极管导通后的管压降是（）伏。