江才健美国‘氢弹之父’ 泰勒泰勒最后的呼唤.ppt

老師的書 * 江老師提供 * 江老師提供 * ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? L-R: Glaser, Feynman, Bacher, Leighton ; standing ; talking ; outdoors at California Institute of Technology 本作品由天下文化授權本課程『科學在文化中的定位與挑戰』使用，本資料庫無再授權他人使用之權利，如需利用本作品，請另行向權利人取得授權 ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? L-R: Glaser, Feynman, Bacher, Leighton ; standing ; talking ; outdoors at California Institute of Technology ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? Flicker:Emilio Segre Visual Archives Richard Feynmans blackboard at the time of his death Flicker:Emilio Segre Visual Archives 本作品由天下文化授權本課程『科學在文化中的定位與挑戰』使用，本資料庫無再授權他人使用之權利，如需利用本作品，請另行向權利人取得授權 本作品由天下文化授權本課程『科學在文化中的定位與挑戰』使用，本資料庫無再授權他人使用之權利，如需利用本作品，請另行向權利人取得授權 挑戰者號太空梭（STS Challenger STA-099/OV-099）在1986年時於任務中爆炸墜毀。 Personal observations onthe reliability of the Shuttle, by R.P. Feynman Introduction It appears that there are enormous differences of opinion as to the probability of a failure with loss of vehicle and of human life. The estimates range from roughly 1 in 100 to 1 in 100,000. The higher figures come from the working engineers, and the very low figures from management. What are the causes and consequences of this lack of agreement? Since 1 part in 100,000 would imply that one could put a Shuttle up each day for 300 years expecting to lose only one, we could properly ask What is the cause of managements fantastic faith in the machinery? We have also found that certification criteria used in Flight Readiness Reviews often develop a gradually decreasing strictness. The argument that the same risk was flown before without failure is often accepted as an argument for the safety of accepting it again. Because of this, obvious weaknesses are accepted again and again, sometimes without a sufficiently seri