Five-year-old Willard Wigan struggled to tell the difference between an M and a W or a 6 and a 9. Unfortunately, his schoolteacher knew nothing about dyslexia(阅读障碍症), a learning disability that can make letters and numbers confusing. She didn't try to help him. Not surprisingly, Willard didn't like school. Usually, his mind drifted—to playing outside, to his dog Maxie, or to the ants that lived near his family's garden shed. Willard was especially curious about those ants. He felt like them—small and insignificant. Thus, when he noticed some ants trying to build a house, he decided to help them! Willard constructed a little building. Then he sprinkled sugar inside to encourage the ants to move in. When they did, Willard built more houses.

At school, Willard still struggled, but now he knew he could do something special. Maybe he wasn't a failure after all. If he had trouble with his reading or math, Willard would later go home and created tiny furniture for the ant houses. He even built an ant school, with teeny swings, ladders, seesaws, and a merry-go-round. His artistic skill increased, and a love for little things began to grow in his heart.

At age nine, Willard began carving faces on toothpicks. He discovered that his ability improved when he held his breath as he worked. When he quit school at age 15 to help support his family, Willard still spent his spare time carving. His confidence grew as more people appreciated his talent. Eventually, he quit his factory job to pursue his dream of becoming one of the best artists in the world. Now, years later, Willard carves the tiniest artwork in the world! His sculptures are so small that several can fit on a period at the end of a sentence.

Because of their beauty and rarity, his sculptures have made Willard a wealthy man. But he says, "Success isn't about material things like an expensive watch or a costly ring; it's about persevering and achieving your dreams."

Willard Wigan, micro-sculptor, has done just that. The man who felt small as a boy has shown the world that something small can really be BIG.

When caught in the rain, we have all run for cover —often to a nearby tree. On the way, we step over short-lived puddles (水坑) and hastily-formed streams, surprised at how quickly the soil changes from supportive and predictable to untrustworthy: slippery, soft, and spongy. At first chance we tend to flee, skipping further observation.

Given that direct observations are often impracticable, remote observation systems are crucial for capturing phenomena that are frequent and unpredictable. However, the Bimbache community of ElHierro observed water running down tree bark during fog events and captured it for drinking, washing and agriculture many years ago. If more contemporary hydrologists (水文学家) had watched fog by trees, forest managers might not have logged (伐木) the Bull Run Watershed, which reduced local rainfall by 30% in 

1982.

Water science faces criticism because of a "techno optimism that tries to solve all problems" . In fact, this issue extends beyond water science. An interdisciplinary research team led by John T. VanStan from Cleveland State University argues that scientists should go beyond the laboratory to directly observe weather phenomena. The researchers insist that hands-on observation of storm events is crucial for comprehending the complexities of wet weather.

"Natural scientists seem increasingly content to stay dry and rely on remote sensors and samplers, models, and virtual experiments to understand natural systems. Consequently, we can miss important stormy phenomena, imaginative inspirations, and opportunities to build intuition (直觉)—all of which are critical to scientific progress," said Van Stan's team.

This type of "umbrella science", they warn, can miss important localized events. For instance, in describing rainwater's flow from the forest treetops to the soils, the authors note that "if several branches efficiently capture and carry storm water to the stem, rainwater inputs to near-stem soils can be more than100 times greater." Likewise, water vapor (水蒸气) clouds trapped beneath forest treetop covers may escape remote detection, yet be sensitive to scientists on the ground. At the broader scale, these oversights can affect Ground Earth systems models, which often underestimate forest treetop water storage.

Direct observation, however, has gone beyond making up for the shortcomings of "umbrella science." Van Stan and colleagues see core value in firsthand storm experiences —not only for natural

scientists, but also for students studying climate change impacts on ecosystems.

A study of 8 different experiments showed that our brains tend to prefer addition rather than subtraction when it comes to finding solutions—in many cases, it seems we just don't consider the strategy of taking something away at all.

The researchers found that this preference for adding was noticeable in three situations in particular: when people were under higher cognitive (认知的) load, when there was less time to consider the other options, and when volunteers didn't get a specific reminder that subtracting was an option. In one of the experiments, participants were asked to improve a Lego structure so that it was able to take more weight. Half the volunteers were reminded that they could take away bricks as well as add them, and half weren't. In the group that got the reminder, 61 percent solved the problem by taking away a brick—which was a much faster and more efficient way of making the structure stable. In the group that didn't get the reminder, only 41 percent went for the removing bricks approach.

"Additive ideas come to mind quickly and easily, but subtractive ideas require more cognitive effort," says psychologist Benjamin Converse, from the University of Virginia. "Because people are often moving fast and working with the first ideas that come to mind, they end up accepting additive solutions without considering subtraction at all."

The researchers have a few ideas about what might be going on. Our brains might find additive changes easier to process perhaps, or we might be associating adding with ideas of something that's bigger and therefore better in our subconscious. There might also be associations in our minds with the current status being something that needs to be maintained as much as possible—and taking something away is arguably more destructive to the current status than adding something new.

The researchers say their work is important in a much broader sense: for institutions looking to streamline (简化), for example, and even for the human race looking for ways to better manage the planet's resources.