第十一次五カ年計画








第十一次五カ年計画（だいじゅういちじごかねんけいかく）は、中国の五カ年計画で第11番目のもの。中国語では「十一五」と略す。期間は2006年から2010年まで。この時期の半ばに北京オリンピック、最終年に上海万博が開かれ、中国政府にとっては国威にかけて失敗が許されない計画となった。


世界的には、ちょうど北京オリンピックの閉幕直後にリーマンショックが発生し、経済が大幅に後退したが、中国政府は巨額の財政出動で自国のみならず世界経済をも下支えし、中国人に「かつては市場経済が中国を救ったが、今回は中国が市場経済を救った」という自信を与えた。


原語がそれまでの「計画」から「規画」になり（英訳では前者はplanだが、後者はguidelineである）、政策的な位置づけも変化した。


「一票否決」制度の導入により、環境目標も1つの指標以外は全て達成された。



外部リンク



  • 第11次5カ年計画（2006-2010年）の目標（21世紀中国総研）







Popular posts from this blog

Can a sorcerer learn a 5th-level spell early by creating spell slots using the Font of Magic feature?

Image
28 6 $begingroup$ Per the Font of Magic feature, sorcerer can use Flexible Casting to create 5th-level spell slots at level 7, even though they are not typically available until level 9. You can transform unexpended sorcery points into one spell slot as a bonus action on your turn. The Creating Spell Slots table shows the cost of creating a spell slot of [5th level is 7] If such a sorcerer levels up while still having this 5th-level spell slot, can they choose a 5th-level spell as the spell they gain upon levelling up? The Spellcasting feature states: Additionally, when you gain a level in this class, you can choose one of the sorcerer spells you know and replace it with another spell from the sorcerer spell list, which also must be of a level for which you have spell slots.
Read more

Does disintegrating a polymorphed enemy still kill it after the 2018 errata?

Image
up vote 13 down vote favorite 1 After the 2018 errata, the disintegrate spell description now reads: A creature targeted by this spell must make a Dexterity saving throw. On a failed save, the target takes 10d6 + 40 force damage. The target is disintegrated if this damage leaves it with 0 hit points. If you were to polymorph an enemy into a rat and then disintegrate it, would the enemy be disintegrated or would it just return to its original form? I know that for Druids, it’s not an instant kill anymore, but is this the case for polymorph as well? dnd-5e spells polymorph errata share | improve this question edited 18 hours ago
Read more

A Topological Invariant for $pi_3(U(n))$

Image
3 3 $begingroup$ Recently, I saw a construction of topological invariant for $pi_3(U(n))$ with $ngeq 2$ : $$ N=frac{1}{24pi^2}int_{S^3} d^3x epsilon^{ijk} Tr[(U^{-1}partial_{x_i}U)(U^{-1}partial_{x_j}U)(U^{-1}partial_{x_k}U)] , $$ where $Uin U(n)$ depends on $boldsymbol{x}=(x_1,x_2,x_3)in S^3$ , $epsilon^{ijk}$ is the Levi-Civita symbol, $i,j,k=1,2,3$ , and the duplicated indexes are summed over. It is claimed that $N$ is an integer, but why? Update 02/02/2019 I think I got an argument for $n=2$ . In this case, $U=e^{i varphi} q$ with $qin SU(2)$ . Due to the trace and the Levi-Civita symbol in $N$ , $varphi$ does not contribute to $N$ . As $Tr[q^{dagger}partial_i q]=0$ and $(q^{dagger}partial_i q)^{dagger}=-q^{dagger}partial_i q$ , $q^{dagger}partial_i q$ in geneeral has the form $q^{dagger}partia
Read more