**4. Research Results**

Experimental Results: There were 130 subjects in this test and questionnaire, in which there were 125 valid samples and 5 invalid samples; the valid rate of the questionnaire was 96.15%. There were 63 valid subjects in the group with emotion recognition and 62 valid subjects in the group without emotion recognition.


Research Findings:


### *4.1. Implementation and Collection of Test and Questionnaire*

The survey subjects of this testing and questionnaire, who were tested and questioned on-site and whose answers were collected, totaled 130 cases. During the implementation

of the 130 student samples in the puzzle film, all students finished the task in one hour (60 minutes). There were 125 valid test and questionnaire samples and 5 invalid test and questionnaire samples (A21, A57, B3, B8, B26), so the valid rate of the questionnaire was 96.15%.

### *4.2. Analysis of Basic Data*

The valid questionnaires indicated that there are a total of 125 valid respondents, including 63 in the group with emotion recognition and 62 in the group without emotion recognition.

Gender and gender distribution (Table 1): there are 64 females (51.2%) and 61 males (48.8%), and there are 2.4% more females. In the group with emotion recognition, there are 11.2% more females; in the group without emotion recognition, there are 6.4% more males.


**Table 1.** Gender, grade, and age distribution of the two groups.

Grade and grade distribution (Table 1): There are 51 (40.8%) students in Grade 5. There are 74 (59.2%) students in Grade 6, which is 18.4% more than Grade 5. For the group with emotion recognition, Grade 6 is 11.2% larger than Grade 5; for the group without emotion recognition, Grade 6 is 25.8% larger than Grade 5.

Age and age distribution (Table 1): There are 17 (13.6%) students aged 10, 51 (40.8%) students aged 11, 49 (39.2%) students aged 12, and 8 (6.4%) students aged 13; students aged 11 and 12 are almost the same numbers. For the group with emotion recognition, students aged 11 account for more with a ratio of 44.4%; for the group without emotion recognition, students aged 12 account for more with a ratio of 43.5%.

Learning time (time used to finish four levels): the average learning time spent by the group with emotion recognition was 20 min 9 s, and that of the group without emotion recognition was 17 min 15 s; the group with emotion recognition spent 2 min 54 s more on average, and their emotional reaction was detected 3.3 times on average, upon which occasion they received encouragement cards. The group with emotion recognition took 16.8% more time than the group without emotion recognition.

Emotion detection data: among the 65 students in the group with emotion recognition, an emotional reaction was not detected in five respondents—A11, A27, A28, A38, and A46—during the test. Among the 65 respondents, the most detected emotional reaction was disgust, with a total number of 177 times, and for individuals, disgust was detected nine times at most; sadness was detected 11 times, and for individuals, sadness was detected three times at most; joy was detected 12 times in total, and for individuals, joy was detected three times at most. The longest time for a student to finish the four levels in the group with emotion recognition was 30 min 36 s, and the shortest time was 10 min 38 s; the longest time for a student to finish the four levels in the group without emotion recognition was 35 min 36 s, and the shortest time was 4 min 21 s.

### *4.3. Effectiveness Analysis of the Interactive Teaching Test*

An independent sample t-test was adopted to compare whether there is a significant difference between the average of the two groups of samples. (1) There is no significant difference between the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion recognition in the before-watching true or false questions test, with a *p*-value of 0.10 > 0.05, indicating that there is no difference between the true or false answers of the two groups before the interactive teaching; for the group with emotion recognition, the average right answers of true or false questions in the before-watching test is 5.05, and that of the group without emotion recognition is 5.42. (2) There is no significant difference between the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion recognition in the before-watching multiple-choice questions test either. With a *p*-value of 0.69 > 0.05, it indicates that there is no difference in the multiple-choice question answers of the two groups before the interactive teaching; for the group with emotion recognition, the average right answers of multiple-choice questions in the before-watching test is 3.38, and that of the group without emotion recognition is 3.27, which indicates that there is no difference between the performances of the two groups in the before-watching test before watching the "Story of the Comet".

An independent sample t-test is used to compare whether there is a significant difference between the average of samples of the two groups. (1) There is no significant difference between the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion recognition in the after-watching true or false questions test, with a *p*-value of 0.43 > 0.05, it indicates that there is no difference between the true or false answers of the two groups after the interactive teaching; for the group with emotion recognition, the average right answers of true or false questions in the after-watching test is 6.19, which is 1.14 more than the before-watching test; that of the group without emotion recognition is 6.39, which are 0.97 more than the before-watching test. (2) However, there is a significant difference between the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion recognition in the after-watching multiple-choice question test; with a *p*-value of 0.00 < 0.05, it indicates that there is a difference between the choice answers of the two groups after the interactive teaching; for the group with emotion recognition, the average right answers of multiple-choice questions in the after-watching test is 5.86, which is 2.48 more than the before-watching test—that of the group without emotion recognition is 4.74, which is 1.47 more than the before-watching test, and indicates that during the interactive teaching of "Story of the Comet", the appearance of the encouragement card helps students of the group with emotion recognition to obtain better learning performance in the after-watching test of multiple-choice questions.

### *4.4. Construct Validity and Reliability of the Questionnaire*

### 4.4.1. Construct Validity Analysis

After investigation and collection of all questionnaires, the valid samples collected is 125, which ensures the validity of the factor analysis. Statistics software of SPSS 18.0 for Windows is taken as the main tool for data analysis; generally, the method to measure construction validity is to use factor analysis to analyze the factor structure matrix of each item of each scale, and then retain the item only if the factor loading listed in the structure matrix is greater than 0.5, otherwise; it is deleted. To judge the validity of the framework, the greater the factor loading, the better the validity. KMO is Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin sampling adequacy. When the KMO value is greater, it means that there are more common factors among variables, which is more suitable for factor analysis. When the KMO value is less than 0.5, it is not suitable for factor analysis. When the KMO value is greater than 0.7, the effect is acceptable, and when the KMO value is greater than 0.9, the effect is the best. Factor analysis can be verified by the KMO value and Bartlett's test.

### 4.4.2. Reliability Analysis

To understand the validity and reliability of the questionnaire, reliability analysis should be completed. Cronbach's α coefficient is the commonly used reliability analysis method in the Likert scale. The higher the coefficient, the higher the degree of internal consistency of items. Devellis [38] and Nunnally [39] believed that the minimum reliability coefficient should be more than 0.7 to be acceptable. This study uses this method to verify the consistency of scale questionnaires in learning satisfaction, teaching system availability, teaching system satisfaction, etc.

### 4.4.3. Validity and Reliability Analysis of the Questionnaire

(1) Survey analysis of learning satisfaction

Factor analysis on the learning satisfaction survey is conducted. There are nine items in the scale of students' statements about learning satisfaction. KMO and Bartlett's tests are conducted to test whether it is suitable for factor analysis. With a KMO of 0.917 and Bartlett's test *p* = 0.000 < 0.001, the value reaches a significant level, indicating that the correlation matrix has common factors and is suitable for factor analysis; the α coefficient of Factor 1 is 0.899, which has reached high reliability.

(2) Survey analysis on teaching system availability

Factor analysis on teaching system availability is conducted. There are 10 items in the scale of students' statements about teaching system availability. KMO and Bartlett's tests are conducted to test whether it is suitable for factor analysis. With a factor load of 0.488, item 10 is deleted; after deleting item 10, the remaining 9 items underwent factor analysis again. With a KMO value of 0.847 and Bartlett's test *p* = 0.000 < 0.001, the value reaches a significant level, indicating that the correlation matrix has common factors and is suitable for factor analysis; the α coefficient of Factor 1 is 0.838, which has reached high reliability; that of Factor 2 is 0.776, which has also reached high reliability.

(3) Survey analysis on teaching system satisfaction

Factor analysis on teaching system satisfaction was conducted. There are six items in the scale of students' statements about teaching system satisfaction. KMO and Bartlett's tests were conducted to test whether it is suitable for factor analysis. With a KMO value of 0.890 and Bartlett's test *p* = 0.000 < 0.001, the value reaches a significant level, indicating that the correlation matrix has common factors and is suitable for factor analysis; the α coefficient of Factor 1 is 0.869, which has reached high reliability.

### *4.5. Comparative Analysis of the Group with Emotion Recognition and the Group without Emotion Recognition*

4.5.1. Comparative Analysis of Learning Satisfaction

(1) Frequency-distribution table

Based on the questionnaire collected, there are 125 valid samples, including 63 in the group with emotion recognition and 62 in the group without emotion recognition. There are nine questions in learning satisfaction. In the group with emotion recognition, "strongly agree" accounts for most answers with a ratio of 42.2%—however, there is no "strongly disagree"; in the group without emotion recognition, "agree" accounts for most answers, with a ratio of 40.1%.

(2) Average learning satisfaction based on gender

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample average of the two groups and the average learning satisfaction of females and males; with a *p*-value of 0.336 > 0.05, it indicates that there is no significant difference in the average of learning satisfaction based on gender—the average of learning satisfaction of females is 3.86, and that of males is 3.97.

(3) Average learning satisfaction based on grades

An Independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample average of the two groups and the average of learning satisfaction of Grade 5 and Grade 6, with a *p*-value of 0.000 < 0.05. It indicates that there is a significant difference between the average learning satisfaction based on grades; the average learning satisfaction of Grade 5 is 4.18, and that of Grade 6 is 3.73, so Grade 5 is higher than Grade 6 in learning satisfaction.

(4) Learning satisfaction comparison based on groups

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample averages of the two groups and the average learning satisfaction, including the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion recognition. With a *p*-value of 0.000 < 0.05, it indicates that there is a significant difference between the average of the learning satisfaction of the two groups; learning satisfaction average of the group with emotion recognition is 4.13, and that of the group without emotion recognition is 3.69—the statistics show that the group with emotion recognition is higher in learning satisfaction than the group without emotion recognition.

(5) Learning satisfaction comparison of questions within the groups

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample averages of the two groups and the learning satisfaction averages of questions within the two groups—the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion recognition—with a *p*-value < 0.05. Results indicate that the learning satisfaction of questions within groups has a significant difference. By comparing questions of learning satisfaction, \* indicates a *p*-value < 0.05 and has a significant difference. Questions 1–9 (Table 2), except question 2, failed to reach a significant level; the learning satisfaction of the remaining 8 questions all reached a significant level, indicating that except for question 2, learning satisfaction of the remaining questions in the group with emotion recognition is better than that of the group without emotion recognition.


**Table 2.** Comparative analysis table of the two groups on questions of learning satisfaction.

4.5.2. Comparative Analysis of Teaching System Availability

(1) Frequency distribution table

Based on the questionnaire collected, there are 125 valid samples, including 63 in the group with emotion recognition and 62 in the group without emotion recognition. There

are nine questions in teaching system availability. Questions 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 express the teaching system availability positively, in the group with emotion recognition "strongly agree" accounts for most answers with a rate of 33.3%; in the group without emotion recognition, "agree" accounts for most answers with a rate of 35.2%. Questions 2, 4, 6, and 8 express the teaching system availability negatively in the group with emotion recognition. "Ordinary" accounts for most answers with a rate of 36.9%; in the group without emotion recognition, "ordinary" accounts for most answers with a rate of 41.9%.

(2) Teaching system availability based on gender

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample average of the two groups and the average of teaching system availability based on gender. Questions 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 express the teaching system availability positively, with a *p*-value of 0.613 > 0.05. Results indicate that there is no significant difference between the positive average based on gender. For females, the positive average of teaching system availability is 3.84, and that of males is 3.90. Questions 2, 4, 6, and 8 express the teaching system availability negatively, with a *p*-value of 0.252 > 0.05. Results indicate that there is no significant difference between the negative average based on gender. For females, the positive average of teaching system availability is 2.68, and that of males is 2.52. Overall, there is no significant difference between genders in ratings of teaching system availability.

(3) Teaching system availability based on grades

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample average of the two groups and the average of teaching system availability for Grade 5 and Grade 6. Questions 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 express the teaching system availability positively, with a *p*-value of 0.000 < 0.05. Results indicate that there is a significant difference between the positive average based on grades. For Grade 5, the positive average of teaching system availability is 4.19, and that of Grade 6 is 3.65. Grade 5 is higher than Grade 6. Questions 2, 4, 6, and 8 express the teaching system availability negatively, with a *p*-value of 0.014 < 0.05. Results indicate that there is a significant difference between the negative average based on grades. For Grade 5, the positive average of teaching system availability is 2.39, and that of Grade 6 is 2.76, Grade 5 is lower than Grade 6. Overall, Grade 5 is higher than Grade 6 in teaching system availability.

(4) Teaching system availability comparison based on groups

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample average of the two groups and teaching system availability average of two groups, including the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion recognition. Questions 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 express the teaching system availability positively, with a *p*-value of 0.969 > 0.05. Results indicate that there is no significant difference between the positive average based on groups. The positive average of teaching system availability of the group with emotion recognition is 3.87, and that of the group without emotion is 3.87. Questions 2, 4, 6, and 8 express the teaching system availability negatively; with a *p*-value of 0.378 > 0.05, results indicate that there is no significant difference between the negative average based on groups. The negative average of teaching system availability of group with emotion recognition is 2.66, and that of the group without emotion is 2.57. Overall, for teaching system availability, there is no significant difference between the two groups.

(5) Teaching system availability comparison based on questions within the groups

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample average of the two groups and the teaching system availability average of two groups, including the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion recognition. With a *p*-value < 0.05, results indicate that questions within the two groups in teaching system availability have no significant difference. All questions from 1 to 9 did not reach a significant level (Table 3), which indicates that there is no

difference in the teaching system availability between the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion recognition.


**Table 3.** Comparative analysis table of the two groups on questions of teaching system availability.

### 4.5.3. Comparative Analysis on Teaching System Satisfaction

(1) Frequency distribution table

Based on the questionnaire collected, there are 125 valid samples, including 63 in the group with emotion recognition and 62 in the group without emotion recognition. There are six questions in teaching system satisfaction. In the group with emotion recognition, "strongly agree" accounts for most answers with a ratio of 44.7%; in the group without emotion recognition, "neutral" accounts for most answers with a ratio of 40.0%.

(2) Teaching system satisfaction based on gender

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample average of the two groups and the average of teaching system satisfaction based on the gender of males and females. With a *p*-value of 0.295 > 0.05, results indicate that there is no significant difference between the average teaching system satisfaction based on gender; for females, the average teaching system satisfaction is 3.93, and that of males is 3.80.

(3) Teaching system satisfaction based on grades

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample average of the two groups and the average teaching system satisfaction for Grade 5 and Grade 6. With a *p*-value of 0.000 < 0.05, results indicate that there is a significant difference between the average of teaching system satisfaction base on grades; for Grade 5, the average of teaching system satisfaction is 4.11, and that of Grade 6 is 3.70. Grade 5 is, therefore, higher than Grade 6 in teaching system satisfaction.

(4) Teaching system satisfaction comparison based on groups

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample average of the two groups and the teaching system satis-

faction of the two groups, including the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion recognition. With a *p*-value of 0.00 < 0.05, results indicate that there is a significant difference between the teaching system satisfaction of the two groups; the teaching system satisfaction average of the group with emotion is 4.26, and that of the group without emotion recognition is 3.46. Statistical analysis indicates that the group with emotion recognition is higher in teaching system satisfaction as a whole than the group without emotion recognition.

(5) Teaching system satisfaction comparison in questions within the groups

An independent sample t-test was used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the sample average of the two groups and the teaching system satisfaction average of the two groups, including the group with emotion recognition and the group without emotion. With a *p*-value < 0.05, results indicate that there is a significant difference between teaching system satisfaction within questions of the two groups.

By comparing questions within the groups in teaching system satisfaction, \* indicates *p*-value < 0.05, which shows a significant difference. From questions 1 to 6 (Table 4), all six questions reached the significance level in teaching system satisfaction, which indicated that the teaching system satisfaction of questions within the group with emotion recognition is better than the group without emotion recognition as a whole.

**Table 4.** Comparative analysis table of the two groups on questions of teaching system satisfaction.


(\* indicates a *p*-value < 0.05).

### **5. Conclusions**

According to Elias et al., if students can use emotional intelligence in the classroom, they can achieve better results in tests or any other form of academic performance. In this study, the test results before and after watching the interactive film show that the experimental group performed better in learning (answered 2.48 more questions correctly) than the control group (answered 1.47 more questions correctly), proving that the encouragement cards enhanced the students' learning effectiveness. The results of this research fully echo the research of several scholars, such as Elias et al. In addition, Mary E. Pritchard et al.

suggested that positive emotions can increase students' learning interest and motivation. In this study, the learning satisfaction of the experimental group (average 4.13) is higher than that of the control group (average 3.69), and the system satisfaction of the experimental group (average 4.26) is also higher than that of the control group (average 3.46). Nevertheless, the teaching system availability of the two groups has no significant difference. The increase of perception accessibility also enhances the perception of entertainment, which has a direct impact on the use intention of students. The results of this research also echo the research of several scholars, such as Mary E. Pritchard. The goal of this research is to understand the impact of emotional feedback on learning when using a puzzle film in teaching. The research results also confirmed that emotions play an important role in learning. An intelligent learning system can arouse pleasant emotions and reduce learning resistance for learners who may feel frustrated or confused during learning. A positive learning mood can enhance learning effectiveness, and this teaching system improves the past teacher-oriented teaching methods. The sound and light effects of the film stimulate learning enthusiasm. The more important purpose is to increase students' continuous learning motivation and improve their learning ability. Therefore, it is recommended that teachers can make good use of film combined with emotion detection to teach, which will be of great help to improve learning results and the future development of education.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, H.-C.K.L. and S.-C.T.; methodology, H.-C.K.L. and S.- C.T.; software, S.-C.T.; validation, H.-C.K.L. and S.-C.T.; formal analysis, H.-C.K.L. and S.-C.T.; investigation, S.-C.T.; resources, H.-C.K.L. and S.-C.T.; data curation, S.-C.T.; writing—original draft preparation, S.-C.T.; writing—review and editing, H.-C.K.L. and S.-C.T.; visualization, S.-C.T.; supervision, H.-C.K.L. and S.-C.T.; project administration, S.-C.T.; funding acquisition, H.-C.K.L. and S.-C.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

**Data Availability Statement:** Flipped Education, Parenting, Dialogue between Teaching and Learning, Available online: https://flipedu.parenting.com.tw/article/139, accessed on 18 August 2021.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

### **Appendix A. Film Script**

Script of the First Film

Act 1

(Caption): Although with 14 years apart, active Halley and lonely Newton were good friends. In newton's mind, Halley was the most trustworthy friend.

(Caption): In 1680.

Halley: According to Kepler's third law of planetary motion, the gravitational attraction of the sun to the planet should be inversely proportional to the square of the distance, but can this gravitational attraction comply with Kepler's first law of planetary motion that the orbit of the planet is elliptical?

(Caption): Halley could not prove it himself. He once consulted Mr. Hooke who studied the same question and other members of The Royal Society, but he couldn't get the answer. Finally, Halley decided to ask Newton.

Act 2

(Caption): In August 1684, Halley went to Oxford to visit Newton.

Halley: Mr. Newton, I'd like to ask you a question this time.

Newton: Oh, what's that?

Halley: According to Kepler's law of motion, if the planets really move around the sun along the elliptic orbit, what's the law they follow?

Newton: I calculated the inverse-square law ratio almost ten years ago, that is, the planets move around the sun along the elliptic orbit under the law of inverse-square ratio.

Halley: Really, wow! Great. Can you show me all the data of the calculation process? Newton: OK, wait a moment. I'll get it for you.

(Caption): At that time, Kepler's law of planetary motion was only summary according to the observation records without knowing the principle. Newton could explain the reason through calculation formula. With the support of observation data, it was deduced that the motion of celestial bodies in the sky and objects on the earth could be explained by the same law, that is, the law of universal gravitation!

Act 3

(Caption): The book *The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy* of Newton was published in 1686, in which a hypothesis was proposed that in addition to planets, there were also many comets had closed orbits, which meant that they would move around the sun regularly. Hoping to test this hypothesis, Halley had been collecting previous observation record since 1695. Analyzing by Newton's law of motion, he found that the orbit of a comet in 1305, 1380, 1456, 1531 and 1607 were very similar to that of the 1682, which should be the same comet.

(Caption): In 1705.

Halley: If my hypothesis is correct, the comet should come back about every 76 years, so it should reappear in 1758. I want to announce this message. If it does reappear in 1758, future generations will remember that the credit for discovering the comet belongs to a Briton.

Act 4

Johann Georg Palitzsch: Wow! It's really back. This is the comet mentioned by Mr. Halley before. Halley's prediction is correct.

(Caption): On December 25, 1758, this comet was observed by Johann Georg Palitzsch, a farmer and amateur astronomer in Germany. Halley died in 1742 and failed to live to see the return of this comet. Later, this most legendary comet, named after Halley, an Englishman, is still in use today.

Script of the Second Film

Act 1

(Caption): Halley is friends with Hooke and Wren. One day, these three people got together to chat.

Wren: The attraction between the sun and the planets should be the endless motion of the planets around the sun.

Halley: Then what orbit do the planets revolve around the sun? If it is really like Kepler said, if the planets revolve around the sun in an elliptical orbit, then what law of gravitation does this follow?

Hooke: I know the answer. If there is no error in the calculation process, the orbit of the planet should be elliptical.

Halley: So what law of gravitation does it follow?

Hooke: Of course it is based on the principle of the inverse square ratio formula.

Halley: Can you borrow me to study your calculation data?

Hooke: I'll find it and you will get it in two days.

Halley: Okay, thank you.

Act 2

(Caption): Halley went to Hooke's residence, Hooke lent the calculation data of planetary orbits to Halley.

Halley: Wow, your information is so precious, let me study it for a while. Hooke: OK.

Halley: I suggest that you can publish these materials into books, the name of the book is called "Science Principles of Nature".

Hooke: Your suggestion is very good, but I am worried that my funds are not enough. Halley: It's okay, I'll support you, That's it.

Act 3

(Caption): Halley happily ran to Hooke after studying the books and materials of Hooke's "Science Principles of Nature".

Halley: Mr. Hooke, Mr. Hooke, I have calculated it. This comet should come back every 38 years, so after the calculation, it should be two years later that we can see its traces again.

Hooke: Great, we will come together to welcome its visit at that time.

Act 4

(Caption): On Christmas night two years later, Hooke and Halley were sitting in chairs outside the café.

Halley: Wow, it's this one, the comet I speculated is back.

Hooke: It's true, what a beautiful comet.

(Caption): Later, in commemoration of the comet that Halley and Hooke discovered together, the world named the comet Hooke Halley's Comet.

Script of the Third Film

Act 1

(Caption): Halley and Wren are British astronomers, and they are also very good friends.

Wren: I have been observing astronomy for many years. According to my observations, the sun should be the center of the entire universe. I want to publish my observations into a book so that the general public can share my results. The title of my book will be called "Celestial movement theory".

Halley: Does the comet also orbit the sun, do you think it is?

Wren: Of course it is.

Halley: What shape do you think the orbit of the comet orbiting the sun should be? Wren: It should be circular. There is a detailed calculation method in my book "Celestial movement theory". It operates in accordance with the formula of the law of gravitational velocity that I discovered.

Halley: Can you give me a copy after the book is published.

Wren: Of course no problem.

Act 2

(Caption): Three months later, Wren published a book "Celestial movement theory" on astronomy. On this day, Halley arrived at Wren's residence and asked him for the book on "Celestial movement theory". At this time, Wren was sitting outside the house to enjoy the cool.

Halley: Congratulations, Wren, your masterpiece has finally come out, you promised me to give me a copy.

Wren: No problem, I'll get it to you.

Wren: On page 107 of the book, there is a formula for the law of gravitational velocity when a comet orbits the sun.

Halley: Great. Recently, I am very interested in a certain comet on the celestial body. Now I have enough information to do research.

Act 3

(Caption): Halley happily ran to find Wren after studying the book materials of Wren's "Celestial movement theory" for a period of time.

Halley: Mr. Wren, Mr. Wren, I have calculated. This comet should come back every 60 years, so it should be 10 years from now.

Wren: That's great, I hope we have the honor to see it.

(Caption): Halley passed away due to overwork and illness after three years of studying comets. Halley confessed to his wife Mary Stuart before his death.

Halley: Mary, thank you very much for taking care of me for so many years. The comet I studied may come back in seven years. You must help me pay attention to this matter.

Mary: Halley, don't worry, I will help you pay attention.

Act 4

(Caption): Seven years later, one night in March, Mary sat in front of the house to enjoy the cool.

Mary: Wow, it's a comet. It's such a beautiful comet. According to the date, it is supposed to be the comet Halley was studying. It has returned again. Its cycle around the sun is really 60 years. I want to announce this message. Let the world know.

(Caption): In order to commemorate Halley's research on comets, the world named this comet Mary Halley's Comet.

Script of the Fourth Film

Act 1

(Caption): Halley and Flamsteed were both British astronomers and celebrities at that time. Halley paid a special visit to Flamsteed in order to find the comet data he was studying.

Flamsteed: I have been observing astronomy for many years. According to my observations, the sun should be the center of the entire universe. I want to publish my observations into a book so that future generations will always remember my contribution to astronomy. My book title will be called "Principle of Planetary Motion in the Universe".

Halley: May I ask Mr. Flamsteed, is the comet also orbiting the sun?

Flamsteed: Of course it is.

Halley: What shape do you think the orbit of the comet orbiting the sun should be? Flamsteed: It should be round. There is a detailed explanation in my book "Principle of Planetary Motion in the Universe".

Halley: After your book is published, can you borrow a copy for me to study?

Flamsteed: Of course it can.

Act 2

(Caption): Two months later, Flamsteed published an astronomy book "Principle of Planetary Motion in the Universe". On this day, Halley arrived at Flamsteed's residence and wanted to borrow from him the book "Principle of Planetary Motion in the Universe". At this time, Flamsteed just taking a walk outside the house.

Halley: Congratulations, Flamsteed, your masterpiece has finally come out. You said you would lend me a copy for me to study the comet.

Flamsteed: No problem, I'll bring it to you now.

Flamsteed: On page 59 of the book, there is information about comets orbiting the sun.

Halley: Great, I can finally do my research.

Act 3

(Caption): Halley happily ran to Flamsteed after studying the book materials of "Principle of Planetary Motion in the Universe" written by Flamsteed for a period of time.

Halley: Mr. Flamsteed, Mr. Flamsteed, I have calculated that this comet should come

back every three years, so we should be able to see it again in September after three years. Flamsteed: Great, I want to include the comet you discovered in my next edition of "Principle of Planetary Motion in the Universe"

Halley: I will pay special attention to the coming of this comet in September in three years.

Flamsteed: Remember to tell me the observation data at that time.

Halley: OK

Act 4

(Caption): Three years later, one night in September, Halley sat in front of the house to enjoy the cool.

Halley: Wow, it's a comet. It's such a beautiful comet. It's the comet I studied three years ago. It is inferred from the date that it really came back again. I want to inform Flamsteed of this information as soon as possible.

(Caption): In order to commemorate Halley's research on comets, the world named this comet as Flamsteed Halley's Comet.
