Colonization in asteroids as compare to other planets
In this set of materials, the author strongly postulates that the colonization of people in asteroids is a best option to survive as compare to the Mars and provides three reasons to endorse it's idea. However, the professor states that the colonization on asteroids is not practical and gainsays each of the argument mentioned in the reading.
First and foremost, the passage begins by asserting that asteroids are much smaller as compare than other planets so the gravity on asteroids will be low which will ease landing and taking off of spaceships relatively. In contrast, the speaker explains the risk associated with low gravity. Decreased gravitational pull not only helps in landing and taking off but also cause health problems in people. The astronaut who spent few months in space in low gravity premises suffered issues with loss of muscle mass and bone density. By taking in view this dangerous risk, this rationale is not validate in order to survive on asteroids.
Next, the professor further points on details that precious metals obtained from mining in asteroids will not be profitable for long term because of two objectives. Firstly, the cost of supporting life on asteroid and transporting equipment through spaceships will be very high. Secondly, asteroids are rich in valuables. Since, the market will be super saturated by them, they will loose their worth after a while. These points refute the implication of author about getting valuable metals from asteroids is enriching. As the writer states that the mining minerals can prove very beneficial for business if people started living in asteroids.
Finally, the article wraps it's arguments by declaring that the asteroid orbits very close to earth as compare to Mars and even moon. Therefore, it will be easy and affordable for people to set foot on asteroids. On the other hand, the speaker refutes this reason by showing the inaccuracy of author that although it will be east to travel to closer orbits but orbits move away often so coming back to Earth is not certain at all. In fact, travelling to and fro from Mars is relatively undeniable.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-04-16 | degew59415@eryod.com | 93 | view |
| 2023-05-28 | Atharva_Bhide188 | 80 | view |
| 2023-05-28 | Soham Chinchalkar | 73 | view |
| 2023-05-20 | Hibahtabbaa | 80 | view |
| 2023-04-30 | Hibahtabbaa | 81 | view |
- Carved stone balls 70
- Carved stone balls 80
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Teachers were more appreciated and valued by society in the past than they were nowadays Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 73
- Ways to lift heavy rocks to build an Egyptian pyramid 80
- Effects of electronic devices 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 102, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[1]
Message: Use 'the' with the superlative.
Suggestion: the
... colonization of people in asteroids is a best option to survive as compare to th...
^
Line 3, column 85, Rule ID: COMP_THAN[3]
Message: Comparison requires 'than', not 'then' nor 'as'.
Suggestion: than
...serting that asteroids are much smaller as compare to the other planets so the gra...
^^
Line 3, column 594, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'validated'.
Suggestion: validated
...s dangerous risk, this rationale is not validate in order to survive on asteroids. Ne...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 384, Rule ID: LOOSE_LOSE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'lose' (= miss, waste, suffer the loss etc.)?
Suggestion: lose
...l be super saturated by them, they will loose their worth after a while. These points...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, in contrast, in fact, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 30.3222958057 191% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1777.0 1373.03311258 129% => OK
No of words: 352.0 270.72406181 130% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04829545455 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33147354134 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64839626498 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 145.348785872 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553977272727 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 549.0 419.366225166 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.7690166399 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.529411765 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7058823529 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.52941176471 7.06452816374 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0361420620556 0.272083759551 13% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0129796684366 0.0996497079465 13% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0360175820086 0.0662205650399 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0358889665313 0.162205337803 22% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0621615134634 0.0443174109184 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.3589403974 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.01 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 63.6247240618 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.