105
I tend to support the importance of imagination as more valuable asset. Not long ago Albert Einstein said, imagination is more important that knowledge! Imagination is the very vivid and interesting creations of human brain, which can cross boundaries of conventions and confirmations. And most importantly aids ingenuity of mankind without needlessly following the age-old tradition of ‘face a problem and then invent a solution’.
In support of the argument I must present the well-known example of theory of relativity. When Einstein proposed the theory of relativity, it was esoteric for most of the scientific community of that time. But as the time progressed the theory proved to be grand success. Here one must understand that Einstein had no resources or ways to experience what he had put in the theory. That came out of his imagination and working towards a goal of achieving something.
It is simply impossible to predict what will be the result of human imagination. There are many examples of human imagination that resulted in to knowledge about mysterious things about the nature. The theory of big bang is a cognizance of human imagination. The theory is refined with time and out coming evidence. But all this started at some point when a human being imagined it. Therefore it can be evident that outcome or results of any theory or invention start with imagination.
On the other side effect of on hand experience bounds the results to certain extent. If we look carefully in to the history process of evolution, every new trend is established taking in to account the problems experienced by any creature. Therefore the development has occurred in certain direction we can call it of conventional type.
Also having experience confines the way of looking at the problem. A tendency is developed which unintentionally forces the outcomes in certain direction. Consider research about some chemical element, which by experience has proved to be poisonous. If we proceed by taking in account its diabolical properties we might fail to see its importance in some other area such as its use as fuel.
There is a long going conflict about the nuclear elements. The experience in Hiroshima and Nagasaki has proved its devastating capacities, but it also can be used as fuel. Therefore always proceeding forward based on experiences will definitely prove to be inaccurate.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 385, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...e point when a human being imagined it. Therefore it can be evident that outcome or resul...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 242, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...e problems experienced by any creature. Therefore the development has occurred in certain...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 2, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...e can call it of conventional type. Also having experience confines the way of l...
^^^^
Line 11, column 174, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ities, but it also can be used as fuel. Therefore always proceeding forward based on expe...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, so, then, therefore, well, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 12.9106741573 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2022.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 390.0 442.535393258 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.18461538462 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44391917772 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05403883222 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 213.0 215.323595506 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546153846154 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 656.1 704.065955056 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.4782088681 60.3974514979 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.25 118.986275619 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.25 23.4991977007 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.29166666667 5.21951772744 44% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.243740707755 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0831039109588 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0758088955206 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.150359130593 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0667264976115 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 14.1392134831 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 100.480337079 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.8971910112 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.