greeks burning mirror
The article expresses how the use of a burning mirror by the Greeks in the ancient world in the attempt of defending their city against the Roman navy is not feasible. The lecturer contradicts the points made in the essay and believes they are not accurate.
Firstly, the Greek could have manufactured the burning mirror out of many pieces of small polished copper instead of needing a very large sheet. Subseqently, evidence shows that they would have been able to modify the necessary parabolic curvature using those small pieces of mirror. thus, fashioning of the device would have been possible.
Secondly, although it is true that it takes a long time for wood to catch fire originated by a burning mirror, the Roman ships were not entirely made of wood. There was a substance used in the cracks of the ship called 'pitch' which would catch fire caused by the burning mirror in seconds, even if the ship was moving. Thus, time efficiency was not an issue either.
Finally, on the contrary to what the article claims, using the flaming arrows would have not been more practical and effective. The Romans were familiar with the Greek's flaming arrows, and therefore they were prepared to put out fired caused by them. On the other hand, they were not able to see the rays causing the fire in the case of a burning mirror, only the mirror itself. So, they were caught by surprise and this would give the burning mirror an advantage over the flaming arrows.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 285, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Thus
...ure using those small pieces of mirror. thus, fashioning of the device would have be...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, it is true, on the contrary, 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: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 12.0772626932 25% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1210.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 255.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.74509803922 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99608801488 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.28185426801 2.5805825403 88% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545098039216 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 378.0 419.366225166 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.3641056214 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.833333333 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.25 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.5 7.06452816374 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.364939240615 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.129529438313 0.0996497079465 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.117020408826 0.0662205650399 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.227012100574 0.162205337803 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0319277668678 0.0443174109184 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.27 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 63.6247240618 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.