Scientists are considering the possibility of sending humans to Mars in the coming decades. Although there have been successful manned missions to the Moon in the 1960s and 1970s, Mars is 150 times further away from Earth than the Moon is. Thus the project of sending humans to Mars would require solving an array of problems the Moon missions did not have to face. One problem is that a round-trip to Mars and back is likely to take at least two years. The trip to the Moon lasted only a few days, and it was easy to bring enough supplies of food, water, and oxygen; but the cargo capacity of space vehicles is too limited to put on board the food, water, and oxygen required by a crew for a period of two years. Without those essentials, though, a Mars mission is impossible. A second problem is that astronauts on the Mars mission would be in the zero-gravity environment of space for many months at a time. Spending a long time in the zero-gravity environment has negative effects on the human body, such as decreased muscle mass and lower bone density. Over the course of a two-year mission, the effects would be so severe, they would make it impossible for humans to make the trip without experiencing grave medical problems. Finally, astronauts on a mission to Mars would be exposed to dangerous levels of space radiation, much of which comes in the form of charged particles emitted by the Sun. Earth’s magnetic field, which normally protects us from dangerous solar radiation, would not be able to protect a spaceship traveling in interplanetary space. Constructing a shield that would protect the whole spaceship from space radiation is at present impossible because it would add too much weight to the ship.
The reading and lecture are about sending the spacecraft to Mars. The author of the reading passage feels that it was challenging and has pernicious effects on the human, and provides three reasons for support. The lecturer on the listening passage claims that it was possible by the use of certain techniques and ideas, and refutes each of the authors' reasons.
To begin with, the reading says that it was difficult to manage food and other raw materials for the two years during the time of to and from Mars to the Earth. However, the speaker argues that special types of technology i.e. hydroponic can be equipped into Mars, which can supply the food and water for the two years. He also elaborated that hydroponics works on the mechanism that it could recycle the wastewater frequently, and can be used for the purpose of drinking.
Secondly, the article posits that due to the zero-gravity on Mars, there would be problems with a decrease in muscle mass and the bone density of humans. The professor refutes this point by saying that on the application of some of the special techniques it would mitigate the problems. He noted that with the help of a regular exercise, solves the problem of muscle weight; and vitamins and minerals reduce the deformities of reducing bone density.
Finally, the reading claims that there is a radiation effect on Mars. Also, the use of a protective shield to protect from these radiations would increase the weight of the spacecraft. On the contrary, the professor opposes it by saying that the problems are occasional. Additionally, he mentions that the use of shield only adds a small amount of weight, and moreover, these could be used on the time of detection of danger.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 212, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...and provides three reasons for support. The lecturer on the listening passage claim...
^^^
Line 3, column 224, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...nt by saying that on the application of some of the special techniques it would mitigate th...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 30.3222958057 148% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1423.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 294.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84013605442 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60131153357 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513605442177 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 436.5 419.366225166 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.1028725646 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.461538462 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6153846154 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.92307692308 7.06452816374 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.0532017161213 0.272083759551 20% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0190233472708 0.0996497079465 19% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0306105089557 0.0662205650399 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0304203990514 0.162205337803 19% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0207938140059 0.0443174109184 47% => 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: 12.7 13.3589403974 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.09 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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: 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.