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.
Both the lecture and the reading discuss the possibility of sending human to Mars. The author of the reading addressed three problems that must be solved but the professor gives three solutions accordingly.
To begin with, the passage mentions the difficulty of having enough food, water, and air during the long trip. However the professor mentions a specialized technique, hydranponics, can solve this problem. To be more specific, the system cultivate the plant with root in water instead of soil. The plant absorbs carbon dioxide and release fresh oxygen which human can use to breath. Also, it recycles the waste water and generates clean and drinkable water. In addition, the system requires little space. As a result, the first problem can be resolved.
Secondly, the reading suggests that the long-travel would harm the health of astronauts. However, the speaker counteracts the statement by providing a solution. She says there are many space stations that the astronauts use to maintain their health. First, they do regular exercises to keep muscle mass. Second, they take minerals to slow down the decease of bone density. Thus, this issue is not problematic.
Last but not least, the reading passage mentions the issue of dangerous level of the sun radiation. Again, the professor contradicts the statement by pointing out that it is not a problem any longer. To illustrate, the level of radiation is not always high and dangerous. Furthermore, new equipment, which does add much weight, has been invited to detect the level of radiation. That is, astronauts can wait in a small shelter when the level of radiation is dangerous and go back to normal work after the danger passes.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 112, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...d, water, and air during the long trip. However the professor mentions a specialized te...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 221, Rule ID: USE_TO_VERB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...many space stations that the astronauts use to maintain their health. First, they d...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, thus, in addition, as a result, 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: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1426.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 277.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14801444043 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65621553691 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 145.348785872 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.613718411552 0.540411800872 114% => OK
syllable_count: 421.2 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 25.666076833 49.2860985944 52% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 71.3 110.228320801 65% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.85 21.698381199 64% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.2 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0425904602076 0.272083759551 16% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0125202826202 0.0996497079465 13% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0252107492568 0.0662205650399 38% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0268455699669 0.162205337803 17% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0169557850353 0.0443174109184 38% => 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: 9.8 13.3589403974 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.74 53.8541721854 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 11.0289183223 65% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.0 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.2008830022 62% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.