No field of study can advance significantly unless it incorporates knowledge and experience from outside that field.
Combining different fields to advance the studies is a very good way of doing research, and many technologies are really breakthrough by taking such a way. Nevertheless, I disagree the method could use in every field. I will explore the reasons in the following essay.
First of all, incorporating with different fields when doing the researches is very useful to developing the new technologies. For example, in recent years, many biologists love to cooperate with engineers in computer science. The counting ability is really helping biologists to develop some biological model, which they were hard to calculate by themselves in the past. Besides, visualization is another factor why the biologists like to work with the field of computer science. Visualization could aid the researcher having many images to figure out what is the root cause.
However, many fields of studies are not suitable to incorporate with others. For instance, physics is one of the studies, which is very suitable to take the research by themselves. String theory, one of the most popular theory apply to explain many phenomena in the cosmos now, is totally guessing theory, developing and proving only by the math. Such theory has no chances to other knowledge because it really has no relationship with others fields. Moreover, if we force to add other theories into it, we may encumber the development of string theory. Thus, for many cases, incorporating knowledge and experience from outside the field might not be a good idea.
Progress is often in an instant. Many factors will lead to a considerable advance in the academic fields. As for the factor of collaboration contributing to academic subjects' significantly growth, I believe it should depend on every different fields' situation. Some subjects are fit for cooperation with other fields, we should encourage, and others that are not suitable, we should not force them to do this.
In summary, cooperation must have some benefits to academic subjects' fields, but I am of the opinion that cooperation is not the only way which could advance the studies.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-13 | smithsonite79 | 83 | view |
| 2019-11-03 | Kyunghwan Kim | 83 | view |
| 2019-10-28 | FaylEAVE0920 | 66 | view |
| 2019-10-19 | tuktuki1311 | 50 | view |
| 2019-10-03 | wwwww | 66 | view |
- In a study of the reading habits of Waymarsh citizens conducted by the University of Waymarsh, most respondents said that they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a second study conducted by the same researchers found that the type o 68
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of Parson City's local newspaper."In our region of Trillura, the majority of money spent on the schools that most students attend—the city-run public schools—comes from taxes that each city government c 55
- In the United States, medical information about patients traditionally has been recorded and stored on paper forms. However, there are efforts to persuade doctors to adopt electronic medical record systems in which information about patients is stored in 85
- Did bees a type of insect exist on Earth as early as 200 million years ago? Such a theory is supported by the discovery of very old fossil structures that resemble bee nests. The structures have been found inside 200-million-year-old fossilized trees in t 81
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Teachers were more appreciated and valued by society in the past than they are nowadays. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 473, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'adding'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'force' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: adding
...th others fields. Moreover, if we force to add other theories into it, we may encumber...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 243, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'fields'' or 'field's'?
Suggestion: fields'; field's
...eve it should depend on every different fields situation. Some subjects are fit for co...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 410, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e, we should not force them to do this. In summary, cooperation must have some b...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, really, so, thus, as for, for example, for instance, in summary, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 14.8657303371 34% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 33.0505617978 54% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 58.6224719101 87% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1758.0 2235.4752809 79% => OK
No of words: 341.0 442.535393258 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15542521994 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9077011627 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 215.323595506 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.536656891496 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 551.7 704.065955056 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.8132827023 60.3974514979 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.5263157895 118.986275619 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9473684211 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.36842105263 5.21951772744 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.220863949006 0.243740707755 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0688219993915 0.0831039109588 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0889393144767 0.0758088955206 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110321041266 0.150359130593 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0665705299615 0.0667264976115 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 100.480337079 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.