Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great deal of useful information can be gathered without the costs and risks associated with sending men and women into space. Therefore, we should invest our resources in unmanned space flight.
It is true that manned space flight comes with its set of perils. The risk associated with sending men and women into space is something which needs to be mitigated. The Challenger fiasco is a perfect testimony to this fact. A lot of brave young men and women lost their lives in that accident, which could have been avoided.
It is interesting to note that unmanned space probes and satellites predate manned space-flight. The Sputnik was launched in 1951 and it took us 18 more years to put a man on the moon. The process of human deployment in space is time-consuming and cumbersome. Yet, we continue to invest millions of dollars in astronaut training. At some level, it should be understood that the human resource is something which cannot be subsumed by machines. Unmanned-space flights have had great successes in the recent past. The Mars Rover was able to traverse the surface of the red planet and bring us pictures of never-before-seen craters and potential sites for human habitation.
However, it should be noted that these are not isolated successes. Behind every triumphant space-probe lies a team of human minds. Therefore, it would be unwise to comment on the economic feasibility of these missions without taking into account the human component. Space probes have also had their fair share of pitfalls. Missions which were earmarked for 4-5 years had to be scrapped within months due to technical failures. Given our advances in technology and robotics, it would be natural for us to assume that these inconsistencies can be effectively addressed with modern resources. That does not take away the fact that there is a significant amount of uncertainty associated with machine-based space travel.
When a working section of the International Space Station had a glitch, a team of human experts were sent to rectify it. The integrity of machines for long-term space operations is therefore circumspect. I concede to your argument that investments in unmanned space-flight should go up, but eliminating human-deployment altogether seems like a knee-jerk response. Several test missions involving artificial intelligence and robots produced unsatisfactory results. As a result, a full-time engagement of machines is nothing more than a long shot. Human and mechanical competence are not mutually exclusive. Manned space-flight continues to enjoy its share of advantages, both economic and scientific. The durability of these advantanges is definitely open to interpretation.
But, I am of the view that investing all of our resources in unmanned space flight without developing a robust astronaut program is counterproductive to our requirements. The two spheres have to feed of one another and grow symbiotically.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-23 | Krisha Lakhani | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-17 | riyarmy | 83 | view |
| 2023-08-11 | Anish Sapkota | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-04 | DCAD123 | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-30 | BusariMoruf | 55 | view |
- In every field, politics, government and business, those in power should step down after five years. 58
- Due to the small possibility of people dying due to the cow vaccine, routine vaccination drives should be abandoned. 93
- Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great deal of useful information can be gathered without the costs and risks associated with sending men 70
Comments
Essay evaluation report
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-essays/following-opinion-was-provided-l…
----------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 28 15
No. of Words: 435 350
No. of Characters: 2254 1500
No. of Different Words: 255 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.567 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.182 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.13 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 159 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 130 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 102 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 72 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.536 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.519 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.286 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.249 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.428 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.041 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, therefore, as a result, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 61.0 55.5748502994 110% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2293.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 435.0 441.139720559 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27126436782 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56690854021 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20917893485 2.78398813304 115% => OK
Unique words: 253.0 204.123752495 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581609195402 0.468620217663 124% => OK
syllable_count: 727.2 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 19.7664670659 142% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 22.8473053892 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.9678719753 57.8364921388 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 81.8928571429 119.503703932 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.5357142857 23.324526521 67% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.21428571429 5.70786347227 39% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 1.0 5.15768463074 19% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.20758483034 171% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.234010594635 0.218282227539 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0568274999097 0.0743258471296 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.07008320948 0.0701772020484 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.234010594635 0.128457276422 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0628817314937 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: 11.2 14.3799401198 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 48.3550499002 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.99 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 137.0 98.500998004 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 12.3882235529 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.1389221557 72% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
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.