The statement argues that many important discoveries are accidental; it is usually the answer to one question that we come across the answer to another. While the history rife with stories of discoveries and invention which were products of serendipity, we cannot state that it is more common to find an answer to a question while we are acquiring another.
The discoveries and creation mostly are results of persistent search and experiments. Even so, there is a decent number of discoveries which were accidental, with the devotion and continuous search, scientists hit these discoveries when they were expecting different results. For example, Dr. Fleming discovered Penicillin by accident when he was doing research in his lab. After he returned to his lab, he found a surprising type of fungus, which killed all the bacteria, on a culture he left, with persistent work and dedication, he retained a crucial discovery, which he didn't even expect. Also, Henry Becquerel discovered radioactivities, by serendipity, when he was investigating X-ray, also discovered earlier by accident. Consequently, we cannot ignore that the two incidents were products of trial and error, which was common in traditional science's research.
Controversially, scientific research nowadays is restricted to a measured approach, where a great percentage of the result can be expected. Since most of the scientific research funded by grants, this requires the scientist to develop a research proposal and acquire deep literature review to comprehend previous achievements and state expected results and hypothesis. As a result, a little room is left for accidental discoveries and inventions, in order to reduce the waste of the available funding for scientific research.
Furthermore, while the number of accidental discoveries is outnumbered by the predicted ones, short and surprising results are more plausible and popular. In addition, these discoveries were a result of the scientific aptitude to grasp the idea and his relentless work to prove it. For instance, a falling apple from the tree would not make Newton suddenly come up with gravity theory, associating the incident, which incited his curiosity, with his novel knowledge on mathematics and physics culminated in the approach of the Law of Universal Gravitation. the accident may spark the research curiosity, but only well-defined research would lead to significant results.
In conclusion, scientific research should be well-planned and its results should be predictable to the most extent. Even accidental discoveries came as a result of an exceptional work.
- People who are the most deeply committed to an idea or policy are also the most critical of it.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In deve 62
- We must reduce overhead here at the café. Instead of opening at 6 a.m. weekdays, we will now open at 8 a.m. On weekends, we will only be open from 9 a.m. until 4 p.m. The decrease in hours of operations will help save money because we won’t be paying f 43
- urban 66
- Teachers' salaries should be based on their students' academic performance. 66
- Society should identify those children who have special talents and provide training for them at an early age to develop their talents.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 575, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
... retained a crucial discovery, which he didnt even expect. Also, Henry Becquerel disc...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 558, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...ch of the Law of Universal Gravitation. the accident may spark the research curiosi...
^^^
Line 10, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...me as a result of an exceptional work.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, if, may, so, well, while, even so, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2226.0 2235.4752809 100% => OK
No of words: 402.0 442.535393258 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.53731343284 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47771567384 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17733661011 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 215.323595506 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.534825870647 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 689.4 704.065955056 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.0668443135 60.3974514979 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.941176471 118.986275619 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6470588235 23.4991977007 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.17647058824 5.21951772744 157% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.217135325801 0.243740707755 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0833956185914 0.0831039109588 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.178911071583 0.0758088955206 236% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.151480844961 0.150359130593 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.231864052121 0.0667264976115 347% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.8420337079 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.15 12.1639044944 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 100.480337079 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.