Excavated clay jars in Iraq
The reading mentions three points about the ancient batteries - clay jars with a copper cylinder and an iron rod - and mainly dismisses the idea that these jars were batteries. However, the lecturer disagrees with the given reasons and finds them not comprehensive.
First of all, the author states for the vessels to work as batteries, they had to had a wire to conduct electricity. On the other hand, the lecturer disputes this by explaining that the vessels were excavated by local people, not by professional archaeologist. Wires and other Conductors might have been found but thrown away as people did not know their value.
Secondly, The reading asserts that the copper cylinders looked exactly like the scroll holders from Seleucia. In contrast, the lecturer believes this is not true, as the cylinders might have been used for sacred texts, but someone found out later that by adding an iron rod to the vessels, one can produce electric current.
Finally, the reading questions the usage of the electricity that was produced by the vessels. Nevertheless, the lecturer challenges this by mentioning that the electricity produced in the vessels could have been used for medical reasons, as in today's world electric current is used to relieve pain and muscle ache, or to show magical power through the shock given by the current.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-12-07 | sepehr_farzaneh | 84 | view |
- Teachers should not make their social or political views known to students in the classroom. 73
- Parents today are more involved in their children's education than parents were in the past. 66
- Young people nowadays do not give enough time to helping their communities. 56
- Excavated clay jars in Iraq 84
- expedition of Robert Peary 80
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, look, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, in contrast, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.48453608247 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 4.92783505155 81% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 5.05154639175 158% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.03092783505 198% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 32.9175257732 39% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 26.3917525773 99% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.85567010309 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1124.0 937.175257732 120% => OK
No of words: 220.0 206.0 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10909090909 4.54256449028 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85128510684 3.78020617076 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61664801738 2.54303337028 103% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 127.690721649 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.595454545455 0.622605031667 96% => OK
syllable_count: 335.7 290.88556701 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.41237113402 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 9.13402061856 11% => OK
Article: 8.0 0.824742268041 970% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 1.83505154639 109% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.463917525773 431% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 1.44329896907 139% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 12.6804123711 71% => 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: 24.0 16.3608247423 147% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 62.5992545217 44.8134815571 140% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.888888889 76.5299724578 163% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4444444444 16.8248392259 145% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.8888888889 4.34317383033 297% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.29896907216 93% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 2.54639175258 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 7.41237113402 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 1.49484536082 268% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.94845360825 76% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0786719795844 0.216113520407 36% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0294471815815 0.0766984524023 38% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0611017831602 0.0603063233224 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0480584430555 0.12726935374 38% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0628582548556 0.0580467560999 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 8.37731958763 178% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 70.7449484536 79% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 3.82989690722 81% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 7.45979381443 154% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 8.71597938144 145% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 7.59969072165 116% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 41.2886597938 136% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 8.62886597938 127% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 8.54432989691 136% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 8.15463917526 147% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.