The burning mirror in ancient time
The reading and lecture are both about the burning mirror, which used in the ancient world. The author of reading believes that there are some reasons to substantiate the burning mirror did not exist in that time. The lecture challenges the statement made by the author. The professor is of the opinion that these reasons inconceivable.
First of all, the author suggests that the ancient Greeks had not enough technology to create the burning mirror because to build the mirror would have to have precise parabolic that the ancient period were not this ability to make such a device. This reason is challenged by the lecture. She says that dozens of small flat pieces of polished copper can create the parabolic shape. Furthermore, ancient mathematicians knew the properties of the parabolic, consequently, they could assemble small pieces to make the parabolic shape.
Secondly, the writer contends that the burning mirror does needs a long time to set the ships on fire. The article notes should there is a device to concentrate the sun's rays on a wooden for ten minutes to set on fire, but it is unlikely that Roman ships stayed much time. The lecture, however, rebuts this by asserting that Roman ships used some materials to seal the spaces between wooden with waterproof substances like the pitch. She elaborates on this by mentioning that the pitch can catch the fire by the burning mirror in seconds even during moving, therefore, the burning mirror had enough time to set the ships on fire.
Finally, it is stated that in the article that in the ancient world were the flaming arrows which were effective for the Greeks, so there was no reason to build a new weapon such as the burning mirror. The lecture, on the other hand, posits that Roman soldiers could determine the flaming arrows, thus they were ready to put out the fire, but they could not the burning arrays from the mirror, as a result, this plan was a surprisingly and effectively than flaming arrows for the Roman army.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-01-28 | reza_fattahi | 80 | view |
| 2022-01-01 | Sujan Shrestha | 60 | view |
| 2022-01-01 | Sujan Shrestha | 80 | view |
| 2021-01-17 | Elhamsarvari | 60 | view |
| 2020-10-08 | serena_wus | 80 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement grades encourage students to learn Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion 40
- what do you think about using strike rules to handling and storage of coal ash products? 80
- what is the source of the sound? 80
- If you are going to graduate from the university and have to choose the final course, which professor will you choose? The one you used to sign up for courses or the one you have never learned from before. 76
- Summaries the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they case doubt on specific points made in the reading passage. the source of quackers 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 215, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ning mirror did not exist in that time. The lecture challenges the statement made b...
^^^
Line 1, column 272, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...enges the statement made by the author. The professor is of the opinion that these ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, finally, first, furthermore, however, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, such as, as a result, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1660.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 343.0 270.72406181 127% => OK
Chars per words: 4.83965014577 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30351707066 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.43151834197 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483965014577 0.540411800872 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 510.3 419.366225166 122% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.9508668742 49.2860985944 144% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.571428571 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5 21.698381199 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6428571429 7.06452816374 151% => 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 : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.424329003266 0.272083759551 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140676992272 0.0996497079465 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.136115834042 0.0662205650399 206% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.250315274523 0.162205337803 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0642410278136 0.0443174109184 145% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.09 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.0 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.