Many important discoveries or creations are accidental: it is usually while seeking the answer to one question that we come across the answer to another.
Author’s claim “Many important discoveries or creations are accidental: it is usually while seeking the answer to one question that we come across the answer to another”, in my opinion is contentious claim. Many might argue about the surreptitious nature of many discoveries but according to me not a single discovery or innovation is by fluke. Following are the reasons for my discordance towards the author’s claim.
Firstly, Consider an example of the formation of Gravitational law by sir Issac Newton. It might be wondered about the nature of the discovery. Many believe it is surreptitious as if Sir Issac Newton have not seen an falling apple, he would not able to come up with gravitational law but one had overlooked that Sir Isaac Netwon need to work to prove the exceptional notion. Thus, it is rigorous implementation and hard work validated the gravitational law, without proof no one would believe any discovery or Innovation.
Secondly, There are many important discoveries or creations anticipated by researchers like human air flight by wright brothers. They have worked intensively towards the architecture of aeroplane to create first human air flight. After coming up with first model, the airplane get crashed after covering few miles. Due to constant refinement of architecture current architecture was approved for safe air travel. Above example aptly illustrate the hard work and passion after the innovation. Idea can be surreptitious but implementing/proving idea require passion and hard work. Thus, it would be unfair to state any discovery or innovation as accidental.
Thirdly, In Medical field also, many researches are carried out for curing chronic disease or innovating medicines to make operations less excruciating. Consider for example, Madam curry has put her life in danger to make people aware about the effectiveness of radioactive atoms. Later radioactive atoms are used to cure cancer disease. Author also stated that while seeking the answer to one question, we come across the other answers but coming up with these answer require exacting knowledge about different domain and scientists need to further work on each and every questions to validate answers. Thus, nothing is accidental, each and every notion needed to be tested for proving its credibility.
On wrapping up, Discoveries and innovations requires passion and hard work and scientists/researcher need to prove each and every question. Thus, discoveries or innovations can’t be accidental whereas ideas can be accidental but it requires intense hard work to prove any notion.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-25 | batterylow_123 | 50 | view |
| 2023-10-15 | Omar Ibna Nazim | 16 | view |
| 2023-08-02 | okazaki11 | 80 | view |
| 2023-07-26 | jayauen | 83 | view |
| 2023-02-10 | Yam Kumar Oli | 58 | view |
- Some people believe that our ever-increasing use of technology significantly reduces our opportunities for human interaction. Other people believe that technology provides us with new and better ways to communicate and connect with one another. 66
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. 66
- To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards. 66
- Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future. 58
- In order for any work of art—for example, a film, a novel, a poem, or a song—to have merit, it must be understandable to most people. 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 223, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun might seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much might', 'a good deal of might'.
Suggestion: Much might; A good deal of might
...s;, in my opinion is contentious claim. Many might argue about the surreptitious nature of...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 70, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of the formation of Gravitational law by sir Issac Newton. It might be wondered a...
^^
Line 3, column 216, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...us as if Sir Issac Newton have not seen an falling apple, he would not able to com...
^^
Line 5, column 277, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...coming up with first model, the airplane get crashed after covering few miles. Du...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, look, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, thus, whereas, while, for example, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.3162921348 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2217.0 2235.4752809 99% => OK
No of words: 406.0 442.535393258 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.460591133 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48881294772 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20354356961 2.79657885939 115% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536945812808 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 714.6 704.065955056 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 55.5503081422 60.3974514979 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.571428571 118.986275619 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.85714285714 5.21951772744 112% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.30950019413 0.243740707755 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0761954820106 0.0831039109588 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.133589101557 0.0758088955206 176% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.172990990325 0.150359130593 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.14015999499 0.0667264976115 210% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.1392134831 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.27 48.8420337079 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.1639044944 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 121.0 100.480337079 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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.