To check the sentences

Question

Could the native speakers tell me whether these sentences sound ok to their ears and are ok in terms of punctuation:

1) I show that the hypothesis that a scale exists between X and the weak scale is enough to predict the masses. Is it better to say: I show that the hypothesis according to which the scale exists between X and the weak scale, is enough to predict the masses.

2) It is a valid and a natural option towards the understanding of X beyond Y. Is it better to say: It is a valid and a natural option toward understanding X beyond Y.

3) No answer can be given to the important issues, like the details on Y, X and Z. Is it better to say: No answers can be given to the important issues, like the details on Y, X and Z or No details can be given on Y, X and Z.

4) New particles are detected at a high energy (or high energy withouth and article?)

5) It is broken at a large energy scale (can a scale be 'large'?)

6) We prefer the use of simple models It is better to say: we prefer to use simple models?

7) They would be required for an analysis, but their use would not change the results (is the time usage correct here?)

8) The content is different below and above the scale. Is it better to say: The contet differs below and above the scale.

9) Is it ok to say: it is far from the reach of present-day experiments

10) When we're writing a conclusion, it is better to say "To summarize,", and not "In summary"? I think that the former is correct. Thank you very much!

Snuppelina · Accepted Answer

Could anyone just read these sentences, please?

Anonymous · Answer

1) This sounds a bit awkward to me. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "scale" here. Do you mean an actual scale, or a difference between two values? I think you mean to say, "I demonstrate the hypothesis that a scale existing between X and the weak scale is enough to predict the masses." Or, better, "Predicting the masses can be done if there is a scale between X and the weak scale."

2) Both sound fine. The only difference between "toward" and "towards" is that "toward" is more in American English and "towards" is used more in British English. They are interchangeable.

"X beyond Y" sounds odd, unless you really mean values of X that are larger than Y. Do you mean X when compared to Y? Like, X/Y? In that case, I'd say something like "X over Y" or "of X in relation to Y" instead.

3) "No answers can be given to the important issues, like the details of X, Y, and Z."

4) One of these: "New particles are detected at a high energy level," "New particles are detected at a high level of energy," or "New particles are detected at high energy?"

5) What is broken? The hypothesis? As a tip, beware of using pronouns too often in English. When writing a lot about a single thing, use the object's name every now and then rather than using pronouns exclusively. What the pronouns refer to can get confusing when they are too far from the words they are replacing.

I'd say something like, "When applied to situations involving high energy, the hypothesis falls apart" (or, "the model falls apart," or whatever "it" is).

6) "We prefer to use simple models," or, "Simpler models are preferred."

7) If you want this to be written in the past tense, this sounds fine, but consider replacing "their use" with "using them." Also, "They" is a bit vague. Consider "These models" instead of "They," if that's what you mean.

You probably want this to be present tense though. That would be, "They are required for an analysis, but using them does not change the results."

8) By "content," do you mean the results of a test or measurement? If so, "results" would likely be a better word.

Both sound a bit off. How about, "The content below the scale is different than the content above the scale."

9) That sounds awkward, but it looks right. If I were to say that sentence, I'd say something more like, "It is beyond the reach of present-day experiments."

10) Both are correct, and which one sounds better depends on the context. You probably want, "To summarize," though.

- Native American English speaker.

Snuppelina · Answer

Anonymous1) This sounds a bit awkward to me. I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "scale" here. Do you mean an actual scale, or a difference between two values? I think you mean to say, "I demonstrate the hypothesis that a scale existing between X and the weak scale is enough to predict the masses." Or, better, "Predicting the masses can be done if there is a scale between X and the weak scale."

Native American English speaker, thank you very much for your help!

A real scale is meant here. The meaning of the sentence is the following: there is a hypothesis that I demonstrate/show, and according to this hypothesis, a scale exists between X and the weak scale, which is enough to predict the masses.
The meaning is not that we just show this hypothesis, but we demonstrate (by means of tests, results, etc.) that according to it, a scale between X and the weak scale is enough to predict the masses.

Can I say: I show that the hypothesis, according to which the scale exists between X and the weak scale, is sufficient to predict the masses.

Anonymous4) One of these: "New particles are detected at a high energy level," "New particles are detected at a high level of energy," or "New particles are detected at high energy?"

Ok, so I don't need an indefinite article when I use just "high energy", without "level". Thanks.

Anonymous5) What is broken? The hypothesis? As a tip, beware of using pronouns too often in English. When writing a lot about a single thing, use the object's name every now and then rather than using pronouns exclusively. What the pronouns refer to can get confusing when they are too far from the words they are replacing.

Sorry, here I means "parity is broken", I certainly use the right nouns so that the meaning is more clear. Simply cut it here, in the forum.
I need to say "the parity is broken at a large energy scale". Is it ok?

Anonymous7) If you want this to be written in the past tense, this sounds fine, but consider replacing "their use" with "using them." Also, "They" is a bit vague. Consider "These models" instead of "They," if that's what you mean.

"They would be required for an analysis, but their use would not change the results".

It's a sort of conditional sentence. I think what is means here is that "they could be included in the analysis (but they are not), but their use would not change the results anyway; that is why they are not used although could be. How is it better to say this? Is this sentence correct?

Anonymous8) By "content," do you mean the results of a test or measurement? If so, "results" would likely be a better word.

I mean the particle content that is different below and above the symmetry scale.
Can I say: bla-bla-bla depends on the content that differs (or DIFFERENT?) below and above the s. scale.

Snuppelina · Answer

Opps, sorry for the typos.
I "mean", of course

Snuppelina · Answer

A few more questions. Could anyone answer please (I've changed the sentences, so their meaning isn't important)? Thank you!

1) This science (here goes its name) allows investigation of the decay of particles.
I think there should either be "allows for the invvestigation" or "allows one to investigate", right?

2) It has been shown to play an important role in revealing something. Does it sound ok?
Isn't better to say "has been proven to", "has been shown to have an important role in something"

Some questions regarding the preposition "of" and articles.

Here are the expressions (just for the sake of examples, no particular meaning is meant):

1) with a mass of 4 kg;
-with a gain of [number]
-fibers 5 mm in diameter

2) they possess helicities (OF?) a=-+3. (that is, helicity is marked with a letter 'a', and -'s value).

I know that it is possible to say "they possess helicities of -+3" or "they possess a helicity of -3", but here 'helicity' is indicated with a letter 'a'. Does it make a difference in usage of "OF"?

3) it corresponds to the angle (OF) ?=45.

4) We get a/the coefficient b=-7 (do I need to use a definite article here since we know that the angle is -7?)

5) it must be different at the scale (OF) ß=?, where this and this are subgroups of the same group.

6) only these neutrinos with a mass (OF?) Mv = 56TeV are allowed here.
That is, do I need to use "OF" when I have a value (56TeV) for a measurement (Mv). Or do I just say without "OF"?

Snuppelina · Answer

Could anyone check please?

To check the sentences

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions