The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

STEP Prep Thread 2016 (Mark. II)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1980
Avatar for fa991
fa991
3
Original post by drandy76
Afaik they're meant to be of similar difficulty, someone correct me if I'm wrong


Posted from TSR Mobile


I find step 3 easier than step 2 but yeah they're supposed to be similar in difficulty haha

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by krishdesai7
Is it just me, or is STEP 3 a whole order of magnitude tougher than STEP 2. I didy first mock today, and ooh, it was a whole new ballgame


More difficult questions (at least content wise), but lower grade boundaries (so it should be about as difficult to get a 1).
who r u if u find ii harder than iii can we swap please
Well, I have nothing against them personally - I have just heard that the paper was overflowing with them.
Original post by fa991
I find step 3 easier than step 2 but yeah they're supposed to be similar in difficulty haha

Posted from TSR Mobile


I agree - I think STEP 3 can be a bit intimidating at first sight but it seems to me as though a lot of the questions don't actually require much work once you get them and complex numbers questions, though intimidating perhaps, can be very easy.
Original post by Mathemagicien
I will forgive you

But personally, I find complex numbers to be the most enjoyable parts of STEP

(Although I will admit that I would realistically skip one if it, by a brief analysis, it looked magnitudes too complex for me, there is after all a limit to what I can do)


Ugh, the last sentence - I am kind of hoping it wasn't on purpose and it is just all the maths slowly leaking out from all this STEP prep.
Original post by Mathemagicien
STEP can induce all sorts of un-natural maths to become integral to one's vocabulary. I cannot now differentiate between mathematical language and pleb talk. STEP probably changes your brain a mean deal - mine deviates a lot from its standard state - although the changes tend to be limited to only some areas.

Tangentially speaking, it is quite interesting how many people say they find STEP III easier than STEP II.


"Tangentially speaking"

No. That's not ok.
Original post by Mathemagicien
Its not a normal way to speak, is it?


No it's not lol, I think you should speak normally instead.
Original post by Mathemagicien
I don't mean to be obtuse, but don't you think its acute way of speaking?

I derive satisfaction from it


I was going to make a derivative pun but I think you've used every differential calculus term I know...
Original post by Mathemagicien
I imagine that there are plenty of really good calculus terms just waiting fourierly good puns


Wow it's like the name was Taylor-made for that pun.
I have a friend that thought the series in Q3 II 2016 was e^x. He was convinced the question was very easy. RIP.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by jjsnyder
I have a friend that thought the series in Q3 II 2016 was e^x. He was convinced the question was very easy. RIP.


Posted from TSR Mobile


That's the case where n=infinity, so it basically is the same as doing all the individual cases of non-infinite n. Full marks ez
Original post by jjsnyder
I have a friend that thought the series in Q3 II 2016 was e^x. He was convinced the question was very easy. RIP.


Posted from TSR Mobile


Ouch. How did he even do the first part though, if the series was extended to infinity the first result wouldn't be valid?
Original post by jjsnyder
I have a friend that thought the series in Q3 II 2016 was e^x. He was convinced the question was very easy. RIP.


Posted from TSR Mobile


It is an approximation to e^x. I thought the same way as him for a few minutes, and was confused why they wanted me to prove such a trivial result lol. Then, I realised that it was up to n, so I went on with the question haha. :biggrin:


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by IrrationalRoot
Ouch. How did he even do the first part though, if the series was extended to infinity the first result wouldn't be valid?


This is what I thought to myself, clearly he is a wizard.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Insight314
It is an approximation to e^x. I thought the same way as him for a few minutes, and was confused why they wanted me to prove such a trivial result lol. Then, I realised that it was up to n, so I went on with the question haha. :biggrin:


Posted from TSR Mobile


It is an approximation, but it's important to note the difference, unfortunately I think it was rather hard to gain any credit at all by using e^x. Perhaps 1 mark for condolences may be awarded.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by jjsnyder
It is an approximation, but it's important to note the difference, unfortunately I think it was rather hard to gain any credit at all by using e^x. Perhaps 1 mark for condolences may be awarded.


Posted from TSR Mobile


Yeah, totally agree. The whole point of the question is ignored if a person assumes that the series is up to infinity. :wink:


Posted from TSR Mobile
He could have noted e^x=0 is not possible for any real x. x->-infinity does not count btw.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by physicsmaths
He could have noted e^x=0 is not possible for any real x. x->-infinity does not count btw.


Posted from TSR Mobile


Mech practice trumps complex number/vector/geometry practice for STEP III.

Do you agree?

Also, how is physics going? I've got my first A2 Physics exam tomorrow! :biggrin:


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by physicsmaths
He could have noted e^x=0 is not possible for any real x. x->-infinity does not count btw.


Posted from TSR Mobile


There were a lot of ways he could've deduced that the series wasn't exe^x, the most striking being the fact that there were n's in it XD.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you