Mathematics examination paper from 1970

Scroll to see replies

If further maths didnt exist back then, I really dont see what the fuss is all about. That paper isnt really all that bad, It the same stuff as current a level but abit harder.

Reply 201

lifelonged

Original post by lubus

If further maths didnt exist back then, I really dont see what the fuss is all about. That paper isnt really all that bad, It the same stuff as current a level but abit harder.

Another person blissfully unaware. You seem to be in denial that the material on this paper is way beyond what I've seen on any further maths paper. Funny how nobody who seems to believe that this paper is the 'same stuff' has proffered any attempts at any of the questions.

Santa won't be coming for you tomorrow if you keep up this sort of pretence!

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 202

dbkey

Original post by lifelonged

Not all present day exams are as pathetic as the UK's.

Here are ones taken in the Far East:

http://www.qc.edu.hk/math/Links/QC%20Examination%20papers.htm

http://www.icme12.org/upload/submission/2034_F.pdf

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 203

lifelonged

Seems pretty similar to the O level papers that I remember. Probably because many of these countries (HK, Singapore) kept the O level - I wonder why.

I'm not a fan of education being a political football (by either left or right), but I can't help feeling that (certainly for maths) a return to the O level for more able students would be a step in the right direction. I think that many who say that the old S level paper is 'just a bit harder' would change their mind. I suppose that I may just have to settle for teaching my daughter the old material and level of difficultly of questions - if she is able for this. Not surprising that most international tests show the UK slipping down the maths rankings.

Reply 204

Kallisto

Entertainment Forum Helper

Original post by Mr M

I think I got it from Edexcel but can't really remember. It was 4 years ago!

I see. And what was your intention to publish the examination paper? to give mathematics expert a challenge? :biggrin:

Reply 205

sooyong94

Guys, a little off topic here:
Where can I get older A level maths paper (preferably from the 70s-90s, regardless of exam bodies)? Tried looking everywhere but I can't find one.

Something comparable to FP3 would do the trick. Trying to find some hard questions on hyperbolic functions. :P

Reply 206

study beats

i cant do any of those questions

Reply 207

Chris70

Does anyone have solutions to the paper 3 questions 4 and 5?

Reply 208

atsruser

Original post by Chris70

Does anyone have solutions to the paper 3 questions 4 and 5?

I've just had a quick go at Paper 3 Q4 and I found the acceln to be

\frac{32\lambda}{5m}-g

vertically.

What have you done so far?

Reply 209

Louisb19

Original post by Chris70

Does anyone have solutions to the paper 3 questions 4 and 5?

Have you been stuck on this since 2013?

Reply 210

TeeEm

A few question parts in this papers give me some filthy ideas ....

Reply 211

Chris70

I equated gain in PE for string with loss of PE for mass as KE is 0. I ended up with lamda=3amg.
Acceleration is then result of tension in string and weight divided by m. I ended up with 16ag/5-g.

For qu 5 I have done part (I) but would be grateful of some guidance where to start with part (ii)

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 212

atsruser

Original post by Chris70

I equated gain in PE for string with loss of PE for mass as KE is 0. I ended up with lamda=3amg.
Acceleration is then result of tension in string and weight divided by m. I ended up with 16ag/5-g.

I did it purely in terms of

\lambda

so I'd need to finish it off but your answer is definitely wrong - it's not dimensionally consistent as you are trying to subtract

L^2T^{-2} -LT^{-2}

For qu 5 I have done part (I) but would be grateful of some guidance where to start with part (ii)

I'll take a look at it later.

BTW, you need to quote my reply, else I won't know that you are trying to respond to me.

Reply 213

atsruser

Original post by Chris70

For qu 5 I have done part (I) but would be grateful of some guidance where to start with part (ii)

This looks to be fairly straightforward. The relative velocity of P w.r.t N is the velocity of P that you would see if moving with N (in terms of vectors

_P\bold{v}_N = \bold{v}_P-\bold{v}_N

) - and from that perspective, you would always see P with the same x-ordinate as you, and moving with SHM relative to you, considered as the origin. I guess that you'd want to express that in terms of the

\bold{i}, \bold{j}

unit vectors, but that's just a bit of resolving.

Do you need any more help than that?

Reply 214

Chris70

Original post by atsruser

This looks to be fairly straightforward. The relative velocity of P w.r.t N is the velocity of P that you would see if moving with N (in terms of vectors

_P\bold{v}_N = \bold{v}_P-\bold{v}_N

\bold{i}, \bold{j}

unit vectors, but that's just a bit of resolving.

Do you need any more help than that?

Am I correct that in the first case the relative velocity of P would be parallel to the y axis?

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 215

atsruser

Original post by Chris70

Am I correct that in the first case the relative velocity of P would be parallel to the y axis?

The velocity of P relative to N is indeed parallel to the y-axis, yes, but of course, you need to be able to show that formally.

Reply 216

bigmansouf

the best way to get old maths papers is to vist the senate house library
http://senatehouselibrary.ac.uk/using-the-library/library-guides/examination-papers/

if you do get something please share with us

I think Mr T can get access since UCL is still with University of London and it is has access to senate House

Original post by sooyong94

Reply 217

Dominic Ng

Part ii

a+b+c=3

a^2+b^2+c^2=9-2(ab+bc+ca)
but ab+bc+ca=0 if any 2 of a, b or c is 0
Therefore max a^2+b^2+c^2=9

let a^2+b^2+c^2=k
a^2-2a+b^2-2b+c^2-2c=k-6
(a-1)^2+(b-1)^2+(c-1)^2=k-3
LHS=0 when a=b=c=1
min (k-3)=0
Therefore min a^2+b^2+c^2=3