The Student Room Group

iGCSE EDEXCEL PHYSICS DISCUSSION 2012

Scroll to see replies

Reply 180
Original post by StUdEnTIGCSE
Well theoretical physics is damn easy at this stage

This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my Nexus One


Too bad that's not actually tested.
Original post by sahajkaur
The june paper was much better at testing knowledge and understanding. Asking you to make an experiment to measaure angle of refraction in a glass block does not test my understanding of physics IMO, if that's what you think realphysics is then you're in for a surprise at A -level


A-Level isn't "real" physics either. It's still just a game. It may be a bit more theoretical, but it's still not conceptual enough.

Have you seen the British Physics Challenge, AS Challenge and (A2) Olympiad? They actually test understanding. Too bad they're also pretty difficult (and I speak for just the Physics Challenge and maybe AS).
BTW is this paper going to be like January 2012 or June 2011, do you think?
Reply 183
Original post by Big-Daddy
BTW is this paper going to be like January 2012 or June 2011, do you think?


jan
Original post by Big-Daddy
A-Level isn't "real" physics either. It's still just a game. It may be a bit more theoretical, but it's still not conceptual enough.

Have you seen the British Physics Challenge, AS Challenge and (A2) Olympiad? They actually test understanding. Too bad they're also pretty difficult (and I speak for just the Physics Challenge and maybe AS).


As far as 'real' or 'theoretical' or in fact 'conceptual' physics goes, iGCSE reflects none of that. It's just experimental; which IMO is no 'reflection of the real world'. I did the Physics Challenge aswell and that's what papers should be like, not asking me to correct for background radiation. I thought you found physics 'really easy'; then Physics Challenge shouldn't have been that difficult?
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by sahajkaur
jan


As far as 'real' or 'theoretical' or in fact 'conceptual' physics goes, iGCSE reflects none of that. It's just experimental; which IMO is no 'reflection of the real world'. I did the Physics Challenge aswell and that's what papers should be like, not asking me to correct for background radiation. I thought you found physics 'really easy'; then Physics Challenge shouldn't have been that difficult?


I didn't find it that hard at all, and I did very well despite a stupid mistake that cost me 2 marks - but it's much harder to prepare for something like that. It's more a test of "Physics intelligence". I didn't prepare. IGCSEs, I guess, are designed to be prepared for. So are A-Levels. The Physics Challenge is designed to be a test of "talent".
(edited 11 years ago)
Reply 185
Original post by Big-Daddy
I didn't find it that hard at all, and I did very well despite a stupid mistake that cost me 2 marks - but it's much harder to prepare for something like that. It's more a test of "Physics intelligence". I didn't prepare. IGCSEs, I guess, are designed to be prepared for. So are A-Levels. The Physics Challenge is designed to be a test of "talent".


Original post by Big-Daddy
A-Level isn't "real" physics either. It's still just a game. It may be a bit more theoretical, but it's still not conceptual enough.

Have you seen the British Physics Challenge, AS Challenge and (A2) Olympiad? They actually test understanding. Too bad they're also pretty difficult (and I speak for just the Physics Challenge and maybe AS).


Original post by HerroKitty
Aren't resit papers meant to be harder than the summer papers though? Or did you not mean in terms of difficulty.


I meant the style as in how they're experimental :smile:; but on the other hand, I found our June 2012 Chem and Bio papers more challenging than the January papers so we'll see.
Original post by sahajkaur
x.


I found it far harder than IGCSE past papers, which were a breeze. I actually had to concentrate hard in the Challenge. That doesn't mean that there were questions I had to think very carefully about. (Although there were one or two if I remember correctly.)
Do we need to learn anything about magnetising and demagnetising?
Will knowing all the formulas be necessary with the new spec? I know the new spec is going to involve less calculations but I just looked at the 2011 past paper and there are quite a few questions asking you to state the relationship between x and y. I have the memory capacity of a goldfish so what are some general formulas to remember and tips for remembering them?
Reply 189
Original post by Big-Daddy
Do we need to learn anything about magnetising and demagnetising?


Certainly, not sure about double award but certainly for triple.
Original post by HerroKitty
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App


So only magnetizing through making it the core of a solenoid?
Original post by sahajkaur
Certainly, not sure about double award but certainly for triple.


It doesn't appear to be on the specification - the only point related is 6.9: "describe the construction of electromagnets". That's just "put the ferromagnetic core in the solenoid and you will have an electromagnet". It doesn't say anything about magnetising or demagnetising otherwise. :confused:
Can someone explain the motor effect to me? I'm having issues :frown: would be grateful.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
Reply 193
The motor effect is basically: Potential difference(voltage)/current + Magnetic field > motion
so basically it converts electrical energy to kinetic energy.
Overall a current flowing through a conductor (wire) placed within a magnetic field will lead to motion due to the interaction between the 2 magnetic fields.
A question,
Is the orbit of the comet elliptical or elongated or highly elliptical?
Original post by StUdEnTIGCSE
A question,
Is the orbit of the comet elliptical or elongated or highly elliptical?


elliptical
Reply 196
Original post by Big-Daddy
It doesn't appear to be on the specification - the only point related is 6.9: "describe the construction of electromagnets". That's just "put the ferromagnetic core in the solenoid and you will have an electromagnet". It doesn't say anything about magnetising or demagnetising otherwise. :confused:


It most certainly is; refer to point 6.5 which is induced magnetism and also this relates to soft and hard 'magnetic' material. Besides isn't magnetism and demagnetism fairly simple ?
Reply 197
Original post by StUdEnTIGCSE
A question,
Is the orbit of the comet elliptical or elongated or highly elliptical?


Highly elliptical with the Sun at one of the foci, long period and only appearing in the sky every 10 years or so. They originate from the outer reaches of the solar system (Short period from Kuiper belt and Long period from Oort cloud) and form a tail near the sun.
Original post by sahajkaur
It most certainly is; refer to point 6.5 which is induced magnetism and also this relates to soft and hard 'magnetic' material. Besides isn't magnetism and demagnetism fairly simple ?


Magnetism - induction by stroking or by making the material the core of an electromagnet
Demagnetism - hammering or heating

That's all I know off the top of my head. Am I missing any?
Reply 199
Original post by Big-Daddy
Magnetism - induction by stroking or by making the material the core of an electromagnet
Demagnetism - hammering or heating

That's all I know off the top of my head. Am I missing any?


As far as our specification goes. Magnetism is done as you said by induction and electromagnetism and demagnetism is simply when an electromagnet (made by a soft magnetic material) ceases to be magnetic. We don't need to know how but you are right in your methods, so don't worry about learning anything further.

Quick Reply

Latest