The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Sachlee
m1 was ok,except for the moments question 8 which i could NOT find a distance x for at all,ugh.


exactly the same as me! left it out completely.
paper was really good. cept that question.
but by the looks of it. alot of people couldnt do it! apprently answer was 0 alot of people were sayin...:s-smilie:
im clueless!
Reply 21
ZERO?!nooooooooooo i thought it was that but thought no,cant be!
Sachlee
ZERO?!nooooooooooo i thought it was that but thought no,cant be!


hate it when that happens. worse than when you dont have a clue lol.
solo2wolf
howd M2 go everyone? fed up 7 b due to not differentiating mod AB and thus had no means of getting time. also not sure about 6 b...i did work done= force x distance moved and ended up with root 6 x the vector for force....is that right? im sorta thinking you were supposed to use calculus to turn force into work done or something? i dont know what the relationship is though....


I spoke to someone else earlier that had involved a root 6 in that question too. Can I ask what method you used? I had something totally different, so I'm not to sure about this question.

Also, answers to the last two parts of question 2? I spoke to a few others and we all had different answers! :eek:
NavalChicken
I spoke to someone else earlier that had involved a root 6 in that question too. Can I ask what method you used? I had something totally different, so I'm not to sure about this question.

Also, answers to the last two parts of question 2? I spoke to a few others and we all had different answers! :eek:


first i got AB obv which was -A+B=i-2j+k. then i used work done= Force x Distance moved and got Distance from Modulus of AB which was where root 6 comes from. then just root 6 times the force . dont know if that right...i think it is but what did you do? some sort of calculus yeah?i wasnt prepared for Force at all i only revised the relationship between displacement,velocity and acceleration grrr. i used F=ma though in earlier question 3 to get the expression for Acceleration:3t-12t. is that right?
NavalChicken
I spoke to someone else earlier that had involved a root 6 in that question too. Can I ask what method you used? I had something totally different, so I'm not to sure about this question.

Also, answers to the last two parts of question 2? I spoke to a few others and we all had different answers! :eek:


that was the hill one...with sin alpha =8/49....only one part to it...find resistive force. u want that answer?ill do it now but i assume u mean another Q. do u have the paper with you?i have obviously lol memory aint that good!
Reply 26
I'm so glad this thread exists!
I did M2 today too and i actually found the paper quite hard compared to the past 2 years. But i only had 2 past papers and i had and i self taught myself the whole unit)....
I have the paper in front of me now.
How were we supposed to do Q4, the one about the Winter Olympic sled thing? I didnt know how to apply the altitutes into the question.

solo2wolf
first i got AB obv which was -A+B=i-2j+k. then i used work done= Force x Distance moved and got Distance from Modulus of AB which was where root 6 comes from. then just root 6 times the force . dont know if that right...i think it is but what did you do? some sort of calculus yeah?i wasnt prepared for Force at all i only revised the relationship between displacement,velocity and acceleration grrr. i used F=ma though in earlier question 3 to get the expression for Acceleration:3t-12t. is that right?


I used the same method as you for q6, but i had root 2. =S
Oh shoot, i just realised i did a stupid mistake on question 3 .... cant beleive it.

Anyway, is anybody doing FP1? I'm really stuck with proof by induction and may need some help.
Kazzi_7
I'm so glad this thread exists!
I did M2 today too and i actually found the paper quite hard compared to the past 2 years. But i only had 2 past papers and i had and i self taught myself the whole unit)....
I have the paper in front of me now.
How were we supposed to do Q4, the one about the Winter Olympic sled thing? I didnt know how to apply the altitutes into the question.



I used the same method as you for q6, but i had root 2. =S
Oh shoot, i just realised i did a stupid mistake on question 3 .... cant beleive it.

Anyway, is anybody doing FP1? I'm really stuck with proof by induction and may need some help.


Q4 you had to use loss in gravitational potentail energy= gain in kinetic energy. so u know the mass, g and the change in height (initial height-final=104m) then u calculate mgh and equate that to change in kinetic energy which is 0.5MV^2-0.5Mx4 (4 from 2^2, initial velocity). Proof by induction isnt as hard as it may seem but you do need to be clever about it a lot of the time. it will be time consuming getting good at it as it basically requires good logic and the ability to see clever results. its not something that can be taught easily via forums. look for video tutorials on youtube. there will be many on it so give it a shot.
Reply 28
solo2wolf
Q4 you had to use loss in gravitational potentail energy= gain in kinetic energy. so u know the mass, g and the change in height (initial height-final=104m) then u calculate mgh and equate that to change in kinetic energy which is 0.5MV^2-0.5Mx4 (4 from 2^2, initial velocity). Proof by induction isnt as hard as it may seem but you do need to be clever about it a lot of the time. it will be time consuming getting good at it as it basically requires good logic and the ability to see clever results. its not something that can be taught easily via forums. look for video tutorials on youtube. there will be many on it so give it a shot.


thanks! I attempted it but did not use the conservation of energy method... Nevermind.
I can do a few proof by inductions and all induction proof up 'til let n=k but on a few past papers, it just threw me when it got to the n=k+1 part coz so many steps had been skipped. But now that M2 is over, i can focus on FP1 and try suss things out.
solo2wolf
that was the hill one...with sin alpha =8/49....only one part to it...find resistive force. u want that answer?ill do it now but i assume u mean another Q. do u have the paper with you?i have obviously lol memory aint that good!


Oh, yeah, sorry it was the wrong question. I was thinking about question 3, but it doesn't matter now, from others I've spoken to it seems my answer was consistent with everyone elses.

With the work vector question, after finding AB, I used a dot product method (WD = F.D), which seemed like a logical idea since energy is a scalar quantity. The only problem is now I've forgotten what value I came out with, so I cant check it over.
solo2wolf
Q4 you had to use loss in gravitational potentail energy= gain in kinetic energy. so u know the mass, g and the change in height (initial height-final=104m) then u calculate mgh and equate that to change in kinetic energy which is 0.5MV^2-0.5Mx4 (4 from 2^2, initial velocity). Proof by induction isnt as hard as it may seem but you do need to be clever about it a lot of the time. it will be time consuming getting good at it as it basically requires good logic and the ability to see clever results. its not something that can be taught easily via forums. look for video tutorials on youtube. there will be many on it so give it a shot.


For question 4, this wasn't my method. I simply found the total energy at the two respective points (A & B I called them) and then used "Work done against resistance = E(a) - E(b)"
NavalChicken
For question 4, this wasn't my method. I simply found the total energy at the two respective points (A & B I called them) and then used "Work done against resistance = E(a) - E(b)"


your method is the same as mine. mine was just a short cut.
Oh right. Are you sitting FP1 next week?
I am, we haven't even finished the syllabus yet!
NavalChicken
Oh right. Are you sitting FP1 next week?
I am, we haven't even finished the syllabus yet!


no way!!!i finished about 2 months ago!dude thats nuts! im cool on fp1 and 2 but fp3 and s3 will take some work. yourself?
I'm only doing the FP1 core module as part of AS further maths (the other two being made up of statistics 1/2). So its been quite an easy AS really. I'm considering doing the A2 next year (meaning rejecting universities this year) with M3.
NavalChicken
I'm only doing the FP1 core module as part of AS further maths (the other two being made up of statistics 1/2). So its been quite an easy AS really. I'm considering doing the A2 next year (meaning rejecting universities this year) with M3.


are you ****ing nuts!rejecting Imperial!whats wrong with you man thats ridiculous!you can learn all further in the summer easily and M3 is just physics with hyperbolics in some places. why are you considering rejecting your offers? that sounds completely crazy to me. you dont need a year to learn further and they teach it first term at imperial anyway!
I've changed my mind about what degree course to follow (considering Physics now) and so I'm going to need another year to complete my Physics A level and so I would quite like to complete further maths too.

Plus I have a minor financial issue :p:
NavalChicken
I've changed my mind about what degree course to follow (considering Physics now) and so I'm going to need another year to complete my Physics A level and so I would quite like to complete further maths too.

Plus I have a minor financial issue :p:


ah :wink: ok well then those are very valid points. be aware that 2009 sees the end of the cap on top up fees....if the tories dont stop them Imperial may kick it up to 15000!
Reply 38
£15,000? Wow. That's more than the fees charged to internationals now... I think. Maths is usually in a lower fee tier than the experimental sciences, hehe.
Statistics tomorrow anyone? I havent started revising yet... :eek:

Latest