that would give the wrong answer tho . im extremely baffled by this question. even by this parallelogram method. I just resolve angles and solve it that way. perhaps someone could show how it could be done by resolving??

Reply 10

noahwdennis

7

Original post by astiaf

that would give the wrong answer tho . im extremely baffled by this question. even by this parallelogram method. I just resolve angles and solve it that way. perhaps someone could show how it could be done by resolving??

If they got it wrong in the working, the answer could be wrong? Or is there a different mark scheme you are referring to?

Reply 11

astiaf

OP

9

Original post by noahwdennis

If they got it wrong in the working, the answer could be wrong? Or is there a different mark scheme you are referring to?

thats the madas model answers. they might be wrong but I doubt it.

Reply 12

noahwdennis

7

Original post by astiaf

thats the madas model answers. they might be wrong but I doubt it.

Well it looks like they got it right and just made a slight mistake on that line putting 6 instead of 12 because on the next line the 48 is made up of 2 x 8 x 6 x cos60 (0.5)

Reply 13

baziop

10

Original post by astiaf

thats the madas model answers. they might be wrong but I doubt it.

they are not wrong, just a typo. 6 should be a 12, triangle is formed with angle 60 degrees, two lengths 8 and 12 with length F to be found using cosine. that unmarked length next to the 60 degrees should be 12, as it is parallel to the marked length opposite of 12. thats my best guess.

Reply 14

astiaf

OP

9

Original post by baziop

they are not wrong, just a typo. 6 should be a 12, triangle is formed with angle 60 degrees, two lengths 8 and 12 with length F to be found using cosine. that unmarked length next to the 60 degrees should be 12, as it is parallel to the marked length opposite of 12. thats my best guess.

how is that not wrong, if you use 12 instead of 6 you get the magnitude to be root 112 and not root 160

Reply 15

boulderingislife

20

Original post by baziop

they are not wrong, just a typo. 6 should be a 12, triangle is formed with angle 60 degrees, two lengths 8 and 12 with length F to be found using cosine. that unmarked length next to the 60 degrees should be 12, as it is parallel to the marked length opposite of 12. thats my best guess.

6 is a typo and the error is carried through. Next line should be 96, not 48 imo. Thoughts?

Reply 16

astiaf

OP

9

Original post by noahwdennis

Well it looks like they got it right and just made a slight mistake on that line putting 6 instead of 12 because on the next line the 48 is made up of 2 x 8 x 6 x cos60 (0.5)