This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Edexcel A2 Physics Unit 4 'Physics on the Move' 28/01/10

Scroll to see replies

I guess the logs way would work as well but they are not mentioned in the spec at all. The book I studied from was the Edexcel one and it didnt mention that all tbh.

Reply 541

BPat

That was a ridiculously hard paper! I actually felt like crying in the exam hall! I didn't have time to finish it either!!

Looks like i'm going to have to resit. :frown:

Reply 542

insertusername

kosy91

why did they say that lead was 6mm thick?? was that needed anywhere or was it to suuggest that the diagram was to scale???

it was to scale i measured it and then ended up drawing a circle with my ruler as i didnt have a compass and got a radius of 3cm which made a reasonable circle. Although it wasn't a great paper i don't think it was as bad as some people are making out. Edexcels %accuracy is ridiculous though, since when was 110m around 100m??? i thought wtf then thought hang on its edexcel, thats probably right

Reply 543

Kameo

I think it should be under 54/80 for an A, that may sound too low, but last year Unit 1 and 2, you needed 54/80 for an A I think, and this was much harder.

Reply 544

wooper

kosy91

in the PQRS thing you had to multipy it by 50turns...i did the same as you at first and then changed it.

Why do you multiply by the no. of turns? I wondered if 50 turns or 30 degrees might be relevant, but just used the formula F =BIL. :confused:

For the question about the exponential curve, plot ln I against t to get a straight line, not through the origin. To estimate the time constant, divide I-zero by e (2.71828, not the electron charge!) and get the value of t corresponding to this value of I.

Reply 545

wooper

Has anyone got the paper?

Reply 546

unamed

wooper

Has anyone got the paper?

I think everyone was far too disheartened to have it. :smile:

Reply 547

unamed

Kameo

I think it should be under 54/80 for an A, that may sound too low, but last year Unit 1 and 2, you needed 54/80 for an A I think, and this was much harder.

that would make me very happy. :smile:

Reply 548

kosy91

insertusername

that made me lol.....seriously

yeah it would have been better as 110m than 100m

for that radius thing,....i had no idea what to do with it and just got the radius somehow to use in the next part...because of that i got the explanation wrong as i thought radius below lead is smaller than radius above and concluded that it was moving down...damn!!

Reply 549

kosy91

wooper

Why do you multiply by the no. of turns? I wondered if 50 turns or 30 degrees might be relevant, but just used the formula F =BIL.

god knows why you multiply by 50....
i didnt know how to prove that its exponential..i dont think its mentioned in the edexcel book or ay other book i have read...for time constant...i used the formulas and some values from the grph to prove it...theoratical was 0.3s and my graphical was 0.26s

Reply 550

wooper

Can anyone remember the multiple choice questions? I remember the angular velocity one, the units of energy, the charging capacitor, the square coil, and the one with a lambda particle splitting into 2 others. Which was the one in 2 parts?

How did people do the part where you had to explain how electric and magnetic fields are used in a cyclotron?

Reply 551

Kameo

for the last question for the positron I got the velocity to be above the speed of light. :eek3:

Reply 552

wooper

Kameo

for the last question for the positron I got the velocity to be above the speed of light. :eek3:

This is right. In the last part ('Comment on your answer'), you were supposed to say that the mass is higher than the rest mass, and so the velocity is actually lower than the calculated value.

Reply 553

kosy91

wooper

This is right. In the last part ('Comment on your answer'), you were supposed to say that the mass is higher than the rest mass, and so the velocity is actually lower than the calculated value.

yup i did that too

what was the general comment for the paper from ur classmates n teachers??

Reply 554

WindsorHL3

Has anyone made a facebook page complaining yet if so i'll join

Reply 555

Kameo

wooper

This is right. In the last part ('Comment on your answer'), you were supposed to say that the mass is higher than the rest mass, and so the velocity is actually lower than the calculated value.

Damn I said that it was above the speed of light so relativistic effects would have to be taken into consideration where the mass increases significantly.