The Student Room Group

AEA June 2011

Scroll to see replies

Reply 220
Original post by Piecewise
Far simpler: as cot(x)=tan(90x)\cot(x) = \tan(90^{\circ}-x), we have cot(θ53)=tan(143θ)\cot(\theta-53^{\circ}) = \tan(143^{\circ}-\theta); hence what we were asked to solve is tan(θ+35)=tan (143θ) \tan(\theta+35^{\circ}) = \tan~(143^{\circ}-\theta) from which θ=54+90n\theta = 54^{\circ}+90^{\circ}n. Obviously n=0n = 0, and n=1n = 1 give values of θ\theta in the desired range! :tongue:


even better, nice :P
Reply 221
Original post by superkinetic
What's yr firm? Are you majoring in math in future?


My firm is Warwick and my insurance is Nottingham and yeah I'm 'majoring' in maths, how about you?

I've got to be honest, I think I could have done much better in this exam, I guess nerves got to me :frown:.
Original post by Webbykun
My firm is Warwick and my insurance is Nottingham and yeah I'm 'majoring' in maths, how about you?

I've got to be honest, I think I could have done much better in this exam, I guess nerves got to me :frown:.


I am not going into math. I've an offer to study engineering at Imperial. Though they didn't make AEA a requirement, the admission person encourages me to take that.

I understand that sometimes under exam conditions, you can't seem to perform to yr max. It happens to me during all my school internal exams, and in fact for my A levels too, when I am worrying how much marks I lost due to my negligence.
Reply 223
Original post by implus
This is how I did question 1:



You are a genius my friend :hat2:

I didn't think of that at all :sad: Realised I could've done tan x = cot (90 - x) today :facepalm:
Original post by superkinetic
But that's not true that opposite angles in a kite add up to 180 deg; it's coincidental that both opposite angles add up to 180 deg, as one of the angle is 90 deg.

Assume there are 2 similar angles of 100 deg in a kite. Do the remaining opposite angles add up to 180 deg?

Anw, do u require AEA for yr offer?


I thought it was true for 4 sided shapes.
Oh well!

Yeah I require it for my insurance. :rolleyes:
FML
Reply 225
Original post by AnonyMatt
I thought it was true for 4 sided shapes.
Oh well!

Yeah I require it for my insurance. :rolleyes:
FML


How'd you find it, man?
Original post by Ultimate1
How'd you find it, man?


Absolutely crap. :p:

I too thought Q1 was just a typo.

I found the vectors question especially difficult too.

I thought it was a very difficult paper - don't remember any of the others being as difficult at all.
Reply 227
Original post by AnonyMatt
Absolutely crap. :p:

I too thought Q1 was just a typo.

I found the vectors question especially difficult too.

I thought it was a very difficult paper - don't remember any of the others being as difficult at all.

Same. :frown:

I really would have liked a Merit here. ffs why was this one of the hardest years.
Original post by Ultimate1
Same. :frown:

I really would have liked a Merit here. ffs why was this one of the hardest years.


It was like the worst year ever for the AEA and STEP II. Just *******s really. :p:
Reply 229
Original post by AnonyMatt
It was like the worst year ever for the AEA and STEP II. Just *******s really. :p:


Yep. I was expecting a 2 for STEP I but I just froze in the exam. When I tried it again a day later I got quite a lot of the Qs. I hate that.
Reply 230
What do you guys reckon the grade boundaries will be for a distinction? I'm seriously hoping for sub-70.
Reply 231
Original post by Webbykun
What do you guys reckon the grade boundaries will be for a distinction? I'm seriously hoping for sub-70.


Hoping for something like that aswell but DFranklin reckons there'll be normal boundaries :dontknow:
Reply 232
On that last question, how the hell were you meant to find p and q?
Reply 233
Original post by Pheylan
On that last question, how the hell were you meant to find p and q?


Well, the vertical asymptote had been shifted to the y-axis, i.e. 3 to the left. So p = 3.

If you look at the original graph, the y-values of the stationary points were -2 and -10 if I remember correctly. They're symmetrical about the line y=-6. If you look to the translated graph, they both lie the same distance above the x-axis, so the line of symettry y=-6 has been shifted up 6 to the x-axis. Hence q = 6.
Reply 234
Original post by Webbykun
Well, the vertical asymptote had been shifted to the y-axis, i.e. 3 to the left. So p = 3.

If you look at the original graph, the y-values of the stationary points were -2 and -10 if I remember correctly. They're symmetrical about the line y=-6. If you look to the translated graph, they both lie the same distance above the x-axis, so the line of symettry y=-6 has been shifted up 6 to the x-axis. Hence q = 6.


Ugh. ****ing exams
Reply 235
Original post by Pheylan
On that last question, how the hell were you meant to find p and q?


I got p=3, q=6 ?
Reply 236
So is anyone doing the solutions?
Reply 237
Original post by soczek322
So is anyone doing the solutions?


Did you send the paper to Mr. M and ask him? :smile:
Reply 238
Original post by ElMoro
I got p=3, q=6 ?


p is the translation to the left hence 3 as the asymptote move by 3 to the left. q is the shift up, but as the curve,after taking the modulus, is symmetrical in y it means C and D have the same y-coordinate, therefore, before taking the modulus the y coordinate of C is negative that of D, a value of 6 does that.
For me I thought the paper was hard, and the grade boundaries would probably be around 70 as usualll.. I totally messed up on question 5 on the last bit, cus I thought that freaking thing we had to show was an identity, I feel so stupid nowww for not just subbing an a value innn.. I als messed up my calculations a bit in the vectors question in part d). Otherwise I think i did okay, good thing is i don't need it for an offer or anything haha..
Reply 239
Sorry just realised someone made the same point about p and q earlier. :frown:

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending