The Physics PHYA2 thread! 5th June 2013

Original post by Qari

A grade starts from 96 UMS

Alright! Thank you! :smile:

Reply 2242

Can anyone remember how try worked out the % efficiency question on that paper ?

Reply 2243

Original post by Jbay2902

Can anyone remember how try worked out the % efficiency question on that paper ?

I can not remember. Sorry. Did you get it right btw?

Reply 2244

arminb

3

Original post by StalkeR47

Hi! I have already done it before. And, since it has 10k now, it is going to stop the scrapping of jan exams?

no,"

if it gets at least 100',000 signatures, it will be considered for debate in the House of Commons.

Reply 2245

Original post by arminb

no,"

if it gets at least 100',000 signatures, it will be considered for debate in the House of Commons.

Do not you think that 100,000 is kind of impossible?

Reply 2246

Original post by StalkeR47

I can not remember. Sorry. Did you get it right btw?

Im not sure, what was the answer ?

Reply 2247

Original post by Jbay2902

Im not sure, what was the answer ?

Answer was 22.2% t 3 s.f.

Reply 2248

arminb

3

Original post by StalkeR47

Do not you think that 100,000 is kind of impossible?

no probably it is possible as most students are quite pissed by that.Apart from that, it shouldnt stop us trying for it, should it?

Reply 2249

Original post by arminb

no probably it is possible as most students are quite pissed by that.Apart from that, it shouldnt stop us trying for it, should it?

Yep! Do you think it is a good idea to actually make a thread about this and post this e-petition website in the thread? I am sure many people will come. :smile:

Actually, you make a thread on TSR I am going to post this on yahoo answers. What do you think? :smile:

Reply 2250

Original post by StalkeR47

Answer was 22.2% t 3 s.f.

Yeah that's what I got !!!!!

For some reason I divided the total Graviational potential energy by 55 (because it took 55 second) then divided that by 320KN then it came out with 22.2% ?

thats how I got it

Reply 2251

Original post by Jbay2902

Yeah that's what I got !!!!!

For some reason I divided the total Graviational potential energy by 55 (because it took 55 second) then divided that by 320KN then it came out with 22.2% ?

thats how I got it

Yep! You got 3/3 marks then. :smile:

Reply 2252

Original post by StalkeR47

Yep! You got 3/3 marks then. :smile:

Thank god haha ! I left that question right until the end and came off lucky I guess :smile:

Reply 2253

123456789012

11

Looking at the unofficial mark scheme, I think I've either got 51 (pessimistic) or 55 (optimistic). How many UMS could both of the marks be, respectively?

Reply 2254

arminb

3

Original post by StalkeR47

Yep! Do you think it is a good idea to actually make a thread about this and post this e-petition website in the thread? I am sure many people will come. :smile:

Actually, you make a thread on TSR I am going to post this on yahoo answers. What do you think? :smile:

id say the best way is just to copy paste it on different threads and encourage others to do so, this way more people will see it and ,of course, also let other people know in other websites of you can which could be helpful. I think there already is a thread on this anyways.

Reply 2255

.raiden.

OP

10

Original post by 123456789012

Looking at the unofficial mark scheme, I think I've either got 51 (pessimistic) or 55 (optimistic). How many UMS could both of the marks be, respectively?

98 and 107 possibly

Reply 2256

kingmango

7

Do you lose marks for significant figures in this exam?

Reply 2257