The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

OCR C4 (not mei) 18th June 2013 revision

Scroll to see replies

Original post by printergirl
i did

but i can tell you now we're wrong


t is 1. You just had to substitute this back into your parametric equations to get your maximum point as (0, 3) - or negative 3, I can't remember!
Reply 501
Avatar for Lindseyjm
Lindseyjm
Do you think i can drop 13 marks and still get an A* (I have 93% in C3)?
It's so unfair, I'd much rather have an easier paper and actually give students the chance to show their talent.
That paper was so bad, the difference between the top and bottom achievers won't be very much because there were so 'few' standard questions. I don't mind them being hard, just that they are fairly standard. Question 10 WTF?
Original post by a10
I totally agree with this....


I picked up mine cheap second hand on ebay. Not much more than a scientific calculator.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 504
Avatar for Theo115
Theo115
Original post by Kirity
Thanks for the MS

For #3 how did you show they are not parallel? I just stated they are not factors


I just found the two direction vectors and showed that they are not multiples of each other and so they are not parallel.
Original post by JoshL123
Did anyone get t= -1? Fml :/


Yes until I realised I multiplied out my brackets wrong (sorry :/ )
Reply 506
Avatar for hollybeau
hollybeau
That was an awful paper :frown:

Does anyone have any ideas on grade boundaries?
angle can be 171.3 or 6.68 because its the angle between two vectors and it doesn't affect the area of the base because sin(x)=sin(180-x)
Original post by Kirity
Thanks for the MS

For #3 how did you show they are not parallel? I just stated they are not factors


Just show that the vectors are not scalar multiples of each other. Which I think that's what you did. :smile:

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 509
Avatar for tdphysics
tdphysics
for my differential equation I got r^(3/2)=(81/25)t+(9/5) and I got 30.5 3.s.f for the second bit, is this correct?
Reply 510
Avatar for JoshL123
JoshL123
2
Original post by ttylerbevann
Yes until I realised I multiplied out my brackets wrong (sorry :/ )


So t wasn't -1 ;/
Reply 511
Avatar for Chrissii
Chrissii
Original post by eggfriedrice
Isnt it slightly unfair people can plot the graphs using theirs calculators during the exam? :| "pay £80 and get a slight advantage. " Meh.



I only paid £25 for my graphical, but it forgot to even use it to help me with that parametric question! :angry:
I just can't believe I forgot what inversely proportional meant :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

That's going to haunt me forever. 9 marks down the drain.

:banghead:
Original post by samthegooner
It's so unfair, I'd much rather have an easier paper and actually give students the chance to show their talent.
That paper was so bad, the difference between the top and bottom achievers won't be very much because there were so 'few' standard questions. I don't mind them being hard, just that they are fairly standard. Question 10 WTF?


That is so true! Sums up the whole exam! :/
Reply 514
Avatar for Jack976
Jack976
A few of my answers:

For the first stationary points one, x was pi/6 and 5pi/6
Lines were skew
Volume of pyramid was around 9 I think? Length if ad x ac x ab x sin(bac)
I got the air in the balloon as 35..did anyone else?
Parametric gave t=1 for the stationary which gave 0,3 I think
For the last part x=0.1 wasn't valid for modulus x less than 1,hence it not being accurate.
Reply 515
Avatar for a.bees
a.bees
I also got t=-1? I dont understand how it isnt?
Original post by Chrissii
I only paid £25 for my graphical, but it forgot to even use it to help me with that parametric question! :angry:


In my opinion that is still cheating... why should someone have an advantage just because they bought high tech. equipment? Casio fx-85GT all the way! :P
I thought I did alright but no exaggeration -NOONE has said it went alright. Leads to me to think I did awfully. Uh oh
Original post by JoshL123
So t wasn't -1 ;/


Nope it was 1 when I fixed it :/ If it makes you feel any better I forgot to then sub t=1 in to work out the coordinates :mad:
Also Guys the Angel was 171. It wasn't asking for the acute angle.

The triangle can have an angle of 171 since the total degrees for a triangle is 180 that leave 9 degrees to be split between the other two.

no where did it state it was a regular pyramid.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you