Edexcel FP2 June 2015 - Official Thread

Original post by Emmi12345

I really hope Proof by Induction of DeMoivre's Theorem comes up - it would be a few quick, easy marks!
That said, I don't think it will, since it was on a recent paper...

Do you remember which paper that was? I don't remember doing it, unless I skipped that question :s-smilie:

Reply 124

Emmi12345

10

Original post by 1 8 13 20 42

Do you remember which paper that was? I don't remember doing it, unless I skipped that question :s-smilie:

Edexcel FP2 June 2013 question 4a)

https://8dedc505ac3fba908c50836f59059ccce5cd0f1e.googledrive.com/host/0B1ZiqBksUHNYdHIxUkJmdndfMlE/June%202013%20QP%20-%20FP2%20Edexcel.pdf

Reply 125

Original post by Emmi12345

Edexcel FP2 June 2013 question 4a)

https://8dedc505ac3fba908c50836f59059ccce5cd0f1e.googledrive.com/host/0B1ZiqBksUHNYdHIxUkJmdndfMlE/June%202013%20QP%20-%20FP2%20Edexcel.pdf

Thanks.

Yeah it seems unlikely that it'll come up two years later; however it seems reasonably likely that we could be asked to prove the theorem for negative integers (given that it's true for the positives). Not quite as straightforward but very easy to learn.

Reply 126

crashMATHS

16

I have a strong feeling we'll be asked to draw some polar curves.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 127

jf1994

15

Original post by jf1994

Also

Part c, how do you go about finding approximation values for something like that?

Anyone know this?

Reply 128

username1259045

17

Original post by jf1994

Anyone know this?

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3156193&page=11&p=56297417#post56297417 i asked this question before, hope that helps :smile:

Reply 129

Original post by 1 8 13 20 42

Thanks.

Yeah it seems unlikely that it'll come up two years later; however it seems reasonably likely that we could be asked to prove the theorem for negative integers (given that it's true for the positives). Not quite as straightforward but very easy to learn.

I really don't understand the proof for negative integers. Can somebody please explain? Or direct to a good source of info about it? Thank you :smile:

Reply 130

Original post by kingaaran

I have a strong feeling we'll be asked to draw some polar curves.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Definitely, definitely. It mentions it on the spec, but it's not come up, so I think it's highly likely.

Reply 131

jf1994

15

Anyone have a list of all the area/volume formulae for different shapes we might need to know?

Reply 132

TeeEm

19

useful material for the upcoming exams

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=3353445

Reply 133

I really don't understand the proof for negative integers. Can somebody please explain? Or direct to a good source of info about it? Thank you

Reply 134

Original post by tggfootymad

I really don't understand the proof for negative integers. Can somebody please explain? Or direct to a good source of info about it? Thank you

At what point does the explanation in the textbook cease being followable for you?

Reply 135

Original post by 1 8 13 20 42

At what point does the explanation in the textbook cease being followable for you?

Doh. I'm an idiot, didn't realise it was in the textbook. Apologies! Do I literally have to learn the steps in the book, which make sense. It's a bit different in terms of the other proof, is that just because the negative integer one is not a proof by induction?

Reply 136

Original post by tggfootymad

Doh. I'm an idiot, didn't realise it was in the textbook. Apologies! Do I literally have to learn the steps in the book, which make sense. It's a bit different in terms of the other proof, is that just because the negative integer one is not a proof by induction?

Yeah just learning it should be fine :smile:

Exactly; I think you can actually prove it by induction by doing k - 1 instead of k + 1, but the way they prove it is slightly faster.

Reply 137

Original post by 1 8 13 20 42

Yeah just learning it should be fine :smile:

Exactly; I think you can actually prove it by induction by doing k - 1 instead of k + 1, but the way they prove it is slightly faster.

Ok, thanks :smile:

Reply 138

Original post by 1 8 13 20 42

Yeah just learning it should be fine :smile:

Exactly; I think you can actually prove it by induction by doing k - 1 instead of k + 1, but the way they prove it is slightly faster.

On the 2013 proof, they stated to prove by induction. They wouldn't do that for negative integers would they? As then I really would be confused!

Reply 139