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

Edexcel - M3 - 18th May 2016

Scroll to see replies

Original post by physicsmaths
That came up on the jun 15 pper aswell. Well something similar.


Posted from TSR Mobile


That's probably the one I'm thinking of. Wasn't the exact same question but the shape of the solid was identical
Original post by samb1234
Wow they clearly love that question. I have seen a very similar question in another paper, although I think it was asking something slightly different still had the two cones with one of height kh


It's been on IAL Jan 15, June 15 (haven't done the paper yet, but going by what PM said) and IAL Jan 16. The examiner's reports suggest that it's been answered poorly every single time they've given it, so maybe they're using it to differentiate between top grades?
One week to go!! :crazy: How many of us are taking on this beast? :mmm:


Original post by Ayman!
Recently done this paper. :biggrin:

This is how I did it:

Take a look at my diagram here. Can you see that for it to remain in this position, the weight must act along VX? So for it to remain in equilibrium, xˉ≤OA\bar{x} \leq \text{OA}.


That's a beauty! :biggrin:
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Ayman!
It's been on IAL Jan 15, June 15 (haven't done the paper yet, but going by what PM said) and IAL Jan 16. The examiner's reports suggest that it's been answered poorly every single time they've given it, so maybe they're using it to differentiate between top grades?

Yep maybe so, although a 7 makrker ****ed me up last year on a suvat and dropped me like so much UMS. They like trapezium rule aswell.
i hope we get a really difficult exam like 70 for full UMS as i just tend to make silly mistakes and normally can get nearly all the marks on most questions and drop some due to copying errors etc.
Original post by physicsmaths
Yep maybe so, although a 7 makrker ****ed me up last year on a suvat and dropped me like so much UMS. They like trapezium rule aswell.
i hope we get a really difficult exam like 70 for full UMS as i just tend to make silly mistakes and normally can get nearly all the marks on most questions and drop some due to copying errors etc.


Was that the circle one at the end? Did so much stupid stuff on that paper when i did it at home lol. I know how to do everything just haven't done enough papers to get the consistency I had last year for maths
Original post by samb1234
Was that the circle one at the end? Did so much stupid stuff on that paper when i did it at home lol. I know how to do everything just haven't done enough papers to get the consistency I had last year for maths


Yeh I made some crazy mistakes a mistake in last question and istake in start of first question :frown:. I didnt sleep much that day, this year shud be 95+ hopefullyz


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by physicsmaths
Yeh I made some crazy mistakes a mistake in last question and istake in start of first question :frown:. I didnt sleep much that day, this year shud be 95+ hopefullyz


Posted from TSR Mobile


lol i lost like 15marks because of stupid mistakes when i did it at home haha
Original post by Imperion
That's a beauty! :biggrin:


Glad you like it, although you get UMS for correct maths, not prettiness. :ninja:

Original post by physicsmaths
Yep maybe so, although a 7 makrker ****ed me up last year on a suvat and dropped me like so much UMS. They like trapezium rule aswell.
i hope we get a really difficult exam like 70 for full UMS as i just tend to make silly mistakes and normally can get nearly all the marks on most questions and drop some due to copying errors etc.


Damn, that's tough. I'm hoping for a moderate exam because with IAL, no matter how hard the paper is, the boundaries will remain constant. :redface:
Do we need to know proofs for hollow cones/hemispheres?
Original post by JustDynamite
Does anyone have a link or a list to all the proofs/ derivations that I need to know for M3?


The book does it nicely, but here:
When a=f(t)a=f(t), v=∫f(t) dt\displaystyle v=\int f(t) \,dtWhen v=g(t)v=g(t), x=∫g(t) dt\displaystyle x=\int g(t) \,dta=vdvdxa=v\dfrac{dv}{dx}a=ddx(12v2)⇒12v2=∫a dxa=\dfrac{d}{dx}(\frac{1}{2}v^2) \Rightarrow \frac{1}{2}v^2=\displaystyle\int a\,dx where a=f(x)a=f(x)If you need to find xx as a function of tt when you have v=f(x)v=f(x), use v=dxdt⇒dtdx=1v⇒t=∫1v dxv=\dfrac{dx}{dt} \Rightarrow \dfrac{dt}{dx}=\dfrac{1}{v} \Rightarrow t=\displaystyle\int \frac{1}{v} \,dx If you need to find tt as a function of vv when you have a=f(v)a=f(v), use a=dvdt⇒dtdv=1a⇒t=∫1a dva=\dfrac{dv}{dt} \Rightarrow \dfrac{dt}{dv}=\dfrac{1}{a} \Rightarrow t=\displaystyle\int \frac{1}{a} \,dv

Original post by BBeyond
Do we need to know proofs for hollow cones/hemispheres?



I don't think so. But it's quite easy to prove it (there's an example proof on the Edexcel book)
(edited 7 years ago)
Tyvm , do we need to know any proofs for SHM and for chapter 5? I know how to do the SHM ones but I'm just wondering if I will actually have to do it in the exam.
Original post by JustDynamite
Tyvm , do we need to know any proofs for SHM and for chapter 5? I know how to do the SHM ones but I'm just wondering if I will actually have to do it in the exam.


You have to be able to prove that the motion is SHM, starting from the mechanics, but you don't have to prove the various formulae about SHM.

What's chapter5, I no longer have a book?
Original post by tiny hobbit
You have to be able to prove that the motion is SHM, starting from the mechanics, but you don't have to prove the various formulae about SHM.

What's chapter5, I no longer have a book?


Ch 5 is statics I believe.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by physicsmaths
Ch 5 is statics I believe.


Posted from TSR Mobile


As in centres of mass and stuff?

If so, you don't have to be able to prove the basic formulae, but you may well have to use them to find the C of M of a triangle or hemisphere or something.
Original post by tiny hobbit
As in centres of mass and stuff?

If so, you don't have to be able to prove the basic formulae, but you may well have to use them to find the C of M of a triangle or hemisphere or something.


Yh C.O.M. and stuff

I was under the impression we had to derive the formulas from first principles i.e. considering an elemental strip?
Original post by BBeyond
Yh C.O.M. and stuff

I was under the impression we had to derive the formulas from first principles i.e. considering an elemental strip?


No anything in the formula can be assumed unless asked to be proven.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Who else feels f****d for this so far?
Original post by Foutre en L'air
Who else feels f****d for this so far?


What do you need to get the A*?
I assume your doing/done M2 Fp2-3 S2?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Foutre en L'air
Who else feels f****d for this so far?


I thought I was okay, but I have no idea what's going on sometimes.

The SHM time (and the statics) questions confuse me sometimes, and I really need an A* in this unit loool.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by physicsmaths
What do you need to get the A*?
I assume your doing/done M2 Fp2-3 S2?


Posted from TSR Mobile


Doing them all, yup!
I haven't sat any FM yet so I just need the normal for the A*

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you