x Turn on thread page Beta
 You are Here: Home >< Maths

# Edexcel FP2 Official 2016 Exam Thread - 8th June 2016 watch

1. (Original post by PhysicsIP2016)
Definitely, particularly because lots aim for 100% as well (I was but now there is no way that's happening!)
Yep this is me, wanting a 100 in everything. I am confident so I don't get overly nervous but it happens from time to time.
2. (Original post by Zacken)
- write sine in its exponential form
- realise the integrand is the imaginary part of e^(2+i)x
Those two would be pretty impressive solutions. Why haven't I got that vision
3. (Original post by Marxist)
Yep this is me, wanting a 100 in everything. I am confident so I don't get overly nervous but it happens from time to time.
It's weird because that is like I used to be - I never used to get nervous in exams but now that Cambridge has made me care a lot about UMS I've been shaking so badly!
4. (Original post by PhysicsIP2016)
It's weird because that is like I used to be - I never used to get nervous in exams but now that Cambridge has made me care a lot about UMS I've been shaking so badly!
That's completely normal. It's a great position to be in which puts pressure on you. Just try your best to treat it like another past paper
5. (Original post by AlexFrangos)
At first i also sketched the graph and found the solution from there but i didnt know if that was correct since the question said to use algebra to solve the inequality.
Yep, which means that you can't directly use a graph to find your critical values. When they say "use algebra", it's perfectly acceptable to draw a graph AFTER you've found your critical values in an algebraic fashion. Number line works too.

I've seen mark schemes accepting both, we'll be fine!

(Original post by Euclidean)
Those two would be pretty impressive solutions. Why haven't I got that vision
Zacken is a bird of prey when it comes to spotting techniques.
6. (Original post by Ayman!)
Yep, which means that you can't directly use a graph to find your critical values. When they say "use algebra", it's perfectly acceptable to draw a graph AFTER you've found your critical values in an algebraic fashion. Number line works too.

I've seen mark schemes accepting both, we'll be fine!

Zacken is a bird of prey when it comes to spotting techniques.
Hopefully we'll get all marks in that question. In question 7 I made a sillly mistake and used z^n + z^-n = cosnθ rather than z^n + z^-n = 2cosnθ and so the first part of the question went wrong. Will I loose all the marks in the next part of the question, where we had to integrate cos^5θ?
7. (Original post by JJarosz98)
I got 71.003 too, this is because the bound of the 7 cos x is pi/2 not pi. If you integrate between arccos(3/4) and pi you get 71.003 rather than 32.5.

Ah, that makes sense then. Should have checked the boundaries (I took a highlighter as well but didn't use it :/)
8. (Original post by Euclidean)
Summation was a little nonstandard in my opinion, having to spit the summation into three and then evaluate separately won't be intuitively obvious for everyone
That's true... I'll correct it after... ;v;

English is scary...
9. (Original post by PhysicsIP2016)
It's weird because that is like I used to be - I never used to get nervous in exams but now that Cambridge has made me care a lot about UMS I've been shaking so badly!
For me it's more TSR than any university
10. (Original post by AlexFrangos)
Hopefully we'll get all marks in that question. In question 7 I made a sillly mistake and used z^n + z^-n = cosnθ rather than z^n + z^-n = 2cosnθ and so the first part of the question went wrong. Will I loose all the marks in the next part of the question, where we had to integrate cos^5θ?
You will most probably lose 1 unless there's an A1ft mark. So consider 2-3 marks gone from that question, 3 being the worst case scenario.
11. (Original post by Student403)
That's completely normal. It's a great position to be in which puts pressure on you. Just try your best to treat it like another past paper
I was told that going on TSR would be bad, but your replies have reassured me loads so thank you I shall try - hopefully FP3, M2 and S2 will be more like the standard past papers than FP2 was, but even then I could still afford to get an A provided I get A*s in Biology and Physics (but I will definitely not take that risk!)
12. (Original post by Euclidean)
For me it's more TSR than any university
It's true! The standard here is crazy. TSR is like the Eton of the internet

(Original post by PhysicsIP2016)
I was told that going on TSR would be bad, but your replies have reassured me loads so thank you I shall try - hopefully FP3, M2 and S2 will be more like the standard past papers than FP2 was, but even then I could still afford to get an A provided I get A*s in Biology and Physics (but I will definitely not take that risk!)
But yeah there are great people here! Just depends who you talk to I guess xD

Good luck! I'm talking all those maths exams too!
13. (Original post by PhysicsIP2016)
I was told that going on TSR would be bad, but your replies have reassured me loads so thank you I shall try - hopefully FP3, M2 and S2 will be more like the standard past papers than FP2 was, but even then I could still afford to get an A provided I get A*s in Biology and Physics (but I will definitely not take that risk!)
Tbh, I get into exam jitters as well even if my offer though unconditional. This morning I struggled to break up partial fractions (the first question) because my mind was thinking, "oh my god, my A* is on the line here". I managed to recuperate and finished with a good amount of time in hand!

Good luck for those that remain!
14. Anyone doing FP3 here?
15. (Original post by Zacken)
To be fair there were other methods you could consider as well:

- use a PI/CF method on the first order ODE
- differentiate and then use a PI/CF method on the resulting second order ODE
- write sine in its exponential form
- realise the integrand is the imaginary part of e^(2+i)x.
- double IBP
I think in hindsight the PI/CF method on the first order was definitely the intended method, it's one of those things that is on the syllabus but rarely on exams so you only cover it briefly in class. But the exam board would reasonably expect good students to be aware of it (it just so happens that many of those good students also have other methods).
16. For the last question how many marks would I lose if my limits are wrong but everything else was correct?
17. (Original post by Zacken)
To be fair there were other methods you could consider as well:

- use a PI/CF method on the first order ODE
- differentiate and then use a PI/CF method on the resulting second order ODE
- write sine in its exponential form
- realise the integrand is the imaginary part of e^(2+i)x.
- double IBP
lol wut
18. (Original post by PhysicsIP2016)
I'm so glad I've seen this (I was afraid of posting on the Cambridge offer holders thread around mathmos) because I too get nervous in exams and FP2 was no exception. I spent a good long time hyperventilating from question 4 and managed to finish the paper but did no way near as well as I could have done :-/
My heart rate increases to some phenomenal level.
My interesting life:
I get to the last question with plenty of time to go, thinking, OK, I've got loads of time to do this polar coordinate question correctly. So solve for the intersection and get cos(θ) = 3/4.
I do it again. Same answer. OK, Let's just do the integration then. For some reason I do the integration in exact form, check it on the calculator and it's a little bit wrong. My face must be a bright red at this point from increased blood flow. Turns out I had just missed a factor of two in one of the many fractions. Easy fix.
OK, a good half an hour to check questions. One of my critical values doesn't make both sides of the inequality equal, Oh no... Do it again and it turns out I made quite a serious slip the first time around.
By this time I'm having a full blown panic attack. At least some of the questions were self checking, like the tan(x) series and the De Moivre's. I do the p, r, q first order question by separation of variables and it give me a slightly different answer, didn't take me too long to figure why.
Anyways... enough excitement for a lifetime. At least I managed the A* I need with a few minutes to spare.
19. Looking back to this morning, I think I would class the method of differences question as 'out of the ordinary'.
Aside from that everything else was do-able.
4b) was weird yes, I wasn't able to spot the IBP method but in hindsight it seems quite obvious, exam pressure got me I guess. I wouldn't class it as 'out of the ordinary' but a lot of people seem to have been stuck on that, it is different.
8b was nasty purely because the angle wasn't a standard pi/4 or pi/6 etc. It caused some messy working out but was by no means hard.

I would just say forget about FP2 and focus on the rest of your upcoming exams. Also remember the grade boundaries are determined on how the country performs, and by the looks of it people found it the paper generally hard.
Don't expect A* to fall to a lot though. Last year so many people were angry about the C3 exam, and loads of people were predicting 60 for an A*. Turned out to be 65 for an A*

I think 67 for an A* would be a sensible prediction (plus or minus 1).
20. Am I right in thinking that the A* comes from the best 3 A2 modules? In which case since I got 100 in D2 last year I could get 85 in both S2 and M2 and still get an A*?

TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: February 24, 2017
Today on TSR

### I have imposter syndrome at Cambridge

Poll
Useful resources

Can you help? Study help unanswered threadsStudy Help rules and posting guidelinesLaTex guide for writing equations on TSR

## Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE