Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
 You are Here: Home >< Maths

# ..... Watch

1. (Original post by NoahMal)
iMacJack Feelin a tad bit more confident now kingaaran
What did you get for Q7 for the value of a?
2. (Original post by edothero)
If that's a solid 64/75 then I would like to think you've got an A in the bag, though we can't be sure untill the grade boundaries come out.
Good job nevertheless
What did you get for Q7 for the value of a?
3. (Original post by Louisb19)
Nice. 100UMS if they will allow me to say that the lines are in the same direction instead of that they are parallel. Also I didn't prove it as I thought it was obvious from the graph.
What did you get for Q7 for the value of a?
4. (Original post by edothero)
Chin up mate it ain't over yet. The A-Level consists of 6 modules, all of equal weight.
Best of luck, if you need help PM me
What did you get for Q7 for the value of a?
5. (Original post by mathsisjust)
What did you get for Q7 for the value of a?
I swear it's in the solutions..

Posted from TSR Mobile
6. (Original post by mathsisjust)
What did you get for Q7 for the value of a?
-1 Because it has to be "real" Therefore the imaginary party had to be equal to zero Hence finding that 4a+4 = 0 therefore a=-4/4
7. (Original post by Princepieman)
I swear it's in the solutions..

Posted from TSR Mobile
Just clarifying a=-1 is the correct answer right?
8. (Original post by magicrazzaq)
75/75 for me then... As usual
What did you get for Q7 for the value of a?
9. (Original post by mathsisjust)
Just clarifying a=-1 is the correct answer right?
Ofc lol

Posted from TSR Mobile
10. (Original post by NoahMal)
-1 Because it has to be "real" Therefore the imaginary party had to be equal to zero Hence finding that 4a+4 = 0 therefore a=-4/4
A lot of people got different answers for that Q.
11. Does it matter that I didn't do this step in the first proof by induction:

12. (Original post by NoahMal)
-1 Because it has to be "real" Therefore the imaginary party had to be equal to zero Hence finding that 4a+4 = 0 therefore a=-4/4
Is Arsey a math's teacher??
13. (Original post by mathsisjust)
What did you get for Q7 for the value of a?
I did my FP1 last year, for the answers check Arsey's first post, its legit.
14. (Original post by edothero)
I did my FP1 last year, for the answers check Arsey's first post, its legit.
Is Arsey a student or?
15. (Original post by edothero)
I did my FP1 last year, for the answers check Arsey's first post, its legit.
Thanks tho, appreciated what did you get for fp1 last yr?
16. Arsey what Mark would I get if I got the value of A wrong but then I got the corresponding parts right for my value of a? So like I got the mod and arg right for it and the argand right for my value and the last part of the geometrical thing wrong

Posted from TSR Mobile
17. (Original post by Louisb19)
Nice. 100UMS if they will allow me to say that the lines are in the same direction instead of that they are parallel. Also I didn't prove it as I thought it was obvious from the graph.
Same, I said they were parallel as I could tell that the gradients were the same but I didnt write down me working out the gradients. Plus the question said to "describe" so I didnt think it was necessary
18. (Original post by iMacJack)
Arsey what Mark would I get if I got the value of A wrong but then I got the corresponding parts right for my value of a? So like I got the mod and arg right for it and the argand right for my value and the last part of the geometrical thing wrong

Posted from TSR Mobile
Is Arsey definitely right for that Q for the value of a ??
19. I just want to clarify, do you drop a mark if you say the segments are parallel and show that they are parallel but not one is twice the length of the other. Thats the only thing stopping me from getting full marks looooooooooooooooooool.
20. (Original post by TH3-FL45H)
Does it matter that I didn't do this step in the first proof by induction:

To me, if you missed out that step, it would make your proof seem counterintuitive. You would've went from having two fractions which could be added, to taking them away.

With that step included, it would've made your intentions very clear.

It could go either way. Considering it was only worth 5 marks, it would suggest to me that this year's proofs are low on the method marks for the inductive step. This means you could get away with it, given the rest of your proof is correct.

But equally, they may have stopped awarding a mark for one of the previous steps in proof questions.

In summary, nobody will be able to tell you. The exam is over with and you will only find out when the mark schemes are released this Summer.

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: May 23, 2016
Today on TSR

### What is the latest you've left an assignment

And actually passed?

### Simply having a wonderful Christmas time...

Discussions on TSR

• Latest
• ## See more of what you like on The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

• Poll
Useful resources

## Make your revision easier

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
Discussions on TSR

• Latest
• ## See more of what you like on The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

• 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

Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.