Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BioStudentx)
    Dont worry, others will make the same mistake. can be difficult to spot carbons with skeletal sometimes. Hopefully they'll be generous enough to give 1/2.
    it was 2 marks?

    1 mark for emperical
    1 mark for charge?

    ehh, f that charge i completely forgot
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BioStudentx)
    Dont worry, others will make the same mistake. can be difficult to spot carbons with skeletal sometimes. Hopefully they'll be generous enough to give 1/2.
    Was that empirical question 2 marks??
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kamara7)
    I forgot the carbon :facepalm: Out of ALL the questions, I just had to get that one wrong. How many other silly mistakes must I have done??? :afraid:
    What was this question????

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    -1099
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aegonsconquest)
    If i were a betting man, this would be the boundaries I'd bet on:

    100-98; Max
    90-92: A*
    82-80: A
    74-72: B
    66-64: C

    Agree? quote this with a yes.
    Disagree? quote your reason and suggestion for boundaries?

    if you ask me; I myself made a ton of silly mistakes, so I think the difficulty of the paper was slightly the same as last years', if not- a tiny bit harder. But, my opinion cant compare to the masses, so judging from everyone's reactions, the paper was easier than last years'.
    Bruh, there is no way in hell it's gonna be 100 or even 98 for full ums! It will be like 91/92 for full UMS even that is higher than an average paper, it was not easier than last years paper and what a load of cocky people say on the TSR 'z0mg ez paprer' is not actually what's true. I bet a lot of people dropped marks where they thought they didn't..
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kamara7)
    I forgot the carbon :facepalm: Out of ALL the questions, I just had to get that one wrong. How many other silly mistakes must I have done??? :afraid:
    I made that mistake too, it was because the ethanedioate ligands were skeletal and there were H20 molecules bonded to it. I think it was only 1 anyway.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ImNervous)
    What was this question????

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The one with the empirical formula of the complex ion
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beta14)
    Page 146 at the bottom, because [OH-] value was greater than [H+] so it was alkali obviously
    lol im safe then, i was betting my luck on that lol
    can the empirical question, was it jusst like (CuC4O10H4)2-, or you have to write it in complex form??
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by anndz3007)
    lol im safe then, i was betting my luck on that lol
    can the empirical question, was it jusst like (CuC4O10H4)2-, or you have to write it in complex form??
    It's that I think. I wrote mine in complex form (kicking myself)
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by _NMcC_)
    I made that mistake too, it was because the ethanedioate ligands were skeletal and there were H20 molecules bonded to it. I think it was only 1 anyway.
    Yeah, I just completely ignored the fact that it was skeletal. It's good that it's only one mark then
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anndz3007)
    for the acidic or alkaline question, i fount conc of H+ to be 10^-7, and use that to find the conc of OH-, it was 9.311x10^-7 something, and then i compared them and said conc of OH- is more than conc of H+, therefore it's alkaline, is that not how it works ??
    Sameish. Worked out p(OH) was 6.something (found [OH-]) and if p(OH) was 6 it meant the h2o had to have been alkaline
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clankdroid)
    sorry my bad, the other I- was in the given equation
    No problem
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by k.russell)
    Bruh, there is no way in hell it's gonna be 100 or even 98 for full ums! It will be like 91/92 for full UMS even that is higher than an average paper, it was not easier than last years paper and what a load of cocky people say on the TSR 'z0mg ez paprer' is not actually what's true. I bet a lot of people dropped marks where they thought they didn't..
    It makes sense though, the paper was nearly identical to last years'
    last year max ums was 95. I deffo think the boundaries will increase by +1/+2 from last years'. fo sure
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by k.russell)
    Bruh, there is no way in hell it's gonna be 100 or even 98 for full ums! It will be like 91/92 for full UMS even that is higher than an average paper, it was not easier than last years paper and what a load of cocky people say on the TSR 'z0mg ez paprer' is not actually what's true. I bet a lot of people dropped marks where they thought they didn't..
    I do feel like it was harder than June 2015, which had pretty low grade boundaries.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jm098)
    -1099
    How'd you get that?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    -1099 for hydration?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by aegonsconquest)
    I thought it was the same tier difficulty as last years tbh. ( last year had a few tricky Qs too)

    But I think getting an A will deffo require 80+/100 we can agree on that! Right?
    Really? I cannot believe you're saying this ****... 80+ for an A lol! It's never been more than 80 for an A and I certainly wouldn't say that was the easiest EEE paper ever.. if you ask me, it will be a little lower than last year, maybe last years boundaries shifted down by 1 or 2
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    It was okay, I think I may have met my offer for uni chemistry wise.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by smartalan73)
    How'd you get that?
    (2x340) + lattice enthalpy + 24
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    guys you know the empirical formula, did you have to put a +2 charge?!?!
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

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

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