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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mbh16)
    i just put the equation, then said that if the frequency was less than the fringe spacing decreases so you would see a small peak either side of the main peak
    i said something similar, that you would see more waves between A and B because the width was smaller and cause higher frequency theres more between A and B?
    dunno what you mean by frequency less so fridge space is less, do you mean frequency is higher?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selborn)
    we got given refractive index an you needed to use n=C/Cs I believe
    i did that but it then asked for the new wavelength . it gave us another wavelength .
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestordoff)
    i did that but it then asked for the new wavelength . it gave us another wavelength .
    yeah i just used like ratios to find that like for in the core and for in air, is that what you did? can't remember my answer though
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestordoff)
    i did that but it then asked for the new wavelength . it gave us another wavelength .
    It's just: n=lambda/lamda(substance)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by txnilxnur)
    yeah i just used like ratios to find that like for in the core and for in air, is that what you did? can't remember my answer though
    great , i think the wavelength they gave us was something point something times ten to the minus 9 and my new wavelength was something point something times ten to the minus 7
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestordoff)
    great , i think the wavelength they gave us was something point something times ten to the minus 9 and my new wavelength was something point something times ten to the minus 7
    wasn't it 1300nm which is 1300 x10 9m
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the_chosen_one97)
    It's just: n=lambda/lamda(substance)
    by n do you mean the refractive index , i dont understand where in the spec it says that sorry i must have it wrong then . do you think my answer will still be right .,
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Would the final speed of the empty lorry be higher as its driving force will be constant, therefore as m has decreased a would increase. As its the same time period a = v/t would therefore meaning it had a greater final speed?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GeorgeWhite2)
    wasn't it 1300nm which is 1300 x10 9m
    i dont know i thought nm meant nano metres and so was x10-9
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestordoff)
    great , i think the wavelength they gave us was something point something times ten to the minus 9 and my new wavelength was something point something times ten to the minus 7
    yeah I'm certain mine to the minus 7 too. can't even remember what the other questions were.. what were the questions after the 6 marker cause I'm sure there were some more on the same question
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestordoff)
    i dont know i thought nm meant nano metres and so was x10-9
    Thats what I meant, i knew what i typed looked wrong for some reason - forgot the minus sign.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by henry.philips)
    Would the final speed of the empty lorry be higher as its driving force will be constant, therefore as m has decreased a would increase. As its the same time period a = v/t would therefore meaning it had a greater final speed?
    i put that but im not sure if its right . loads of people are saying the terminal velocity is the same as the water lorry
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestordoff)
    by n do you mean the refractive index , i dont understand where in the spec it says that sorry i must have it wrong then . do you think my answer will still be right .,
    Yes, you can use n=c/c(substance) and n=lambda/lambda(substance) - basically ratios. I can't remember what the refractive index was exactly but I'll use 1.42 as an example. The answer was 1300x10^-9 / 1.42 = 9.1x10^-7 or something very similar
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestordoff)
    i dont know i thought nm meant nano metres and so was x10-9
    (Original post by GeorgeWhite2)
    wasn't it 1300nm which is 1300 x10 9m
    nanometres is x10^-9 !! not 9
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by txnilxnur)
    yeah I'm certain mine to the minus 7 too. can't even remember what the other questions were.. what were the questions after the 6 marker cause I'm sure there were some more on the same question
    im not sure its all a blank to me hahahah
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the_chosen_one97)
    Yes, you can use n=c/c(substance) and n=lambda/lambda(substance) - basically ratios. I can't remember what the refractive index was exactly but I'll use 1.42 as an example. The answer was 1300x10^-9 / 1.42 = 9.1x10^-7 or something very similar
    i think i got that so everyones a winner winner chicken dinner
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestordoff)
    i put that but im not sure if its right . loads of people are saying the terminal velocity is the same as the water lorry
    I said the speeds at the end were equal but the leaking lorry accelerated faster therefore covering more distance in the same time period as the other lorry.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jamestordoff)
    im not sure its all a blank to me hahahah
    same lol
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Selborn)
    I said the speeds at the end were equal but the leaking lorry accelerated faster therefore covering more distance in the same time period as the other lorry.
    yeah but a fat man in a car cant reach the same speed as a skinny guy in a car if their resultant forces are the same can they ?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Physicsretake)
    anyone want to sign a petition to get the grade boundries lowerd drastically so 50% is an A, seems a reasonable thing to do....
    Uhh no..
    1. why would the AQA give a **** if 300 students said that it should be lowered? They put the grade boundaries at a level that accurately reflects skill level of the student.
    2. The grade boundaries will probably be low anyway as it was slightly harder than previous years.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • 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

    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.