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

    5
    ReputationRep:
    why did everyone ignore me Zacken EricPiphany Insight314 EnglishMuon physicsmaths -Gifted- kill myself
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Duke Glacia)
    Spoiler:
    Show
    For Q4 last part, im getting the graph as on wolfram. and not like on the solution. Any clue ? thnx
    Exactly the same with me! Im sure the trouble is caused because the q says "h(x) is such that it is continuous" yet I really cant see how it can be continuous and pass through (0,pi) at the same time.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone here applying to study in US, and have only studies A-levels and STEP (e.g. no SAT's etc). Got an offer from Cambridge but thinking of declining it
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Number Nine)
    why did everyone ignore me Zacken EricPiphany Insight314 EnglishMuon physicsmaths -Gifted- kill myself
    im srry. I was interested in ur ssge roll but was jelly cus I have nthing to eat but water. frgive pls.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EnglishMuon)
    Exactly the same with me! Im sure the trouble is caused because the q says "h(x) is such that it is continuous" yet I really cant see how it can be continuous and pass through (0,pi) at the same time.
    i see, how was the paper iyo?
    Spoiler:
    Show
    i think its wasnt too
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Duke Glacia)
    i see, how was the paper iyo?
    Spoiler:
    Show
    i think its wasnt too
    yea I thought it was quite nice. Apart from the unexpected mark loss on q5 from not justifying things properly it all went as expected. I should hopefully have 100+ if I havent made any more dumb mistakes
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    With regards to Q4 II 2015 graph sketch:
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Right alot of us got the graph on wolfram and stuff yet it is wrong.
    Reason why is cause it is shifted due to the arctan function. Normally our arctan function is the smdirect reflection of the bit between -pi/2,pi/2 if so we are correct but here they have taken the arctan such that it is pi/2,3pi/2 and this gives the correct graph. arctan(infinity) in our cause is 3pi/2 not pi/2!.
    Wonderful yet tricky,question!



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ImTooSmart)
    Anyone here applying to study in US, and have only studies A-levels and STEP (e.g. no SAT's etc). Got an offer from Cambridge but thinking of declining it
    Why dyu want to decline it.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ImTooSmart)
    Anyone here applying to study in US, and have only studies A-levels and STEP (e.g. no SAT's etc). Got an offer from Cambridge but thinking of declining it
    you cannot apply to the US without SAT....? Where are you thinking of aplpying?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    STEP III 2013 Q2

    Spoiler:
    Show

    Am I missing something here or does that recurrence relation for the derivatives not also hold for n = 0?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 16Characters....)
    STEP III 2013 Q2
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Am I missing something here or does that recurrence relation for the derivatives not also hold for n = 0?
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Yep you're right, so you could in fact use 0 as the base case.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IrrationalRoot)
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Yep you're right, so you could in fact use 0 as the base case.
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Good, this is what I did but for some reason the IntegralMaths solution obtained the result for n = 0 and then differentiated again to prove it in the n = 1 case and used this as the base which just seemed like unnecessary work so I thought I might be missing something.

    It is bizarre of the question to ask you to prove it for positive integer n rather than non-negative integer n.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 16Characters....)
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Good, this is what I did but for some reason the IntegralMaths solution obtained the result for n = 0 and then differentiated again to prove it in the n = 1 case and used this as the base which just seemed like unnecessary work so I thought I might be missing something.

    It is bizarre of the question to ask you to prove it for positive integer n rather than non-negative integer n.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Ah IntegralMaths, I remember the days when I could actually access that website until it randomly stopped accepting my login a few months ago .

    Anyway I actually did the same thing as IntegralMaths lol. Idk if I didn't spot the fact that it works for n=0, but yeah it is pretty dumb to ask for all positive integers n instead of nonnegative.
    Fortunately differentiating one more time was pretty quick anyway.
    Offline

    14
    (Original post by Number Nine)
    why did everyone ignore me Zacken EricPiphany Insight314 EnglishMuon physicsmaths -Gifted- kill myself
    Soz m9, I will never ignore you, I haven't frequented this thread for some time now.
    I just had a go at STEP I 2015 myself.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Question 8 is a piece of art.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ImTooSmart)
    Anyone here applying to study in US, and have only studies A-levels and STEP (e.g. no SAT's etc). Got an offer from Cambridge but thinking of declining it
    I never did SATs either, not even sure what they are lol.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EnglishMuon)
    Can anyone help with a question about Q5 II 2015?
    Spoiler:
    Show
    For part (ii) I knew I wanted to show  \tan \alpha = \dfrac{1}{2n^{2}} given  \tan 2 \alpha = \dfrac{4n^{2}}{4n^{4}-1} . The markscheme goes through writing tan2a interms of tan a and solving the quadratic, however I knew that I wanted to be 1/2n^2 so I just subbed that into the tan double angle formula and verified we get the expression for tan 2a. Is this valid?
    Spoiler:
    Show
    I didn't do it the ms way either, I just thought I may as well try \arctan\frac{1}{2n^2}+\arctan\fr  ac{1}{2n^2} with the arctan addition formula and it worked .
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by physicsmaths)
    Why dyu want to decline it.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I haven't done any STEP Prep this week and I/II are next week, mainly due to the fact that I had so many exams this week. Is this bad? Although I am currently confident in getting high 1/S, I am not sure if it affects me negatively not doing STEP work for a week. I am definitely doing I/II this weekend and I am also going to do quite a bit of STEP questions the day before the exam so that would be all right.

    How is STEP prep going for you and the other lads in here?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 16Characters....)
    Spoiler:
    Show

    Good, this is what I did but for some reason the IntegralMaths solution obtained the result for n = 0 and then differentiated again to prove it in the n = 1 case and used this as the base which just seemed like unnecessary work so I thought I might be missing something.

    It is bizarre of the question to ask you to prove it for positive integer n rather than non-negative integer n.
    BTW, you don't need a login for integral maths to view STEP solutions.

    http://www.mei.org.uk/step-aea-solutions

    See that, you can login via guest access.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zacken)
    BTW, you don't need a login for integral maths to view STEP solutions.

    http://www.mei.org.uk/step-aea-solutions

    See that, you can login via guest access.
    Quoted the wrong person, I have a login anyway but thanks for the heads up :-)

    Tagging IrrationalRoot
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Insight314)
    I haven't done any STEP Prep this week and I/II are next week, mainly due to the fact that I had so many exams this week. Is this bad? Although I am currently confident in getting high 1/S, I am not sure if it affects me negatively not doing STEP work for a week. I am definitely doing I/II this weekend and I am also going to do quite a bit of STEP questions the day before the exam so that would be all right.

    How is STEP prep going for you and the other lads in here?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    nah itl be fine Just do a couple new qs in the meantime and maybe an old paper or something a couple days before just to remind urself of the exam technique, as u know what u need by now.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Brussels sprouts
  • 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

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