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

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Question 4 for the percentage uncertainty I think it was 2% not 4% as you use +- 0.5mm not +-1mm. It says to the nearest millimeter so it would be to the nearest half a mm
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dylan1016)
    Yeah I did too but people suggest thats wrong.
    It is 100% not wrong. In this method we are not guessing which values to use. We used all of them. Also if pythagourous is used with original values youll get 30.6
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    who's fasting
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I'm gonna die
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    For the conducting putty question, it asked "why would he use a large metal plate on either side" for 2 marks. I wrote a larger surface area would mean more current would flow, is that correct?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LauraGallery)
    For the conducting putty question, it asked "why would he use a large metal plate on either side" for 2 marks. I wrote a larger surface area would mean more current would flow, is that correct?
    It's right, but you need to state the effect of it. Like hence It would reduce the effect of error,or something.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XenoMJ)
    Question 4 for the percentage uncertainty I think it was 2% not 4% as you use +- 0.5mm not +-1mm. It says to the nearest millimeter so it would be to the nearest half a mm
    Ocr accept both, it says so in the practical skills handbook.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mahmzo)
    It's right, but you need to state the effect of it. Like hence It would reduce the effect of error,or something.
    I wrote to reduce contact resistance, I hope that's right. Btw for the next one did you write that you would check the ohm meter to see if the resistance had changed because then the area must have changed therefore the diameter.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harrysomers1)
    Don't know if I got this one right aha but Personally, I wrote about how uv Ray's have more energy than visible light and hence they have a larger frequency due to equation e=hf. Also included threshold frequency in there. Then stated that as the electron will have more energy when uv light is used it will have a larger Ke max. Therefore it will have a higher velocity due to half mv2. Which was shown in the results as when velocity was used it moved much quicker, however they phrased it. Again, not sure if this is right, seen other people with different explanations
    I think the reason it falls quicker is because of the one to one ratio, when intensity increased the number of photons per m^2 also rises so more photo electrons can escape per second >>falls faster.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Parhomus)
    I wrote to reduce contact resistance, I hope that's right. Btw for the next one did you write that you would check the ohm meter to see if the resistance had changed because then the area must have changed therefore the diameter.
    I think that question will have a few answers, I wrote to use a Vernier gauge to check the diameter across a range of places. So did some of my friends. I did also say making sure not to apply to much pressure causing the playdough thing to change shape.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Parhomus)
    I think the reason it falls quicker is because of the one to one ratio, when intensity increased the number of photons per m^2 also rises so more photo electrons can escape per second >>falls faster.
    The question asked how can it be sure that the diameter is constant so idk, was it a bit of a weird worded question haha, the way you are saying, it may be constant half way but then not the other half, it is hard to say without an unofficial mark scheme haha
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mahmzo)
    I think that question will have a few answers, I wrote to use a Vernier gauge to check the diameter across a range of places. So did some of my friends. I did also say making sure not to apply to much pressure causing the playdough thing to change shape.
    I thought they had put that ohm meter there for the purpose of that question. That's the only reason I wrote that.What was the question, asking how for it to retain its diameter or checking if it had changed?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XenoMJ)
    Question 4 for the percentage uncertainty I think it was 2% not 4% as you use +- 0.5mm not +-1mm. It says to the nearest millimeter so it would be to the nearest half a mm
    +-0.5mm is the uncertainty in one measurement, yes, but when you measure using a ruler, you measure at two points, so the overall uncertainty in L is +-1mm
    Then you work out the %Uncertainty in L and multiply by 2 for the %Uncertainty in L^2, giving 4.08% (3 S.F.)
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by esfio)
    +-0.5mm is the uncertainty in one measurement, yes, but when you measure using a ruler, you measure at two points, so the overall uncertainty in L is +-1mm
    Then you work out the %Uncertainty in L and multiply by 2 for the %Uncertainty in L^2, giving 4.08% (3 S.F.)
    both are accepted
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Parhomus)
    both are accepted
    do you know If teachercol will upload the Depth Markscheme like he did for Breadth
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mahmzo)
    do you know If teachercol will upload the Depth Markscheme like he did for Breadth
    I hope so but I have no idea since he's made no mention as of yet.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    what do you reckon for an A?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chemari1)
    what do you reckon for an A?
    Across both papers about 70%.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    PLEASE RESPONDSo paper 2 went so much better and I got 50 something out of 70, however due to my first paper I don't know if I'll even get a C overall, so I was wondering, is it possible that even though I'm dropping physics after AS level, I can do a resit in like September? Have OCR made resits for the new spec? Will it matter if I'm dropping it? Any response is greatly appreciated
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mahmzo)
    Across both papers about 70%.
    I doubt it - last year, unit one was 71% for an A, and unit 2 was 62%. AKA 66.5% for the whole thing basically, this year breadth was a lot harder than any of the old spec papers and depth was on the level of those, I think the same as last year's or less.(probably less)
 
 
 
  • 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
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • 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.