Will the real TeeEm please stand up! Watch

Poll: will the real TeeEm please stand up
man on the desk (19)
6.76%
man in the library with lap top (69)
24.56%
man 3 (13)
4.63%
bodybuilder (43)
15.3%
donkey (52)
18.51%
man eating sandwich (25)
8.9%
ginger (60)
21.35%
math42
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#921
Report 3 years ago
#921
(Original post by dijam)
hey guys, any idea on s3 grade boundaries? i think everyone agrees its the hardest paper by far but teeEm any idea on the A* boundary?
Maybe around 64-65 for an a*, 57-58 for an A. The a* has always shifted from 68-69 before so those may be optimistic. I didn't think the paper was all that bad; FP3 was certainly worse.
0
quote
reply
dijam
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#922
Report 3 years ago
#922
(Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
Maybe around 64-65 for an a*, 57-58 for an A. The a* has always shifted from 68-69 before so those may be optimistic. I didn't think the paper was all that bad; FP3 was certainly worse.
i completely agree with you, what do you think A* would be for fp3?
1
quote
reply
math42
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#923
Report 3 years ago
#923
(Original post by dijam)
i completely agree with you, what do you think A* would be for fp3?
I'd guess 60-61...last year was 62 and I thought this year was a little worse. Probably no higher than last year anyway.
0
quote
reply
Mutleybm1996
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#924
Report 3 years ago
#924
(Original post by dijam)
i completely agree with you, what do you think A* would be for fp3?
Was that for S3?


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
quote
reply
dijam
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#925
Report 3 years ago
#925
(Original post by Mutleybm1996)
Was that for S3?


Posted from TSR Mobile
yes
0
quote
reply
dijam
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#926
Report 3 years ago
#926
(Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
I'd guess 60-61...last year was 62 and I thought this year was a little worse. Probably no higher than last year anyway.
i think it was much worse than last years so i think it might even be 59 for A*?
0
quote
reply
math42
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#927
Report 3 years ago
#927
(Original post by dijam)
i think it was much worse than last years so i think it might even be 59 for A*?
Maybe; I can't imagine it getting lower than that though. It's easy to forget that only the reduction, matrices and coordinate systems were actually bad, we had gift/standard questions for half the paper.
edit: although I was tired and unmotivated after S2 and spent about ten minutes on the first question getting my standard equations wrong and getting a few wrong answers; god knows how I may yet have a decent a* in that paper..
Last edited by math42; 3 years ago
0
quote
reply
Gilo98
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#928
Report 3 years ago
#928
(Original post by TeeEm)
then tomorrow back to products....
Upon reflection, in my solution to the series question I think I may have done something 'illegal'....
0
quote
reply
TeeEm
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#929
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#929
(Original post by Gilo98)
Upon reflection, in my solution to the series question I think I may have done something 'illegal'....
look at post 918
0
quote
reply
dijam
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#930
Report 3 years ago
#930
(Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
Maybe; I can't imagine it getting lower than that though. It's easy to forget that only the reduction, matrices and coordinate systems were actually bad, we had gift/standard questions for half the paper.
edit: although I was tired and unmotivated after S2 and spent about ten minutes on the first question getting my standard equations wrong and getting a few wrong answers; god knows how I may yet have a decent a* in that paper..
im guessing s2 grade boundaries would be about 70 for A*? do you think itd be higher?
0
quote
reply
Gilo98
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#931
Report 3 years ago
#931
(Original post by TeeEm)
look at post 918
No worries, turns out I forgot to differentiate inside function which should have cancelled out the negative that was giving me trouble. Looking at 918, it seems I didn't take the intended route.
0
quote
reply
TeeEm
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#932
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#932
(Original post by Gilo98)
No worries, turns out I forgot to differentiate inside function which should have cancelled out the negative that was giving me trouble. Looking at 918, it seems I didn't take the intended route.
look at the proof of the summation formula for a GP.

try to almost apply the same
0
quote
reply
Gilo98
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#933
Report 3 years ago
#933
I don't know what to do about the increasing numerators...
(Original post by TeeEm)
look at the proof of the summation formula for a GP.

try to almost apply the same
0
quote
reply
TeeEm
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#934
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#934
(Original post by Gilo98)
I don't know what to do about the increasing numerators...
write the series without cancelling anything
multiply it by 1/2, do not cancel anything and write term by term in the appropriate slot under the original series.
do you notice anything?
0
quote
reply
Gilo98
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#935
Report 3 years ago
#935
Ahhhhh.....I can now subtract 'diagonally' and get 2+{GM Series}.
(Original post by TeeEm)
write the series without cancelling anythingmultiply it by 1/2, do not cancel anything and write term by term in the appropriate slot under the original series.do you notice anything?
0
quote
reply
TeeEm
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#936
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#936
(Original post by Gilo98)
Ahhhhh.....I can now subtract 'diagonally' and get 2+{GM Series}.
if you call your series S
then the second line is 1/2S
subtract gives 1/S = ....
0
quote
reply
Gilo98
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#937
Report 3 years ago
#937
(Original post by TeeEm)
if you call your series S
then the second line is 1/2S
subtract gives 1/S = ....
Got it....
A lot simpler than it seems....suppose the simplest things to do are often the hardest to spot. Beats my original solution anyway...was messing about with (1-x)^-1 in that.
0
quote
reply
TeeEm
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#938
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#938
(Original post by Gilo98)
Got it....
A lot simpler than it seems....suppose the simplest things to do are often the hardest to spot. Beats my original solution anyway...was messing about with (1-x)^-1 in that.
maths is a lot of knowledge.

This clearly you have not seen before ... it is a theme...
it goes at the back of your mind.
then one day you see something similar (not the same)
then you say ... I remember the tool I have not used for a while.
0
quote
reply
Gilo98
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#939
Report 3 years ago
#939
(Original post by TeeEm)
maths is a lot of knowledge.

This clearly you have not seen before ... it is a theme...
it goes at the back of your mind.
then one day you see something similar (not the same)
then you say ... I remember the tool I have not used for a while.
Would I be right in saying the point of these questions is to be not your run off the mill maths questions?
Well now I know how to manipulate 1/(1-x) to evaluate a series....and to go back to summing from 'scratch' as it will.
0
quote
reply
TeeEm
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#940
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#940
(Original post by Gilo98)
Would I be right in saying the point of these questions is to be not your run off the mill maths questions?
.
of course they are not standard questions ...

(Original post by Gilo98)
Well now I know how to manipulate 1/(1-x) to evaluate a series....and to go back to summing from 'scratch' as it will.
I will make one of this type then (... it will hurt ...)
0
quote
reply
X

Reply to thread

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

University open days

  • University of Warwick
    Undergraduate Open Days Undergraduate
    Sat, 20 Oct '18
  • University of Sheffield
    Undergraduate Open Days Undergraduate
    Sat, 20 Oct '18
  • Edge Hill University
    Faculty of Health and Social Care Undergraduate
    Sat, 20 Oct '18

Who is most responsible for your success at university

Mostly me (703)
90.94%
Mostly my university including my lecturers/tutors (70)
9.06%

Watched Threads

View All