Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ashwinderk)
    If the data was uncorrected, that would mean 2050 count rate given included the background radiation, so surely just using the inverse square equation to find the distance at 0.90m would include the background radiation
    No, that would assume that the background radiation also obeyed the inverse square law. In actual fact it doesn't (it's a constant 40 counts/minute), so you need to first take 40 from 2050 to find the corrected count rate, then apply the inverse square law, then re-add the background count rate at the end.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marioman)
    No, that would assume that the background radiation also obeyed the inverse square law. In actual fact it doesn't (it's a constant 40 counts/minute), so you need to first take 40 from 2050 to find the corrected count rate, then apply the inverse square law, then re-add the background count rate at the end.

    Ah that makes sense, damn.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Questioner1234)
    Ah that's a good. I got 16700 I think for the indicated power and 48400 for the input

    Also on the very last page which box did you tick? I think I did the second one
    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Sorry i just saw this
    I ticked the second one as well iirc
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    In the turning points paper and the nuclear paper, which boxes did you have to tick?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    There were boxes in the turning points 😱
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Abc321zxc)
    In the turning points paper and the nuclear paper, which boxes did you have to tick?
    I didn't do Turning Points but I'm fairly sure that the correct box in Nuclear/Thermal was "some of the bonds are broken" or whatever the exact wording was.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marioman)
    I didn't do Turning Points but I'm fairly sure that the correct box in Nuclear/Thermal was "some of the bonds are broken" or whatever the exact wording was.
    Yeah boii. On dat ting bruhhhhhh😎
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    How did you guys find the turning point section compared to the previous years?

    Most of the people in the class including myself found it harder than usual
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kelvin1338)
    How did you guys find the turning point section compared to the previous years?

    Most of the people in the class including myself found it harder than usual
    Agreed. What do reckon the a* boundary is ¿
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Leonard Dev)
    Agreed. What do reckon the a* boundary is ¿
    Most of my classmates saying it's gonna be in the low 20's out of 35 for an A* for the turning points section
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    anyone have a model answer for the 6 marker on turning points, I had literally just revised photocells/photoelectric effect but I thought the wording was a little different.

    Was I right in saying that as pd increases KE of electrons decreases as more attractive force/work function higher?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by philo-jitsu)
    anyone have a model answer for the 6 marker on turning points, I had literally just revised photocells/photoelectric effect but I thought the wording was a little different.

    Was I right in saying that as pd increases KE of electrons decreases as more attractive force/work function higher?
    The kinetic energy stays the same. The potential they have to go through increases and because the electrons have a range of kinetic energies some don't have enough energy to overcome the increasing potential so current decreases
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Leonard Dev)
    The kinetic energy stays the same. The potential they have to go through increases and because the electrons have a range of kinetic energies some don't have enough energy to overcome the increasing potential so current decreases
    Damn....Thats right didn't think of it that deeply, of course the KE transferred stays constant because the frequency of light is constant...Really couldnt wrap my head around this question at the time. Cheers
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    Hello I got an answer wrong and I'm wondering how many marks I lost.

    For the count rate one I got the corrected count rate as 2010, then did 2010/36 (6x the distance so 1/36x less power) to get 55.8 counts/min. However I forgot to add the 40 back on at the end. How many marks will I lose?

    In addition, with the question with the m - M = log(d/10) I forgot to divide d by 10. Will I lose both marks?

    Also, what were the spectral classes for that star question? I remember getting K somewhere but can't remember where.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PressTabStart)
    Hello I got an answer wrong and I'm wondering how many marks I lost.

    For the count rate one I got the corrected count rate as 2010, then did 2010/36 (6x the distance so 1/36x less power) to get 55.8 counts/min. However I forgot to add the 40 back on at the end. How many marks will I lose?

    In addition, with the question with the m - M = log(d/10) I forgot to divide d by 10. Will I lose both marks?

    Also, what were the spectral classes for that star question? I remember getting K somewhere but can't remember where.
    Not sure I remember the last two, but you'll drop 1 for the first one


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Will I lose a mark for leaving the count rate as 95.8? I hope not since I did all the right things to get the answer!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Leonard Dev)
    The kinetic energy stays the same. The potential they have to go through increases and because the electrons have a range of kinetic energies some don't have enough energy to overcome the increasing potential so current decreases
    (Original post by philo-jitsu)
    Damn....Thats right didn't think of it that deeply, of course the KE transferred stays constant because the frequency of light is constant...Really couldnt wrap my head around this question at the time. Cheers
    This isn't strictly true. The energy supplied is the same, definitely, and they do definitely have the exact same INITIAL kinetic energy, but kinetic energy definitely does decrease when you increase the voltage.

    As an example, let's say the work function of a metal is 10J and you supply an electron with 20J. It's maximum kinetic energy is 10J (20J - 10J). No matter what voltage, this will always be the same. However, as you increase the voltage of the metal, it's becoming increasing positive, the electrostatic force of attraction is getting stronger on the electrons. This means that there is a resultant force in the direction of the positive plate, which in turn decelerates the electrons. As KE = 1/2mv^2, as the velocity reduces, the kinetic energy also decreases, so you've no longer got 10J of kinetic energy - this is why they can't reach the negative plate to allow a current to flow

    Initial kinetic energy is constant, but kinetic energy is not conserved throughout due to deceleration.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GrandMasti)
    Will I lose a mark for leaving the count rate as 95.8? I hope not since I did all the right things to get the answer!
    This answer is correct!

    The question specified an original count rate of 2050, including 40 for the background rate.

    2050 - 40 = 2010 from the source at 0.15m

    Increasing distance to 0.90m = 6x further away, therefore intensity = 36x less
    2010 / 36 = 55.833

    Adding the background rate back on gives you 95.83333, or 95.8

    You'll get all 3 marks!

    Hope it helps
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jay1421)
    This isn't strictly true. The energy supplied is the same, definitely, and they do definitely have the exact same INITIAL kinetic energy, but kinetic energy definitely does decrease when you increase the voltage.

    As an example, let's say the work function of a metal is 10J and you supply an electron with 20J. It's maximum kinetic energy is 10J (20J - 10J). No matter what voltage, this will always be the same. However, as you increase the voltage of the metal, it's becoming increasing positive, the electrostatic force of attraction is getting stronger on the electrons. This means that there is a resultant force in the direction of the positive plate, which in turn decelerates the electrons. As KE = 1/2mv^2, as the velocity reduces, the kinetic energy also decreases, so you've no longer got 10J of kinetic energy - this is why they can't reach the negative plate to allow a current to flow

    Initial kinetic energy is constant, but kinetic energy is not conserved throughout due to deceleration.
    This is correct Ek decreases


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jay1421)
    This isn't strictly true. The energy supplied is the same, definitely, and they do definitely have the exact same INITIAL kinetic energy, but kinetic energy definitely does decrease when you increase the voltage.

    As an example, let's say the work function of a metal is 10J and you supply an electron with 20J. It's maximum kinetic energy is 10J (20J - 10J). No matter what voltage, this will always be the same. However, as you increase the voltage of the metal, it's becoming increasing positive, the electrostatic force of attraction is getting stronger on the electrons. This means that there is a resultant force in the direction of the positive plate, which in turn decelerates the electrons. As KE = 1/2mv^2, as the velocity reduces, the kinetic energy also decreases, so you've no longer got 10J of kinetic energy - this is why they can't reach the negative plate to allow a current to flow

    Initial kinetic energy is constant, but kinetic energy is not conserved throughout due to deceleration.
    I'm pretty sure the electrons have a range of kinetic energies up to a maximum given by ekmax= hf - phi. Standard unit 2¿🌝
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: August 19, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

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.