x Turn on thread page Beta
 You are Here: Home >< Maths

# Edexcel FP2 June 2015 - Official Thread watch

1. (Original post by jf1994)
Attachment 413903

On question B, I set x = sin5theta and found sin5theta to be equal to -1/2

But how do I find theta when I'm not given a range? Do I just pick the 5 smallest values for theta?
theta is within -pi and pi in complex numbers
2. (Original post by mmms95)
theta is within -pi and pi in complex numbers
'Doh!'

Thanks
3. I really hope Proof by Induction of DeMoivre's Theorem comes up - it would be a few quick, easy marks!
That said, I don't think it will, since it was on a recent paper...
4. (Original post by Emmi12345)
I really hope Proof by Induction of DeMoivre's Theorem comes up - it would be a few quick, easy marks!
That said, I don't think it will, since it was on a recent paper...
Do you remember which paper that was? I don't remember doing it, unless I skipped that question
5. (Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
Do you remember which paper that was? I don't remember doing it, unless I skipped that question
Edexcel FP2 June 2013 question 4a)

https://8dedc505ac3fba908c50836f5905...%20Edexcel.pdf
6. (Original post by Emmi12345)
Edexcel FP2 June 2013 question 4a)

https://8dedc505ac3fba908c50836f5905...%20Edexcel.pdf
Thanks. Yeah it seems unlikely that it'll come up two years later; however it seems reasonably likely that we could be asked to prove the theorem for negative integers (given that it's true for the positives). Not quite as straightforward but very easy to learn.
7. I have a strong feeling we'll be asked to draw some polar curves.

Posted from TSR Mobile
8. (Original post by jf1994)
Also

Attachment 412303

Part c, how do you go about finding approximation values for something like that?
Anyone know this?
9. (Original post by jf1994)
Anyone know this?
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...7#post56297417 i asked this question before, hope that helps
10. (Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
Thanks. Yeah it seems unlikely that it'll come up two years later; however it seems reasonably likely that we could be asked to prove the theorem for negative integers (given that it's true for the positives). Not quite as straightforward but very easy to learn.
I really don't understand the proof for negative integers. Can somebody please explain? Or direct to a good source of info about it? Thank you
11. (Original post by kingaaran)
I have a strong feeling we'll be asked to draw some polar curves.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Definitely, definitely. It mentions it on the spec, but it's not come up, so I think it's highly likely.
12. Anyone have a list of all the area/volume formulae for different shapes we might need to know?
13. useful material for the upcoming exams

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=3353445
14. I really don't understand the proof for negative integers. Can somebody please explain? Or direct to a good source of info about it? Thank you
I really don't understand the proof for negative integers. Can somebody please explain? Or direct to a good source of info about it? Thank you
At what point does the explanation in the textbook cease being followable for you?
16. (Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
At what point does the explanation in the textbook cease being followable for you?
Doh. I'm an idiot, didn't realise it was in the textbook. Apologies! Do I literally have to learn the steps in the book, which make sense. It's a bit different in terms of the other proof, is that just because the negative integer one is not a proof by induction?
Doh. I'm an idiot, didn't realise it was in the textbook. Apologies! Do I literally have to learn the steps in the book, which make sense. It's a bit different in terms of the other proof, is that just because the negative integer one is not a proof by induction?
Yeah just learning it should be fine Exactly; I think you can actually prove it by induction by doing k - 1 instead of k + 1, but the way they prove it is slightly faster.
18. (Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
Yeah just learning it should be fine Exactly; I think you can actually prove it by induction by doing k - 1 instead of k + 1, but the way they prove it is slightly faster.
Ok, thanks
19. (Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
Yeah just learning it should be fine Exactly; I think you can actually prove it by induction by doing k - 1 instead of k + 1, but the way they prove it is slightly faster.
On the 2013 proof, they stated to prove by induction. They wouldn't do that for negative integers would they? As then I really would be confused!
On the 2013 proof, they stated to prove by induction. They wouldn't do that for negative integers would they? As then I really would be confused!
No; they may seem to enjoy challenging people lately but I don't think they're allowed to ask that

TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

This forum is supported by:
Updated: March 25, 2016
Today on TSR

### Happy St Patrick's day!

How are you celebrating?

### Stay at sixth form or go to college?

Discussions on TSR

• Latest
Poll
Useful resources

Can you help? Study help unanswered threadsStudy Help rules and posting guidelinesLaTex guide for writing equations on TSR

## Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups
Discussions on TSR

• Latest

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