You are Here: Home >< Maths

# AQA A2 MFP3 Further Pure 3 – 18th May 2016 [Exam Discussion Thread] Watch

1. (Original post by JME_CHG)
y r the last 2 parts of the 2015 paper so hard?
the very last part isn't that hard but second to last is pretty damn difficult yeah lol
In the mock I managed to form a cubic and there I gave up
2. (Original post by C0balt)
the very last part isn't that hard but second to last is pretty damn difficult yeah lol
In the mock I managed to form a cubic and there I gave up
True... & SAME - but my cubic was in terms of sinθ so I didn't spot that crazy trick in the MS... But surely that's as hard as it gets?! That's the hardest one I've ever done... Ever - spent so long trying different ways I thought I was in step... On avg you're supposed to spend 30 mins on a step Q? I spent 45 mins on that second to last part and still got nowhere
3. (Original post by JME_CHG)
True... & SAME - but my cubic was in terms of sinθ so I didn't spot that crazy trick in the MS... But surely that's as hard as it gets?! That's the hardest one I've ever done... Ever - spent so long trying different ways I thought I was in step... On avg you're supposed to spend 30 mins on a step Q? I spent 45 mins on that second to last part and still got nowhere
And it was still 67 for an A*. Despite the very high level of difficulty, i think it was a nice question
4. (Original post by JME_CHG)
True... & SAME - but my cubic was in terms of sinθ so I didn't spot that crazy trick in the MS... But surely that's as hard as it gets?! That's the hardest one I've ever done... Ever - spent so long trying different ways I thought I was in step... On avg you're supposed to spend 30 mins on a step Q? I spent 45 mins on that second to last part and still got nowhere
yeah i was trying out factor theorem like plugging in simple values but it got me nowhere lmao
at least we will spot it next time we do a similar question...
5. (Original post by Qcomber)
And it was still 67 for an A*. Despite the very high level of difficulty, i think it was a nice question
I desperately need 100 in this too... Do you think we have a chance? Or does man have a better chance of inventing a time machine and going back to jan06 to get 100%?
6. (Original post by JME_CHG)
I desperately need 100 in this too... Do you think we have a chance? Or does man have a better chance of inventing a time machine and going back to jan06 to get 100%?
Shouldn't be too hard to 100% provided you genuinely understand each topic (i.e. you don't just go through every question on memorisation of techniques).
The few marks that they'll purposely make especially difficult this year (as they've been doing recently) should be made up by grade boundaries but idk.
7. (Original post by C0balt)
the very last part isn't that hard but second to last is pretty damn difficult yeah lol
In the mock I managed to form a cubic and there I gave up
Literally did the exact same haha, thought a cubic was just too weird so I just moved on rip
8. Anyone hoping for a similar paper to last years? (normal all the way through then a hard polar question )
9. Id prefer it to be normal all the way, with a harder 2nd order substitution question since I understand DE a lot more after going through the edexcel questions
10. (Original post by Hjyu1)
Anyone hoping for a similar paper to last years? (normal all the way through then a hard polar question )
Yes
11. FP3 2015 becomes a lot more enjoyable after you've done a recent step 3 paper!

Posted from TSR Mobile
12. (Original post by JME_CHG)
True... & SAME - but my cubic was in terms of sinθ so I didn't spot that crazy trick in the MS... But surely that's as hard as it gets?! That's the hardest one I've ever done... Ever - spent so long trying different ways I thought I was in step... On avg you're supposed to spend 30 mins on a step Q? I spent 45 mins on that second to last part and still got nowhere
45 mins?! Gosh you had a lot of time left over. Just did that paper in school today and tbh wasn't bad at all. Polar stuff at the end was a little tricky but wasn't too bad if you worked through it logically.
13. (Original post by jjsnyder)
FP3 2015 becomes a lot more enjoyable after you've done a recent step 3 paper!

Posted from TSR Mobile
I find FP3 papers (not the content though) really boring tbh, especially after doing STEP. But I'd agree that 2014/2015 in FP3 were vaguely enjoyable in some parts.
I find FP2 papers a lot more enjoyable.
14. (Original post by IrrationalRoot)
I find FP3 papers (not the content though) really boring tbh, especially after doing STEP. But I'd agree that 2014/2015 in FP3 were vaguely enjoyable in some parts.
I find FP2 papers a lot more enjoyable.
FP4 even better
15. (Original post by Qcomber)
FP4 even better
I don't do that module, but will cover it over summer .
16. (Original post by IrrationalRoot)
45 mins?! Gosh you had a lot of time left over. Just did that paper in school today and tbh wasn't bad at all. Polar stuff at the end was a little tricky but wasn't too bad if you worked through it logically.
Yeah exactly! Thought it was mad easy until that point and idk... Guess I got bored and lost concentration

Anyway I'm I right in thinking that we should treat polar like Cartesian?

So for example in Cartesian you have 2 eqns in form of x and y, then can solve for either to get points of intersection...

Is this same for Polar? So it can be either in r or θ instead of x and y's?

In that 2015 I got a cubic in sinθ rather than r's but I didn't think it was correct so didn't even attempt to solve it
17. Is there a quicker way to work out if we use keˣ or kxeˣ or kx²eˣ for particular integral than using trial and error?
18. (Original post by JME_CHG)
Is there a quicker way to work out if we use keˣ or kxeˣ or kx²eˣ for particular integral than using trial and error?
Have you got the AQA textbook?

Posted from TSR Mobile
19. (Original post by JME_CHG)
Is there a quicker way to work out if we use keˣ or kxeˣ or kx²eˣ for particular integral than using trial and error?
You go up in degree of x if present in the complimentary function.
20. (Original post by JME_CHG)
Yeah exactly! Thought it was mad easy until that point and idk... Guess I got bored and lost concentration

Anyway I'm I right in thinking that we should treat polar like Cartesian?

So for example in Cartesian you have 2 eqns in form of x and y, then can solve for either to get points of intersection...

Is this same for Polar? So it can be either in r or θ instead of x and y's?

In that 2015 I got a cubic in sinθ rather than r's but I didn't think it was correct so didn't even attempt to solve it
Yep effectively it was polar coordinate geometry so starting by converting the (obvious) Cartesian equation of the line AB into polar form and the rest follows.

Ah the cubic equation looked daunting (I was about to make an equation in but I realised what we want is the value of r and it's easier to work in r) but two things:
-if you had an equation solving calculator it was fine, since it would remind you that 3/2 was a root
-you already knew that 3/2 must be a root.

If the cubic was in trig functions same goes.

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: August 17, 2016
Today on TSR

### Last-minute PS help

100s of personal statements examples here

### Loneliness at uni

Discussions on TSR

• Latest
• ## 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
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
• ## 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

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