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

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BriO)
    I'll show some working in a sec. How you feeling about physics? The grade boundaries are always so low I love it
    Cool thanks.

    Terrible, there's so much information they get us to remember, and it infruriates me when half of what I learned isn't tested. Yeah low grade boundaries do help, allows you to literally skip some questions if you haven't got the time to waste being stuck
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    for the area under the curve question, did you integrate between 0 and the intercept, or was it between both intercepts? I can't remember what the question asked but I did it between 0 and ln ( 3 + root5 / 2) so I would probably have got the correct answer / 2 if I read the question wrong but did everyting else right.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BriO)
    Attachment 557231 (done in paint xd)

    Again, any online matrix calculator confirms. Just put in M and raise to like power 10.
    Nope mine was completely different.

    I had eigenvalue = 1 and -1/6
    And eigen vectors (1,-1) and (3-4) respectively. So I didn't have 1/7 I had -1
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -Gifted-)
    I think I plotted the points on my Argand diagram too small, but you can definitely see it in the paper. Will it get scanned ?
    Yes should be fine don't worry about it
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alex621)
    for the area under the curve question, did you integrate between 0 and the intercept, or was it between both intercepts? I can't remember what the question asked but I did it between 0 and ln ( 3 + root5 / 2) so I would probably have got the correct answer / 2 if I read the question wrong but did everyting else right.
    I did between 0 and ln.... then multilpied it by 2
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alex621)
    for the area under the curve question, did you integrate between 0 and the intercept, or was it between both intercepts? I can't remember what the question asked but I did it between 0 and ln ( 3 + root5 / 2) so I would probably have got the correct answer / 2 if I read the question wrong but did everyting else right.
    Hm between the two I think...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Alex621)
    for the area under the curve question, did you integrate between 0 and the intercept, or was it between both intercepts? I can't remember what the question asked but I did it between 0 and ln ( 3 + root5 / 2) so I would probably have got the correct answer / 2 if I read the question wrong but did everyting else right.
    You can do between 0 and the root and just multiply by 2. Can also do it between both roots. Same answer
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    Nope mine was completely different.

    I had eigenvalue = 1 and -1/6
    And eigen vectors (1,-1) and (3-4) respectively. So I didn't have 1/7 I had -1
    I think the first one should be (1 1), as the top half the 2x2 matrix were both 0.5, so using your first eigenvector, you would get 0 for the top instead of 0.5 for lambda = 1. Second one is correct though I am fairly sure.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    Nope mine was completely different.

    I had eigenvalue = 1 and -1/6
    And eigen vectors (1,-1) and (3-4) respectively. So I didn't have 1/7 I had -1
    Ahh i see why. It seems your mistake is having the eigen vector as (1,-1). The correct answer is (1,1). When you multiply by M it stays the same unlike yours. You'll probably get all the error carry on marks though
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by decombatwombat)
    I think the first one should be (1 1), as the top half the 2x2 matrix were both 0.5, so using your first eigenvector, you would get 0 for the top instead of 0.5 for lambda = 1. Second one is correct though I am fairly sure.
    (Original post by BriO)
    Ahh i see why. It seems your mistake is having the eigen vector as (1,-1). The correct answer is (1,1). When you multiply by M it stays the same unlike yours. You'll probably get all the error carry on marks though
    Ah that's good, I enjoy getting the whole of question 3 wrong. **** my life, doubt I even got a B.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    Cool thanks.

    Terrible, there's so much information they get us to remember, and it infruriates me when half of what I learned isn't tested. Yeah low grade boundaries do help, allows you to literally skip some questions if you haven't got the time to waste being stuck
    Yeah, the paper is also so long. I find timing to be an issue if i get lost on some questions. But yeah you can just skip haha. I skipped like 3 questions last year and got 150ums still. The definitons are my bane.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Expecting A* as 64 UMS - I thought it was about the same difficulty as Jan 2013 but apparently the general opinion is it was harder?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Never have I made so many mistakes in one exam. I hardly made that many mistakes in total so far in all the exams I've ever sat.

    I can't subtract 1 from 1/2 correctly.

    I can't read questions properly.

    Just great. 10/10
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    Ah that's good, I enjoy getting the whole of question 3 wrong. **** my life, doubt I even got a B.
    You didn't need to remove your other post, in fact I would have upvoted it if I'd been able to, but apparently I've already upvoted you too many times recently

    I feel the same way, but the only thing we can change right now is our Physics grade so it seems pointless to lament over this exam, at least until after tomorrow
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MintyMilk)
    You didn't need to remove your other post, in fact I would have upvoted it if I'd been able to, but apparently I've already upvoted you too many times recently

    I feel the same way, but the only thing we can change right now is our Physics grade so it seems pointless to lament over this exam, at least until after tomorrow
    Yeah I know it's pointless to get annoyed over this exam, but that doesn't mean I can stop myself from being depressed by it.

    Ah I had to remove it, it was a bit pathetic, just went on a rant.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Badly need someone to do an unofficial mark scheme, imma crash in a minute. Really needed an A. Like badly.

    So weird going for full UMS then realising after you might've not gotten an A.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    Badly need someone to do an unofficial mark scheme, imma crash in a minute. Really needed an A. Like badly.

    So weird going for full UMS then realising after you might've not gotten an A.
    What modules are you doing? If you've been getting near 100 on your other modules then you could get a 0 on FP2 and still get an A* overall.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    Badly need someone to do an unofficial mark scheme, imma crash in a minute. Really needed an A. Like badly.

    So weird going for full UMS then realising after you might've not gotten an A.
    1)i) 1 - x^2 + x^4 (3)

    ii) x - 1/3 x^3 + 1/5 x^5 +c but c = 0 (3)

    iii) pi/6 (4)

    iv) Draw the graph, sort of like a loop but starting at pi/4 and ending on the horizontal axis (2)

    As the angles tends to 0 r tends to infinity (1)

    v) a^2 ln(2 root2) or 1/2 a^2 ln 8 (4)

    2)i) 1-z (3)

    ii) Show that C + jS thing (8)

    iii) Modulus of the cube roots was root2 the angles were pi/18 13pi/18 25pi/18 (7)


    3)i) Eigenvalues were -1/6, 1 eigenvectors were (1 1) and (3 -4) I think, cant quite remember the order (8)

    ii) M^n tended towards one seventh of (3 4) or something like that order might be different (6)
    ................................ ......................(3 4)



    iii) Not too sure on this, I think it didnt tend to a limit (maybe infinity), as the elements of the matrix were greater than 1 but some were negative so it could have positive or negative infinity (4)

    4)i) Show that arcosh thing (5)

    ii) ln((3+root5)/2) and ln((3-root5)/2) (5)

    iii) The graph sort of looked like x^2 but started at y=2

    The area bound by the curve was 5root5 / 2
    The area bound by the line y = 5 was 5ln((7+3root5)/2) There are other ways of writing this for example 10ln(...) (8)

    Then take one away from the other.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bunderwump)
    What modules are you doing? If you've been getting near 100 on your other modules then you could get a 0 on FP2 and still get an A* overall.
    I got 91 in M2 last year, think I got 70/72 or better in S2 this year, D2 I couldn't sleep the night before (first exam so obvs had some stress or something) and ended up with around 59/72, which could be anything from a B to an A*, and FP2 whatever happens. I know there's still a chance but I had already screwed up D2 due to a horrendous nights sleep so today needed to be good. I honestly just wonder why me.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ComputerMaths97)
    I got 91 in M2 last year, think I got 70/72 or better in S2 this year, D2 I couldn't sleep the night before (first exam so obvs had some stress or something) and ended up with around 59/72, which could be anything from a B to an A*, and FP2 whatever happens. I know there's still a chance but I had already screwed up D2 due to a horrendous nights sleep so today needed to be good. I honestly just wonder why me.
    You only need 3 A2 modules so if you put M2, S2 and FP2 in your FM, then put 3 other highest scoring AS modules in your further maths, you'll be fine for an A, assuming your C3 and C4 UMS are high enough to get you a A while using your 3 lowest AS modules and D2 for maths.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Brussels sprouts
  • 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

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