You are Here: Home >< Maths

# STEP Prep Thread 2016 (Mark. II) Watch

1. (Original post by Zacken)
PTSD (post traumatic step disorder) to 16, II, Q3
Acronym inside an acronym. I like it.

I wonder if we can go deeper.

Posted from TSR Mobile
2. (Original post by IrrationalRoot)
Nah I just derive it in the exam if I can't remember. Also is quite a tricky one to remember, so I usually derive that too just to be on the safe side.
I thought every remembers it at the sum of the even function cosh and the odd function sinh?

Posted from TSR Mobile
3. (Original post by sweeneyrod)
I do usually remember it, I think I just wrote it down wrong. (And technically cos is even, sine is odd!)
Nah it's for diff stuff, sin goes to cos, cos goes to -sin, hence the odd

Posted from TSR Mobile
4. Did you guys know that the first four letters of Stephen Siklos' name make up the word STEP?

Coincidence? I think not.

Edit: 1, 2, 3, 4. Yay!

Posted from TSR Mobile
5. (Original post by Insight314)
Did you guys know that the first three letters of Stephen Siklos' name make up the word STEP?

Coincidence? I think not.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Four* letters, you made a typo

Posted from TSR Mobile
6. (Original post by drandy76)
Four* letters, you made a typo

Posted from TSR Mobile
I actually didn't make a typo. I miscounted. I hope Camb isn't watching.

Posted from TSR Mobile
7. STEP III 2015:
Spoiler:
Show
I thought this was a weird paper, due to the three questions on proof that weren't on any normal A-level stuff at all (not complaining, because they were quite nice).

2 - pretty straightforward
5 - also pretty straightforward, except I couldn't get the if part at the start of (ii)
6 - gave myself 2 marks for an attempt at half of (i)
7 - nice question
8 - would have been an easy full if I hadn't for some reason differentiated sin as -cos and vice versa. Instead it was an easy half.
12 - (i) fairly easy, although a bit dodgy that you didn't seem to have to prove that Rn's p.g.f. was always G(x). Didn't make much progress in (ii), and looking at the mark scheme it looked horrendous
13 - drew a little graph, gave up

Overall 73, a solidish 1. Not bad, although it was a bit odd I wouldn't mind a paper like it this year.
8. (Original post by Insight314)
I actually didn't make a typo. I miscounted. I hope Camb isn't watching.

Posted from TSR Mobile
You counted 3 letters because triangles have 3 sides illuminati confirm
9. (Original post by Insight314)
I actually didn't make a typo. I miscounted. I hope Camb isn't watching.

Posted from TSR Mobile
My boy SS just dmed me, soz but you've been relocated to London met

Posted from TSR Mobile
10. (Original post by sweeneyrod)
You counted 3 letters because triangles have 3 sides illuminati confirm
Wait a minute.

1. STEP is made up of three letters.
2. STEP is also made up of three papers - I, II, III.

However, STEP is not made up of three letters, so by using proof by contradiction it has been proven that STEP is also not made up of three papers. STEP IV is being secretly hidden by Siklos confirmed. QED Illuminati controls STEP confirmed.

Try to refute my logic, you mortal peasants.

Pro-tip: You can't.

Posted from TSR Mobile
11. (Original post by drandy76)
My boy SS just dmed me, soz but you've been relocated to London met

Posted from TSR Mobile
I am an optimist: at least it's not Oxford.

Posted from TSR Mobile
12. (Original post by Insight314)
Wait a minute.

1. STEP is made up of three letters.
2. STEP is also made up of three papers - I, II, III.

However, STEP is not made up of three letters, so by using proof by contradiction it has been proven that STEP is also not made up of three papers. STEP IV is being secretly hidden by Siklos confirmed. QED Illuminati controls STEP confirmed.

Try to refute my logic, you mortal peasants.

Pro-tip: You can't.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Using the principles of strong induction (thank you zacin bas\$d God)
We can consider the initial case, where step has 3 letters.
1-S
2-T
3-E
4-P
.......... Oh my gawd, step 4 confirmed

Posted from TSR Mobile
13. (Original post by drandy76)
Using the principles of strong induction (thank you zacin bas\$d God)
We can consider the initial case, where step has 3 letters.
1-S
2-T
3-E
4-P
.......... Oh my gawd, step 4 confirmed

Posted from TSR Mobile
The 4th paper is called STEP S.

It's sat by applicants who want to skip Part IA so they can fasttrack the Tripos.

You need SSS in STEP I-III to qualify and the paper is taken in September.

Posted from TSR Mobile
14. (Original post by jneill)
The 4th paper is called STEP S.

It's sat by applicants who want to skip Part IA so they can fasttrack the Tripos.

You need SSS in STEP I-III to qualify and the paper is taken in September.

Posted from TSR Mobile
dont u mean...

STEPtember???
15. (Original post by drandy76)
Using the principles of strong induction (thank you zacin bas\$d God)
We can consider the initial case, where step has 3 letters.
1-S
2-T
3-E
4-P
.......... Oh my gawd, step 4 confirmed

Posted from TSR Mobile
Using proof by exhaustion:

Case 1: STEP is a subset of Stephen Siklos.
Case 2: STEP I, II, III are elements of the subset STEP.

Since STEP I, II, III are subsets of STEP, and due to the fact that STEP is a subset of Stephen Siklos, then there must be a distinct subset of elements of the set Stephen Siklos that are members of it. Therefore, using proof by exhaustion, the proposition that Stephen Siklos is hiding STEP IV is true. QED

My logic is irrefutable.

Posted from TSR Mobile
16. (Original post by jneill)
The 4th paper is called STEP S.

It's sat by applicants who want to skip Part IA so they can fasttrack the Tripos.

You need SSS in STEP I-III to qualify and the paper is taken in September.

Posted from TSR Mobile
I'm so excited to be the first half of the day before I get a follow back on my way home from work (spammed suggestive text and couldn't stop because sentence was interesting)

Posted from TSR Mobile
17. (Original post by sweeneyrod)
dont u mean...

STEPtember???
That would be silly...

Posted from TSR Mobile
18. (Original post by drandy76)
I'm so excited to be the first half of the day before I get a follow back on my way home from work (spammed suggestive text and couldn't stop because sentence was interesting)

Posted from TSR Mobile

Posted from TSR Mobile
19. (Original post by Insight314)
Using proof by exhaustion:

Case 1: STEP is a subset of Stephen Siklos.
Case 2: STEP I, II, III are elements of the subset STEP.

Since STEP I, II, III are subsets of STEP, and due to the fact that STEP is a subset of Stephen Siklos, then there must be a distinct subset of elements of the set Stephen Siklos that are members of it. Therefore, using proof by exhaustion, the proposition that Stephen Siklos is hiding STEP IV is true. QED

My logic is irrefutable.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Gonna take a page from my boy ramanujan and do a proof by intuition:
Consider how cool primes are(very)
Consider that they're are 3 step papers, a prime, it follows that Siklos would only work in prime number of step papers so there MUST be a FIFTH step paper too

Where's my field medal?

Posted from TSR Mobile
20. (Original post by drandy76)
Gonna take a page from my boy ramanujan and do a proof by intuition:
Consider how cool primes are(very)
Consider that they're are 3 step papers, a prime, it follows that Siklos would only work in prime number of step papers so there MUST be a FIFTH step paper too

Where's my field medal?

Posted from TSR Mobile
Using direct proof:

Axiom 1: Stephen Siklos is the set with subset of STEP.
Axiom 2: STEP is a subset with elements I, II, III; it's cardinality is a non-fixed positive integer, solely controlled by Stephen "the madman" Siklos.

By considering the above axioms, we can see that the cardinality of set Stephen Siklos is 13. Since 1 + 3 = 4, then through direct proof we have proven that the new cardinality of the set STEP, as outlined in Axiom 2, is one more than its cardinality over the real elements of the family. Therefore, there must be a STEP IV. QED

Posted from TSR Mobile

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: February 28, 2017
Today on TSR

### Last-minute PS help

100s of personal statements examples here

### More pressure for kinky sex?

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.