The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Xero Xenith
STEP II does not rely on any Further Maths, so all questions are possible without going Further :smile: (And it's arctan - aka tan^(-1) - that works for this.)


Comes in handy though. Also, for mechanics+Stats you're occasionally going to need M3+/S3+ which only people who do further maths will have done.
Original post by deejayy
Which STEP paper ? I,II or III?


it was step 1 I believe
I guess I should probably make myself known in this thread.

I'm applying for the universities mentioned in my signature with the grades mentioned in my signature.. oh and GCSE grades: 4A*s 9A's and 1B.

Preparation isn't going tremendously well but I have started looking at STEP papers (starting with STEP I of course).
Original post by Edwin Okli
I guess I should probably make myself known in this thread.

I'm applying for the universities mentioned in my signature with the grades mentioned in my signature.. oh and GCSE grades: 4A*s 9A's and 1B.

Preparation isn't going tremendously well but I have started looking at STEP papers (starting with STEP I of course).


Welcome!!
I see you're interested in the study abroad option. Have you got a country in mind??
Im looking at maths and german so...
Original post by BeccaCath94

Original post by BeccaCath94
Welcome!!
I see you're interested in the study abroad option. Have you got a country in mind??
Im looking at maths and german so...


France or Belgium probably but I wouldn't mind studying a language ab initio. In fact, I would like to.
Original post by deejayy
Which STEP paper ? I,II or III?


step 1
Original post by Edwin Okli
I guess I should probably make myself known in this thread.

I'm applying for the universities mentioned in my signature with the grades mentioned in my signature.. oh and GCSE grades: 4A*s 9A's and 1B.

Preparation isn't going tremendously well but I have started looking at (starting with STEP I of course).


how's it going?
Reply 1707
Original post by House Dagoth
how's it going?


Not tremendously well, apparently
What is an intercalated year? I heard it at the Warwick open day but wasn't paying full attention lol.
Original post by Aristotle's' Disciple
What is an intercalated year? I heard it at the Warwick open day but wasn't paying full attention lol.


i think its when you take a year out to work (sandwich course)
Original post by sqwerty

Original post by sqwerty
Not tremendously well, apparently


Stole the words from out of my mouth.
This thread has slowed down quite a lot...time for a question
Prove that the sum of the product of 4 consecutive odd or 4 consecutive even integers and the number 16 yields a square.

EDIT: If you know double factorials then it is show (n+8)!!/n!! +16=k^2
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by TheMagicMan
This thread has slowed down quite a lot...time for a question
Prove that the sum of the product of 4 consecutive odd or 4 consecutive even integers and the number 16 yields a square.

EDIT: If you know double factorials then it is show (n+8)!!/n!! +16=k^2


x(x+2)(x+4)(x+6)+16=x4+12x3+44x2+48x+16=(x2+6x+4)2 x(x+2)(x+4)(x+6)+16=x^4+12x^3+44x^2+48x+16=(x^2+6x+4)^2
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by TheMagicMan
EDIT: If you know double factorials then it is show (n+8)!!/n!! +16=k^2


The double factorial is one of my least favourite pieces of notation... I would recommend avoiding it if at all possible in the future, there's nothing that can be written as a double factorial that can't be written in a way that is cleaner and almost as concise!
Original post by ben-smith

Original post by ben-smith
x(x+2)(x+4)(x+6)+16=x4+12x3+44x2+48x+16=(x2+6x+4)2 x(x+2)(x+4)(x+6)+16=x^4+12x^3+44x^2+48x+16=(x^2+6x+4)^2


He states.. as if there were no additional working. :wink:
Original post by Edwin Okli
He states.. as if there were no additional working. :wink:


Well it's true :tongue:
Original post by Hedgeman49
The double factorial is one of my least favourite pieces of notation... I would recommend avoiding it if at all possible in the future, there's nothing that can be written as a double factorial that can't be written in a way that is cleaner and almost as concise!


Any particular reason why you hate it so much? I never really use it but I thought the question was slightly unclear without it.
Original post by Edwin Okli
He states.. as if there were no additional working. :wink:


Need there be?
Original post by ben-smith

Original post by ben-smith
Need there be?


Not really but it never hurts.
Original post by Edwin Okli
France or Belgium probably but I wouldn't mind studying a language ab initio. In fact, I would like to.


Ooh cool. That sounds good :smile:

Latest