Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

OCR Physics B G495 Field and Particle Pictures June 21st 2011 Exam Thread watch

    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    What do you guys think the grade boundaries will be like?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bear54)
    Didn't it say at the beginning of the ball question that is was neutral?
    yeh but then it got charged, hence why it was attracted to the negative plate and so there was an extension

    for grade boundaries, absolutely no idea :/ that was easier than the january paper (only cus of its section C to be fair) so maybe 75-80 for an A
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mikkels88)
    yeh but then it got charged, hence why it was attracted to the negative plate and so there was an extension

    for grade boundaries, absolutely no idea :/ that was easier than the january paper (only cus of its section C to be fair) so maybe 75-80 for an A
    Oh my, I hope not. This was MUCH harder than Jun 2010, so I am not sure. Maybe 68?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    oh dear i got 9x10^7 for the electrons one?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arianex)
    I reasoned that since radioactive decay = random process, the number of nuclei we calculated that corresponded to the measured activity (that was given to us) would be a minimum - simply because we COULD have more nuclei present that just weren't decaying, therefore still giving us that same measured activity

    EDIT// Well, I remember explaining it better in the exam. XD
    Isn't it just that not all decaying nuclei are actually detected, so there are actually several other nuclei decaying, but the detector isn't pointing at them...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Summerdays)
    Oh my, I hope not. This was MUCH harder than Jun 2010, so I am not sure. Maybe 68?
    oh phew, i dont think i did june 2010 or cant remember it anyways so idk


    (Original post by jimmeh)
    Isn't it just that not all decaying nuclei are actually detected, so there are actually several other nuclei decaying, but the detector isn't pointing at them...
    that would have been a good idea... damn
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jimmeh)
    Isn't it just that not all decaying nuclei are actually detected, so there are actually several other nuclei decaying, but the detector isn't pointing at them...
    Such an easy answer that slipped my mind. Damn
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Summerdays)
    Such an easy answer that slipped my mind. Damn
    oops went on a random babble about A=-lambaN and all that malarky :rolleyes:
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birkatron)
    oops went on a random babble about A=-lambaN and all that malarky :rolleyes:
    So did I I said that the activity mut have been greater in the past haha
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birkatron)
    That wasn't too bad! :P For the radioactive people one i got 435, for the flux one did anybody get 7.1x10^-4wb?? and the 1.8x10^-3 for emf?? also the beta one i put it ionises the air in the gap so postive ions give the sphere positive charge so it moves downwards, that was on a past paper the same question 0.0, for the uranium thingy i got 1024kg?? ring any bells, also the prerelease what did people put for the very last question?? the picked some weird things to ask !!!
    Flux Density = 0.7 T
    I got 1.7x10^-4wb =/
    Diameter was 1.8x10^-2 => Radius = 0.9x10^-2
    Area= pi x radius^2

    Flux= 0.7 x Area = 1.7x10^-4Wb
    If I'm wrong oh well, I think I've done okay overall.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stuffedfigs)
    Flux Density = 0.7 T
    I got 1.7x10^-4wb =/
    Diameter was 1.8x10^-2 => Radius = 0.9x10^-2
    Area= pi x radius^2

    Flux= 0.7 x Area = 1.7x10^-4Wb
    If I'm wrong oh well, I think I've done okay overall.
    Oh crap... it said diameter? Damn, such a newb
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Summerdays)
    Oh crap... it said diameter? Damn, such a newb
    Yeah I read it and went "CHEEKY OCR, not letting you get away with that"
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stuffedfigs)
    Yeah I read it and went "CHEEKY OCR, not letting you get away with that"
    I did that, and then still fell for it. Not one of my finest moments, I have to admit...

    Spotted my mistake when checking though! Felt like such a great moral victory...
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stuffedfigs)
    Yeah I read it and went "CHEEKY OCR, not letting you get away with that"
    SO ANNOYED. Urgh, that's what happens when you are reading really fast I have feeling that the two marks come from identying that 1/4piD^2 = area. Urgh. I did write that flux = BA though
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    so did we decide grade boundaries are gonna be low for this paper?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Geekchic17)
    so did we decide grade boundaries are gonna be low for this paper?
    I hope so. I feel really ashamed
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Even though I screwed up a lot, it was a very fair paper, I think the same grade boundaries or higher than Jan 11.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stuffedfigs)
    Yeah I read it and went "CHEEKY OCR, not letting you get away with that"
    I can just imagine someone literally shouting that in the exam
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jimmeh)
    Isn't it just that not all decaying nuclei are actually detected, so there are actually several other nuclei decaying, but the detector isn't pointing at them...
    They didn't mention a detector at all in that Q, just said that "the activity of the sample is xxx." But I suppose you could reason it that way...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by stuffedfigs)
    Even though I screwed up a lot, it was a very fair paper, I think the same grade boundaries or higher than Jan 11.
    oww, what were they for jan11? around 80?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: August 21, 2011
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

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

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