Join TSR now and get all your revision questions answeredSign up now
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robbo54)
    Why did OCR gives us like 10cm of space for that natural log questions -- it took me like 5-6 lines, and I think I made a POT error .

    Can anyone remember the values so I can try and do it now?
    At 500K it was 10 microsomethings and at 400K it was 1 microsomething.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Robbo54)
    Why did OCR gives us like 10cm of space for that natural log questions -- it took me like 5-6 lines, and I think I made a POT error .

    Can anyone remember the values so I can try and do it now?
    I think it was when T=300 , I=1*10^-6A
    When T=400 I=1*10^-5A
    And the equation was I=Ce^-(epsilon/kT)
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Can anyone remember the values for the current question? It was a small value of capacitance and one of the voltages was 0.12V?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Unofficial markscheme anyone?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Could we have said that for G the measuring equipment and devices have improved precision


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mutleybm1996)
    Could we have said that for G the measuring equipment and devices have improved precision


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Maybe, but I think what they were getting at was that the value of density used was way off. Besides, what values would you have improved the precision of?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rhetorical Hips)
    Maybe, but I think what they were getting at was that the value of density used was way off. Besides, what values would you have improved the precision of?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Timing perhaps


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Ok for the natural log questions I divided the two values so you cancel the two constants, and re-arranged to get Epsilon, anyone do a similar method to this?
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by Robbo54)
    Ok for the natural log questions I divided the two values so you cancel the two constants, and re-arranged to get Epsilon, anyone do a similar method to this?
    Exactly that.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ashysmithy105)
    Oh. My. God. I'm such an idiot. I put 9.4x10-7 = 94uA not 0.94uA :rolleyes: I wrote 9.4x10-7 above the answer section, do you think I'll only lose one mark then?
    You might not even lose any, they're often lenient with these kind of things. At absolute most you'll lose one.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by STATER)
    Exactly that.
    I still don't see what I did wrong then because I got something ^-3. How many marks do you think I would drop?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    How many marks was the question where we had to state why our value of G was wrong?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ryanWales)
    I don't think it can be sound because it was in space so there are no air particle. I put heat
    There would still be sound as the sound would go through the solid spacecraft.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    So what did everyone get for the frequency of lift oscillations? I got 0.45hz which I'm reasonably sure is wrong, I saw a few people mention they got 1.4hz?
    My error was not subbing k=EA/L into the formula for T, i just calculated k and then subbed the value in but I must have got the value wrong.
    Offline

    3
    (Original post by Robbo54)
    I still don't see what I did wrong then because I got something ^-3. How many marks do you think I would drop?
    Likely youll only lose 1
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    For the logs question, I did, my answer was 3.86 * 10^-20.

    Anyone get this, rather than 3.96? I've checked it again just now, so I'm sure it's right unless I made a silly mistake.

    my answer was epsilon = ln10 / [(1/(300*k))-(1/(400*k))] which gives 3.86 * 10^-20
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Also, is 'all the particles have the given average velocity of about 500ms^-1' a correct assumption for the rate of collision question.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nair39)
    For the logs question, I did, my answer was 3.86 * 10^-20.

    Anyone get this, rather than 3.96? I've checked it again just now, so I'm sure it's right unless I made a silly mistake.

    my answer was epsilon = ln10 / [(1/(300*k))-(1/(400*k))] which gives 3.86 * 10^-20
    Yep doing it now on my calculator I get the same. Hopefully I just remember my answer wrong!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by urz13)
    Yep doing it now on my calculator I get the same. Hopefully I just remember my answer wrong!
    I think I got 3.86 actually because thats what I get on my calcuator now. 3.96 is probably be remembering wrong. I doubt I would have written something different to what I had on my calculator.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Ok thanks, I'm sure you both just remembered it wrongly but got it right.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?

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.