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

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucabrasi98)
    All I know is the book said equal to in bold writing. So if it's not then I blame AQA and Nelson Thrones for ****ing me over and over again.
    Both will prob be accepted
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Does anybody think I'll lose marks for not NAMING the laws, it said state, so I didn't do it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    For the graph of field strength I drew it correctly but what happens if it doesn't scan properly ?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jay1421)
    Does anybody think I'll lose marks for not NAMING the laws, it said state, so I didn't do it.
    I didn't name them either... slightly worried that they'll drop a mark or two for it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Datta10)
    For the graph of field strength I drew it correctly but what happens if it doesn't scan properly ?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    If you can see it on the paper, then they will see it. They're not using a scanner from Argos for 20 quid trust me
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone got the amount of marks for each question or pics of the paper?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For Q1 I got 8 for the capacitance, will that still get me the marks or will it be outside the range??
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Danielgeen_)
    For Q1 I got 8 for the capacitance, will that still get me the marks or will it be outside the range??
    No one on here knows, we are not examiners and so do not have the official mark scheme.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucabrasi98)
    All I know is the book said equal to in bold writing. So if it's not then I blame AQA and Nelson Thrones for ****ing me over and over again.
    You will not loose a mark for it because:
    Equation for flux linkage is NS=BAN ( I have replaced the thy thing with s).
    or flux is S=BA

    EMF=-(BAN)/T hence being picky the text book is right the EMF magnitude of the emf is equal to the rate of change in flux linkage.

    How ever this can be re-written as:

    EMF=-N(S/t) There for the magnitude of Induced EMF id directly proportional to rate of change of flux or is equal to the rate of change of flux linkage. That said the -1 can technically a constant of proportionality.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Is there an unofficial mark scheme?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    does anyone have any pics of the paper? would be much appreciated!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    90 UMS prediction??
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by C0balt)
    Thanks i hope so, all depends on the next 3 exams!

    :five:

    Know exactly how you feel, have to get an A* on physics for my st catz offer and atm I'm not convinced I'm gonna make it.... i always lose marks for ****ing retarded errors
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pinkfloydcool)
    Know exactly how you feel, have to get an A* on physics for my st catz offer and atm I'm not convinced I'm gonna make it.... i always lose marks for ****ing retarded errors
    Hahaha same with my A* in FM... Let's do this though... Good luck 👍
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Any revision sheets for unit 5?
    It's so much to understand I can't handle it
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex_david97)
    unofficial mark scheme for section B?
    Is there an unofficial markscheme for both section B and A. If there is could someone excplain the method for the proof. cos I lost 8 marks all together
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    there was a question about neutrinos? I didnt see it on the exam, have I missed out some questions?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tomharris15)
    there was a question about neutrinos? I didnt see it on the exam, have I missed out some questions?
    It was about why the equation for kinetic energy of alpha particles cannot be used for beta decay and the answer was anti neutrino is also produces which also carries momentum and KE.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by C0balt)
    It was about why the equation for kinetic energy of alpha particles cannot be used for beta decay and the answer was anti neutrino is also produces which also carries momentum and KE.
    ohhh right thanks for clarifying
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For the last question I said the emf was induced only when the current was increasing. Forgot it was turning. I got all the parts after that right just the reason for the emf was wrong. Will that lose all 3 or could I save a mark or two?
 
 
 
  • 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
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
  • 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.