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

    3
    ReputationRep:
    is there no unofficial mark scheme to astro/nuclear yet?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by johnthedog)
    Sorry if this has already been asked but in the Med Physics paper, the last question, was it the % of X-Rays that passed through or the % of X-Rays that were reflected?
    I'm quite sure it was % that passed through, but do correct me if I'm wrong, anyone.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FireBLue97)
    can u say nuclear weapon testing
    Yep, I said nuclear fallout from previous weapons testing. It's been given as a viable answer in mark schemes.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Any grade boundary predictions for nuclear and astro?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by allofthestars)
    exactly ! so the raw count rate seen would of included the background effect aswell?
    Yeah! there was no need to worry about the background count rate in caculation
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sztirmzi)
    Yeah! there was no need to worry about the background count rate in caculation
    I'm pretty sure you had to find the corrected count rate, then use the inverse square law, then add on the background count rate again. Otherwise you would be lowering the background count rate in the inverse square law calculation even though it wouldn't decrease since it is uniform in all directions. Hope that helps.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ItsYaBoi)
    Here are my numerical answers(and stuff i remember) that im pretty confident about

    NUCLEAR AND THERMAL
    1ai 3.348x10^(−15)
    1aii 3.05x10^(−15)
    2a Nuclear accidents, e.g. Chernobyl
    2bi 96
    3bi 2.27x10^(−28)
    3bii 127
    4bi 4.39x10^(−4)
    4bii .0667
    4biii 1.21
    5bi 15500
    5bii 2490
    5biii 2120

    ASTRO
    1a 0.9
    1bi real
    1bii 0.2
    2bii 0.47
    2biii areitis furthest
    4a radio signals
    4bi 2.37x10^(14)au
    Could you possibly tell me what the question was for 2a on the Nuclear and Thermal paper? I don't recall any answer like this and I'm worried if I've missed a question.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aprkrheiqkk)
    Yep, I said nuclear fallout from previous weapons testing. It's been given as a viable answer in mark schemes.
    Could you possibly tell me which question this was? I really don't remember it and I'm worried I've missed one
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by radiohedge)
    FINALLY SOMEONE ELSE WHO DID APPLIED. I found it slightly harder than last year's. I had to leave out a couple of questions and I only half-attempted the six markers, and I want an A. In an ideal world it'd be 55 for an A but I'm worried that's optimistic. What do you think?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I am glad I found someone doing applied too. I found it really hard and I let some questions emtpy too hahahah I couldnt do the question which had find frictional torque and most of that question tbh. I did the counting square to find area in a rush hopefully it is correct I got about 280 is that around what u got? I really really hope that the GB will be low for it or Ill miss my offer. i personally found it harder than usual.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Aprkrheiqkk)
    Yep, I said nuclear fallout from previous weapons testing. It's been given as a viable answer in mark schemes.
    Would solar radiation increase as ozone layer get weaker liable too u think?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jay1421)
    Could you possibly tell me what the question was for 2a on the Nuclear and Thermal paper? I don't recall any answer like this and I'm worried if I've missed a question.
    what was 3b)ii for the nuclear section? was it mass defect?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by wallpaperpaste)
    I'm pretty sure you had to find the corrected count rate, then use the inverse square law, then add on the background count rate again. Otherwise you would be lowering the background count rate in the inverse square law calculation even though it wouldn't decrease since it is uniform in all directions. Hope that helps.
    Ahh cheers wallpaperpaste! that makes sense ! aw no lost those marks
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    what did people get for 1a on astro i got about 0.13?
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Questioner1234)
    Ah that's a good. I got 16700 I think for the indicated power and 48400 for the input

    Also on the very last page which box did you tick? I think I did the second one
    Posted from TSR Mobile
    OMG what question to tick on last page? what was the question?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ManOfJustTin)
    I put dark matter. I think the Big Bang caused the expansion but they don't know why it's accelerating hence dark matter?
    I know the evidence for it expanding (e.g red shift) but not the reasons that directly cause it
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GrandMasti)
    Any grade boundary predictions for nuclear and astro?
    Astro normally has the highest boundaries
    Considering it was a relatively easier than normal paper I think they will be quite high 😕
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dann_a)
    Astro normally has the highest boundaries
    Considering it was a relatively easier than normal paper I think they will be quite high 😕
    I think last year was easier though
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by allofthestars)
    For this silly mistake i got the wrong volume, can you remember how many marks this was and also the later part of this question where you reuse the answer,would i gain error carried forward ?

    Thanks
    I think it was 3 or 4 marks, I think you'll only get one. You should get e.c.f for the number of mols if that's the method you used
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Did anyone get 1.8x10^11 Ckg^-1 for the specific charge turning points
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -jordan-)
    I don't think so, you had to use e/m = V/B^2xR^2 to find an experimental value of the specific charge. It gives 9.9x10^10 I think. How did you obtain that?
    e/m= v/Br
    v calculated from V
 
 
 
  • 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
    Brussels sprouts
  • 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.