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

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jay1421)
    Yep! I'm midway through it at the moment, I'll be uploading it later tonight at some point - can't give a specific time though. Hope it helped so far!
    Hi, do you remember how many marks the question about speed of the molecules increasing as temperature increases was worth? Was it 2 or 3? Thanks!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tanyapotter)
    Hi, do you remember how many marks the question about speed of the molecules increasing as temperature increases was worth? Was it 2 or 3? Thanks!
    2 marks


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jay1421)
    Hey all - just uploaded the Thermal etc. section of the mark scheme to imgur, here's the link!

    Unit 5 Thermodynamics, Radiation and Gases Unofficial Mark Scheme

    As always, if there's anything in it that you believe to be wrong, be sure to let me know and I'll correct it!

    Thanks!
    Nice scheme, but I think for 4c, you'd gain only one mark for all of the points as the idea of the mean speed of the gas molecules would be necessary?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kingaaran)
    Nice scheme, but I think for 4c, you'd gain only one mark for all of the points as the idea of the mean speed of the gas molecules would be necessary?
    Was that question worth 3 marks?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tanyapotter)
    Was that question worth 3 marks?
    Nah don't think so. I'll have the official papers today, so will upload them later.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kingaaran)
    Nah don't think so. I'll have the official papers today, so will upload them later.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Would you mind writing out what would be needed for 2 marks, and if it were worth 3 marks, then what would be needed for 3 marks? Thanks so much.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tanyapotter)
    Would you mind writing out what would be needed for 2 marks, and if it were worth 3 marks, then what would be needed for 3 marks? Thanks so much.
    I would say these are the three key ideas, although the second bullet point doesn't really deserve an extra credit in my opinion, making 2 marks apt:

    increasing the temperature increases the mean kinetic energy of the gas molecules;

    temperature is proportional to mean speed (squared) / mean kinetic energy of the gas molecules; *

    hence the mean speed increases;

    You need the idea of the 'mean' speed/kinetic energy for full credit. If it is not included anywhere, you'd drop 1 and ecf would be applied to give you 1/2.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    In the Nuclear and Thermal Physics part last question on specific heat. I used a rounded answer b) (ii). I used 1.6x104 instead of 1.55 x 104. So I got like 1700 for the heat capacity for ice instead of 2100. Hoow many marks would I lose?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SirRaza97)
    In the Nuclear and Thermal Physics part last question on specific heat. I used a rounded answer b) (ii). I used 1.6x104 instead of 1.55 x 104. So I got like 1700 for the heat capacity for ice instead of 2100. Hoow many marks would I lose?
    I don't remember the numbers, but I don't see how using an answer that is correct to 2 significant figures, instead of 3 significant figures, has given you only an accuracy of 1 significant figure.*
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kingaaran)
    I don't remember the numbers, but I don't see how using an answer that is correct to 2 significant figures, instead of 3 significant figures, has given you only an accuracy of 1 significant figure.*
    It makes a huge difference. Because there was a question before the heat capacity calc, where we needed to calculate how much heat energy was used to heat the ice (Can't remember exactly) and it gave you a value of 1.8x104J was transferred from the water.

    In the question to calc the heat capacity of ice we it told us that it went from -25 to 0 degrees. So how much was given to heat the ice was the energy transferred from water minus the heat capacity of ice.

    1.8 x104 - 1.55x104 = 2500J

    what I did was 1.8 x104 - 1.6x104 = 2000J

    Then using Q = mc delta T where delta T = 25 and m = 0.047
    when Q = 2000, c approx = 1700
    when Q = 2500, c approx = 2100

    You can see there is a missive difference if I use less sig figs. Which I unfortunately did.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SirRaza97)
    It makes a huge difference. Because there was a question before the heat capacity calc, where we needed to calculate how much heat energy was used to heat the ice (Can't remember exactly) and it gave you a value of 1.8x104J was transferred from the water.

    In the question to calc the heat capacity of ice we it told us that it went from -25 to 0 degrees. So how much was given to heat the ice was the energy transferred from water minus the heat capacity of ice.

    1.8 x104 - 1.55x104 = 2500J

    what I did was 1.8 x104 - 1.6x104 = 2000J

    Then using Q = mc delta T where delta T = 25 and m = 0.047
    when Q = 2000, c approx = 1700
    when Q = 2500, c approx = 2100

    You can see there is a missive difference if I use less sig figs. Which I unfortunately did.
    Oh, then of course, because it was a two stage calculation - I thought it was a one stage calculation.

    At maximum, you would only lose one mark. The rest will be ecf. Although, I don't think you'll any, as the question was not testing significant figures at all, so it would be against the mark scheme to penalise you for it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kingaaran)
    Oh, then of course, because it was a two stage calculation - I thought it was a one stage calculation.

    At maximum, you would only lose one mark. The rest will be ecf. Although, I don't think you'll any, as the question was not testing significant figures at all, so it would be against the mark scheme to penalise you for it.
    Thank you that puts my mind at ease! I really messed up in Unit 4 (probably got a low B) and want to make up for it in Unit 5. What do you think 60-62 marks will be? I took turning points as the optional
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SirRaza97)
    Thank you that puts my mind at ease! I really messed up in Unit 4 (probably got a low B) and want to make up for it in Unit 5. What do you think 60-62 marks will be? I took turning points as the optional
    Probably an A*
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    What are people thinking for the grade boundaries of this year's unit 5?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jay1421)
    Hey all - just uploaded the Thermal etc. section of the mark scheme to imgur, here's the link!

    Unit 5 Thermodynamics, Radiation and Gases Unofficial Mark Scheme

    As always, if there's anything in it that you believe to be wrong, be sure to let me know and I'll correct it!

    Thanks!
    Will you be doing a Medical Physics unof mark scheme? It would help a lot
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kingaaran)
    Nice scheme, but I think for 4c, you'd gain only one mark for all of the points as the idea of the mean speed of the gas molecules would be necessary?
    Yeah, you're probably right. Good catch.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mcride98)
    Will you be doing a Medical Physics unof mark scheme? It would help a lot
    Hi! Sadly I can't, as I don't have the Medical Physics paper, nor do I know the specification for it. Sorry! I'm sure somebody else will upload one at some point though
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jay1421)
    Hi! Sadly I can't, as I don't have the Medical Physics paper, nor do I know the specification for it. Sorry! I'm sure somebody else will upload one at some point though
    Hi! Do you have the Unit 5 nuclear physics paper? Thanks so much for your unofficial mark scheme. I was just wondering if you know exactly how many marks the answer about the speed of the molecules increasing with temperature, as you didn't specificy it in the mark scheme. I have a feeling it was worth 3 marks, but people keep saying it was worth only 2. Thanks!
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jay1421)
    Yep! I'm midway through it at the moment, I'll be uploading it later tonight at some point - can't give a specific time though. Hope it helped so far!
    Hi pal cheers for the section A. Anywhere near for the turning points?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tanyapotter)
    Hi! Do you have the Unit 5 nuclear physics paper? Thanks so much for your unofficial mark scheme. I was just wondering if you know exactly how many marks the answer about the speed of the molecules increasing with temperature, as you didn't specificy it in the mark scheme. I have a feeling it was worth 3 marks, but people keep saying it was worth only 2. Thanks!
    Hi - sorry, that was a mistake on my part - as people are saying, it was worth 2 marks.

    Glad it helped!
 
 
 
  • 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • 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

    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.