Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Grade boundaries imo will probably similar to 2015.
    Around about 50 for an A.
    I thought it was alright. I've certainly done better in this compared to the specimens.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jordan1000000)
    for one of the last questions if you put beta instead of a positron would you get the mark
    If you pure beta+ then you would. A beta minus wouldn't however
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    yeah i put beta + i think you should because normally you get away for putting beta - instead of electron
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    For calculating the frequency of the wave for the chocolate question. Do we use c=f lamda? I used that and used 3x10^8 for c. But someone said that that's the speed in a vacuum so can't be used. Can someone confirm the method for me? And can someone explain what the 5 marks would be for? It seem. S the c=flamda seems a bit easy for 5 marks
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    for the chocolate bar one, i measure the entire chocolate bars length and got 14cm.
    I then basically used the idea that this a standing wave pattern with 3 antinodes with a length of 0.14m to calculate the wavelength. I then used this to calculate a freq. of 3.2x10^9Hz. Ive clearly done something wrong cos everyone got 2.9x10^9. what did i do wrong??
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    im sure you use 3x10^8 and c=f lamda and you had to measure the distance and then put it in metres. so my measurement was 118mm you had to do 118x10^-3 and then 3x10^8/ 118x10^-3 . I didn't know a full wavelength was length of all 3 dots so i divided 118/2= 59mm so thats where i messed up
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Roshan123)
    For calculating the frequency of the wave for the chocolate question. Do we use c=f lamda? I used that and used 3x10^8 for c. But someone said that that's the speed in a vacuum so can't be used. Can someone confirm the method for me? And can someone explain what the 5 marks would be for? It seem. S the c=flamda seems a bit easy for 5 marks
    you had to measure the 2 points where chocolate was melted i think it was around 6cm then convert it to m
    and just use c=flamda but i think one of them was in prefix form which is why there were like 5 marks, still that's a lot of marks for a question like that...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ishea16)
    you had to measure the 2 points where chocolate was melted i think it was around 6cm then convert it to m
    and just use c=flamda but i think one of them was in prefix form which is why there were like 5 marks, still that's a lot of marks for a question like that...
    (Thats only half a wavelength) Name:  Untitled.png
Views: 151
Size:  4.1 KB
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by marldor)
    (Thats only half a wavelength) Name:  Untitled.png
Views: 151
Size:  4.1 KB
    it was a whole wavelength I think,
    the 2 points where the chocolate melted like an interference pattern?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ishea16)
    it was a whole wavelength I think,
    the 2 points where the chocolate melted like an interference pattern?
    Its a stationary wave, the 3 points are antinodes.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LeScienceBlogger)
    I wish
    It's based on what percentage of people they want to get an A so they put the grade boundaries so like 15% of the people that sat it get As
    They might lower them as they want to make the new spec look good. And there are not as many resits.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    OMG the distance between two fringes of constructive interference is the wavelength. If anyone has CGP physics revision guide (purple book) look at page 32.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    whats the overall consensus of the paper? also, i see so many people get 2.3V across the R3 or whatever. I got that at first, then changed it because the current splits when resistors are in parrallel. So i divided by 0.33A instead to get around 4.6V.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by haes)
    Me but only because I actually worked it out using the numbers!
    I got 0.79%,but I rounded into 0.8%. Is that okay?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by zebrara)
    I got 0.79%,but I rounded into 0.8%. Is that okay?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    the smallest number of sf in that question was two, i think... so i don't know ;_;
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by haes)
    the smallest number of sf in that question was two, i think... so i don't know ;_;
    There is only a max of 2 SF questions on the paper, and it did not say to give an answer to a suitable degree of accuracy.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Will there be an unofficial mark scheme?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by imranh_100)
    Will there be an unofficial mark scheme?
    Not yet
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BotUnfair)
    Hi lots of people saying D was obviously the bungee cord. However, surely because it plastically deformed easily, it would make a rubbish bungee cord? Like imagine jumping and your cord just got longer and longer, you wouldn't be doing much bouncing
    That's what I said too. Material D had a very short elastic range and would easily plastically deform and not return to its original shape so I put C for the bungee cord?
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a.ndyb)
    That's what I said too. Material D had a very short elastic range and would easily plastically deform and not return to its original shape so I put C for the bungee cord?
    I put C for the bungee cord too but I was so confused by that 6 marker
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: April 30, 2018

2,446

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process

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.