The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

Higher Physics 2018-19

Scroll to see replies

Did anyone else get 256kg for the mass of the satellite?
And also did others get 7.91 x 10^- something for the energy after the MeV bits? And 3.69 x 10^-13 J for the energy of the photon?
Yep!
Original post by Andrew.Macleod7
Did anyone else get 256kg for the mass of the satellite?

I can't remember but those numbers look kind of familiar so possibly, but I'm not sure, sorry.
Original post by Andrew.Macleod7
And also did others get 7.91 x 10^- something for the energy after the MeV bits? And 3.69 x 10^-13 J for the energy of the photon?
Original post by Andrew.Macleod7
Did anyone else get 256kg for the mass of the satellite?


I got that mate
I did the exact same thing mate
Original post by whatever32
no. i got negative up till 0.5 then positive up till 0.77 then back to negative again for the rest. when going down acceleration is negative due to gravity and when going up it's positive because the ball is bouncy
Has anybody seen/got the answers for paper 2?
I’m not sure anyone can bear to work through 42 pages of Higher Physics again 😂
Original post by jackgregory14
Has anybody seen/got the answers for paper 2?
Original post by FlightVelocity
I’m not sure anyone can bear to work through 42 pages of Higher Physics again 😂


Original post by jackgregory14
Has anybody seen/got the answers for paper 2?

Tomctutor has started uploading them in this thread- looks like they're uploading each question as they complete it :smile:
but its also decelerating, so would it not stay under the axis?
Original post by laura.mckay
but its also decelerating, so would it not stay under the axis?

yea that's what I did
Original post by nat5dawg
yea that's what I did


Acceleration is a vector in 2D as this problem they show velocities down = -ve, so acceleration (slope of v(t)) is also negative-positive-negative:proud:
thinking about it more, i think what happens is it's negative at all the points except when it's specifically bouncing, so there's a very thin line around the point where it's bouncing where it's positive acceleration, but everywhere else is -9.8
Original post by laura.mckay
but its also decelerating, so would it not stay under the axis?
Original post by tomctutor
Acceleration is a vector in 2D as this problem they show velocities down = -ve, so acceleration (slope of v(t)) is also negative-positive-negative:proud:


Ahhh right I see! Btw see if I put ms^-2 for the unit for gravitational field strength rather then N/kg - is that wrong?
g can be Nkg−1Nkg^{-1} or ms−2ms^{-2} no matter, but I think I stated it correct units!
Original post by tomctutor
g can be Nkg−1Nkg^{-1} or ms−2ms^{-2} no matter, but I think I stated it correct units!


okay cool thanks :biggrin:
Original post by Andrew.Macleod7
Did anyone else get 256kg for the mass of the satellite?
Yeah I did thought it was quite a small mass so wasn’t sure
I got this as well but i thought i'd done it wrong too because it seemed small for a satellite
Original post by Lewis72737
Yeah I did thought it was quite a small mass so wasn’t sure
What did everyone say about how the force of attractions would be for the second satellite, what did everyone get for the height ball was thrown from and did the diamond sparkle more
I said the force of attraction would be the same as the enlarge/decrease of numbers in the equation cancelled out. I said the moissanite sparkled more, just looked it up on google and says moissanite sparkles more than diamonds as it has a higher refractive index

https://www.google.com/search?ei=SzPdXOWdMvaS1fAP0oyDiAU&q=does+moissanite+sparkle+like+a+diamond&oq=does+moissanite+sparkl&gs_l=psy-ab.1.1.0l2j0i22i30l2.2799.9090..10467...0.0..0.234.2088.17j4j1......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i71j35i39j0i67j0i131.AC1lkLFLOb0
Original post by amber100
What did everyone say about how the force of attractions would be for the second satellite, what did everyone get for the height ball was thrown from and did the diamond sparkle more
(edited 4 years ago)
I said the same thing too, just wanted to check, thanks!
Original post by jamesmcfadyen4
I said the force of attraction would be the same as the enlarge/decrease of numbers in the equation cancelled out. I said the moissanite sparkled more, just looked it up on google and says moissanite sparkles more than diamonds as it has a higher refractive index

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you