The Student Room Group

WJEC Physics Unit 4 (13/6/2024)

Thoughts?

idk i left so many parts blank i'll be lucky if i got 50%😭😭😭 the first half was good but the second half simply sucked😭 i wish i haven't thought over the mean radial velocity one and the fields questions for too long too :/

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
I went in with very low expectations and was pleasantly surprised. Certainly some nasty stuff though like the graph analysis. Thought the QER was decent and the unit I did (medical) was fairly straight forward. Big up mr Evans.
Original post by sploofd
I went in with very low expectations and was pleasantly surprised. Certainly some nasty stuff though like the graph analysis. Thought the QER was decent and the unit I did (medical) was fairly straight forward. Big up mr Evans.

yeah the QER was good and my school does AC theory so i also thought i couldnt get many marks in options but good for you :>👍🏻
Lovely paper with 1 or 2 hard ones. AC theory was beautiful
what did you guys get for the uncertainty question, i got 3.95 A something like that
Original post by kimi jdks
what did you guys get for the uncertainty question, i got 3.95 A something like that
I had (266.66666 +- 8)A
what did you get for the gradient question
Original post by staycyoungluv
Thoughts?
idk i left so many parts blank i'll be lucky if i got 50%😭😭😭 the first half was good but the second half simply sucked😭 i wish i haven't thought over the mean radial velocity one and the fields questions for too long too :/


same im not very confident in my answers really, the questions were quite strange imo
Original post by kimi jdks
what did you get for the gradient question
Which part? For the min I got -0.94. I was able to show that mean was -1 but was confused on the intercept. The agreement with equation was easy as they are set standard mark. The percentage uncertainty in gradient was 3% I know that’s correct. But I think I messed up the question Cus I just couldn’t figure out what was equivalent to the gradient. And then part 2 was easy as his graph was more suitable as the gradient is easier to find and the gradient is just Ba
Reply 9
Can anyone remember the order and marks of the questions in part A?
Original post by romanfurey
Which part? For the min I got -0.94. I was able to show that mean was -1 but was confused on the intercept. The agreement with equation was easy as they are set standard mark. The percentage uncertainty in gradient was 3% I know that’s correct. But I think I messed up the question Cus I just couldn’t figure out what was equivalent to the gradient. And then part 2 was easy as his graph was more suitable as the gradient is easier to find and the gradient is just Ba

What did you get for the speed of the partical in the fueld queation and was the resultant field approx 735kN.
Original post by fatima zzz
What did you get for the speed of the partical in the fueld queation and was the resultant field approx 735kN.

no the resultant was 1484924.24. I go the speed at x to be around 0.23ms^-1
Original post by romanfurey
Which part? For the min I got -0.94. I was able to show that mean was -1 but was confused on the intercept. The agreement with equation was easy as they are set standard mark. The percentage uncertainty in gradient was 3% I know that’s correct. But I think I messed up the question Cus I just couldn’t figure out what was equivalent to the gradient. And then part 2 was easy as his graph was more suitable as the gradient is easier to find and the gradient is just Ba

yeah for min it is -0.94
Original post by fatima zzz
What did you get for the speed of the partical in the fueld queation and was the resultant field approx 735kN.

The trick with the resultant question was each charge was 525KN yeah. So at P u had the arrow going from the posotive to the negative and then the arros also going toword the negative. So for each arrow toword the negative away from P was actually 2(525)kN. So then ur resultant was 2(1050)Cos45. Due to the 2 arrows
is grade boundary going to be lower or higher than 2023
Original post by romanfurey
The trick with the resultant question was each charge was 525KN yeah. So at P u had the arrow going from the posotive to the negative and then the arros also going toword the negative. So for each arrow toword the negative away from P was actually 2(525)kN. So then ur resultant was 2(1050)Cos45. Due to the 2 arrows

Yes but even if you make the arrows by head to tail rule you would fimd that theu turn out to be right angle triangle then just do phytagorus
Original post by fatima zzz
Yes but even if you make the arrows by head to tail rule you would fimd that theu turn out to be right angle triangle then just do phytagorus

The opposite arrows were cancelling out right.
look at this phys.png
Original post by fatima zzz
OR it can be same as the horizontal components cancel hence cos45 ×525 ×2

this is disregarding the posotive charges and is oncrrcet as the posotive aqnd negative charges both flow toword the negative charge. I know my answer is correct i went through it with my physics teacher after
Original post by romanfurey
look at this phys.png

So i did exactly the same but i got it as 525/cos45 + 525/cos45

Quick Reply