Higher Level Physics

.:FuZion:.

celtic723 wrote: »

also if i'm leaving out mechanics does that mean i've no need to know any of the derivations?

Presuming they can't be asked anywhere else, no need to know em.

celtic723

.:FuZion:. wrote: »

Presuming they can't be asked anywhere else, no need to know em.

ok so:

the chances of the monochromatic derivation coming up is zilch as that exp came up last year.

the equations of motion= mechanics so that's okay.

F=Bqv **** need to know as it's outside mechanics.


any others ?

AndyWhite

celtic723 wrote: »

also if i'm leaving out mechanics does that mean i've no need to know any of the derivations?

If you have a little extra time, look over them because they could come up in question 5.

Also, does anyone know where i can find a sheet with all of the formulae on them? It would take me way too long to find them all in the book and i know i would leave something out.
Or if anyone has made one can they pm me?

Ive been told that the definition of the ampere, the wheatstone bridge and the derevation of resistors in series are likely to come up. maybe worth a look.

.:FuZion:.

celtic723 wrote: »

ok so:

the chances of the monochromatic derivation coming up is zilch as that exp came up last year.

the equations of motion= mechanics so that's okay.

F=Bqv **** need to know as it's outside mechanics.


any others ?

Resistance and all that stuff. Few derivations there.

AndyWhite

AndyWhite wrote: »

Also, does anyone know where i can find a sheet with all of the formulae on them? It would take me way too long to find them all in the book and i know i would leave something out.
Or if anyone has made one can they pm me?

http://www.thephysicsteacher.ie/leavingcrtrevision.html

Dmullar

celtic723 wrote: »

ok so:

the chances of the monochromatic derivation coming up is zilch as that exp came up last year.

the equations of motion= mechanics so that's okay.

F=Bqv **** need to know as it's outside mechanics.


any others ?

I just think that theres F=BQV and resistance in series/parallel if you exclude all of mechanics and monohromatic light.

celtic723

i've been at it all day today so i'll just get up at 7 and study the exp's definitions and 3 chapters i've left.


better look at them resistor derivations. :mad:

celtic723

Dmullar wrote: »

I just think that theres F=BQV and resistance in series/parallel if you exclude all of mechanics and monohromatic light.

that's like music to my ears.:D:D

AndyWhite

celtic723 wrote: »

i've been at it all day today so i'll just get up at 7 and study the exp's definitions and 3 chapters i've left.


better look at them resistor derivations. :mad:

Yeah, my lovely brother decided today would be a great day to invite his friends up for a session of guitar hero so ive pretty much the whole course still to cover tonight! fun times!

Im just going to do the formulas and definitions. Ill look over experiments in the morning!

likely_lass

ive been going through the exam question



the guy who writes this paper is a spa


why cant he give numbers for a graph that actually form a STRAIGHT line


& why does everything have to be 2.392490248234u029390823 x10^-672983

Dmullar

celtic723 wrote: »

better look at them resistor derivations. :mad:

They're really easy, only 3 lines each. Shouldn't take too much time!:)

celtic723

AndyWhite wrote: »

Yeah, my lovely brother decided today would be a great day to invite his friends up for a session of guitar hero so ive pretty much the whole course still to cover tonight! fun times!

Im just going to do the formulas and definitions. Ill look over experiments in the morning!

haha..still got plenty of time to go.you've the morning as well so there's a plus. the definitions are worth 7% and the exp's 40% plus if you write down the formula to the maths questions asked you've got at least another 2%. so all in all you've passed. (provided you get everthing right of course):D

celtic723

likely_lass wrote: »

ive been going through the exam question



the guy who writes this paper is a spa


why cant he give numbers for a graph that actually form a STRAIGHT line


& why does everything have to be 2.392490248234u029390823 x10^-672983

1. the guy who writes the paper has got a hard on for numbers it seems
2. the graphs are normally ***** to plot due to his use of non-round numbers so to speak
3.haha i know really pisses me off because if you type in an 8 instead of a 5 your answer is out by a bit and possible outside the range for the accepted answer.

AndyWhite

celtic723 wrote: »

haha..still got plenty of time to go.you've the morning as well so there's a plus. the definitions are worth 7% and the exp's 40% plus if you write down the formula to the maths questions asked you've got at least another 2%. so all in all you've passed. (provided you get everthing right of course):D

Yeah, the problem is im aiming for much higher than a pass!!! hehe:o

PurpleFistMixer

celtic723 wrote: »

1. the guy who writes the paper has got a hard on for numbers it seems
2. the graphs are normally ***** to plot due to his use of non-round numbers so to speak
3.haha i know really pisses me off because if you type in an 8 instead of a 5 your answer is out by a bit and possible outside the range for the accepted answer.

If you do physics in university generally (or at least in 1st year), you only take anything to 3 significant figures (that said it does depend on what sort of errors are involved in your experiment), so you don't have to type in reams and reams of numbers...

celtic723

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

If you do physics in university generally (or at least in 1st year), you only take anything to 3 significant figures (that said it does depend on what sort of errors are involved in your experiment), so you don't have to type in reams and reams of numbers...

i won't make that mistake i can assure you:pac::pac:

likely_lass

PurpleFistMixer wrote: »

If you do physics in university generally (or at least in 1st year), you only take anything to 3 significant figures (that said it does depend on what sort of errors are involved in your experiment), so you don't have to type in reams and reams of numbers...

thanks i didn't know what was acceptable in physics i know in ap maths i usually keep it to 4 significant figures, but for some reason i wasnt doing that in physics

AndyWhite

likely_lass wrote: »

thanks i didn't know what was acceptable in physics i know in ap maths i usually keep it to 4 significant figures, but for some reason i wasnt doing that in physics

Hmm, didnt realise it was 4 in applied maths. Thanks!!!

WolfForager

I know 4 of the mandatory sections... Rofl... copter.

likely_lass

AndyWhite wrote: »

Hmm, didnt realise it was 4 in applied maths. Thanks!!!

theres not a set no. but thats juts what i do and the answers always fine - applied maths is more about the method then the answer anyway



111 hours till applied 12 pm on the 19th of june avoiding study is great

Zonda999

Lads, i'm more or less leaving out mechanics out in terms of the long questions. That is i'm scarcely looking at the chapters on circular motion and SHM. Is it fairly safe to assume that again 2 electricity questions will come up again?

I'm plannin to do fairly well in this one and my real strengths are electricity(Static, current and induction), modern physics and the nuclear option. I'm OK at stuff like light and waves but ideally i'd like to localise my long questions to those three topics, and Q5, i always seem to find that alright!

celtic723

Zonda999 wrote: »

Lads, i'm more or less leaving out mechanics out in terms of the long questions. That is i'm scarcely looking at the chapters on circular motion and SHM. Is it fairly safe to assume that again 2 electricity questions will come up again?

I'm plannin to do fairly well in this one and my real strengths are electricity(Static, current and induction), modern physics and the nuclear option. I'm OK at stuff like light and waves but ideally i'd like to localise my long questions to those three topics, and Q5, i always seem to find that alright!

you'll be perfectly fine as that's what i'm doing as wel. we should be okay tbh.

Zonda999

Yea, i guess. Theyre still complaining that very few do electricity but i've always found it fine tbh!

AndyWhite

Zonda999 wrote: »

Yea, i guess. Theyre still complaining that very few do electricity but i've always found it fine tbh!

I think teh main problem people have with electricity is that when you get somethin wrong it still usually looks right. with most other sections it can be pretty clear from your answer if youve done somethin wrong along the way. thats for the mathematical questions anyway.

Zonda999

I think that just comes down to knowing how to do the question in the first place. One definitely just has to learn how to do a certain question, and stick to it.

Isaac702

Ok I should be back into the habit of answering these questions correctly again.

As long as the questions that suit me come up I should be no problem. (ie. Not Radioactivity). Although the option topic I studied in school was Particle Physics. I have found that I am better at answering questions on Applied Electricity.

This is going to be my last exam so hopefully I can end the experience well.

Davidius

I've completely neglected the experiments. God dammit.

On the plus side, only three more exams.

Only three.

:pac:

WolfForager

Is anyone else completly ****ed???!!

If i pass i wil dance on someones face.

Jam-Fly

WolfForager wrote: »

Is anyone else completly ****ed???!!

If i pass i wil dance on someones face.

oh jesus yes. I've done most of mechanics and that's it. I'll report back soon...


(could be looking at an all-nighter here)

english4490

WolfForager wrote: »

Is anyone else completly ****ed???!!

If i pass i wil dance on someones face.

I will be very surprised if I pass! Find this a horrible subject and wish I never took it on! I'm going to stay up till half 2 or 3 an sleep for a while and up again!