New log tables

pathway33 · 02-09-2009 4:50pm #1

Anybody see the new mathematics tables yet? They are supposed to be bigger than the old ones and contain more physics formula. Is this true?

english4490 · 02-09-2009 5:02pm

pathway33 wrote: »

Anybody see the new mathematics tables yet? They are supposed to be bigger than the old ones and contain more physics formula. Is this true?

yep saw them the other day in easons! they also have a few economic formulae too!!

Fad · 02-09-2009 5:20pm

I posted a few scans, they are ridiculous.....I could well be in a different college if I had them.....

RexMundi · 02-09-2009 5:45pm

Fad wrote: »

I posted a few scans, they are ridiculous.....I could well be in a different college if I had them.....

Not that much help to be honest.. saves us from learning a few formulae I suppose but they really shoudl be committed to memory from repitition at this stage..

Blerdiii · 02-09-2009 6:01pm

will we have those in the lleaving cert?

pathway33 · 02-09-2009 6:08pm

Blerdiii wrote: »

will we have those in the lleaving cert?

State Examinations Commission

Cor na Madadh, Baile Átha Luain, Co. na hIarmhí

Cornamaddy, Athlone, Co. Westmeath

S.60/09

To: Management Authorities of Second-Level Schools

Re: Formulae and Tables booklet

Dear Principal,

I refer to the State Examinations Commission Circular No. S.56/09 (copy enclosed) and I now enclose three copies of the new Formulae and Tables booklet. This new booklet will be used in the 2010 examinations and thereafter, and the older Mathematics Tables booklet will no longer be provided.

leesmom · 02-09-2009 6:19pm

i didnt even use the tables in the exams, well i did do ordinary level, but yeah its about time they made the print bigger:rolleyes:

Xtina!! · 02-09-2009 7:18pm

This new tables book cotains most, if not all the formulas for HL maths, and includes physics formulas aswell.
Seeing as more formulas are being given without having to remember them, they are bound to increase the difficulty of the maths and physics exams. Probably not this year, but in the examinations to come, thats my theory anyway.
I personally prefered the old tables book. All you had to do was open page 9 and you kept it on that page for most of the exam.
There are way too many pages in this new one, and people will be going back and forward trying to find formulas.
However, they had to change the old one, could bearly read the areas and volumes pages.

jumpguy · 02-09-2009 7:46pm

For the Junior Cert, the log tables were grand, all you had to was open page 9. It's only a pity the thing was illegible. The tables page are useless altogether, we never even learned to use it. New tables are more modern and are hopefully alot more legible.

blubloblu · 02-09-2009 7:48pm

The legibility is much better. Better hold onto the old logbook for nostalgia.

MathsManiac · 02-09-2009 8:27pm

It's intriguing that people still refer to this as "the log book" and "the log tables". It hasn't been called that officially for donkeys' years. The new one doesn't even have any log tables in it! But I'm sure it'll still be called "the new log book"!

Anyway, how many people here know how to use log tables to calculate stuff, I wonder? Or a slide rule, for that matter?

RexMundi · 02-09-2009 8:29pm

MathsManiac wrote: »

It's intriguing that people still refer to this as "the log book" and "the log tables". It hasn't been called that officially for donkeys' years. The new one doesn't even have any log tables in it! But I'm sure it'll still be called "the new log book"!

Anyway, how many people here know how to use log tables to calculate stuff, I wonder? Or a slide rule, for that matter?

Well, I can use log tables!

dannydfc · 02-09-2009 8:31pm

yeah , the teacher said it today.
Really good help, so it is.

MathsManiac · 02-09-2009 8:40pm

RexMundi wrote: »

Well, I can use log tables!

Well, you can, obviously, being kingoftheworld!

(Maybe one is giving one's age away by admitting to being able to calculate with log tables!)

Lawliet · 02-09-2009 8:42pm

blubloblu wrote: »

The legibility is much better.

Good! I was sick of squinting to see if it was looking at an 8 or a 3

RexMundi · 02-09-2009 8:46pm

MathsManiac wrote: »

Well, you can, obviously, being kingoftheworld!

(Maybe one is giving one's age away by admitting to being able to calculate with log tables!)

Yeah, perhaps not... I'm sitting the Leaving this year

02-09-2009 8:46pm

MathsManiac wrote: »

It's intriguing that people still refer to this as "the log book" and "the log tables". It hasn't been called that officially for donkeys' years. The new one doesn't even have any log tables in it! But I'm sure it'll still be called "the new log book"!

Anyway, how many people here know how to use log tables to calculate stuff, I wonder? Or a slide rule, for that matter?

A quite-old teacher showed us in 2nd or 3rd year, it was always handy to know how to use them when you didn't have a calculator.

swatch · 02-09-2009 9:03pm

pathway33 wrote: »

Anybody see the new mathematics tables yet? They are supposed to be bigger than the old ones and contain more physics formula. Is this true?

Yupp this is very true! Our maths teacher came into our 6th year maths class beaming yesterday going on about how she didn't even know they were coming out and what a great surprise it was

!

doug.irl.92 · 02-09-2009 9:30pm

Yep we were told about them today! You get pretty much everything in them now (the very difficult co-ordinate geometry formulae!!!).

We can also read them now!!

RexMundi · 02-09-2009 9:35pm

doug.irl.92 wrote: »

Yep we were told about them today! You get pretty much everything in them now (the very difficult co-ordinate geometry formulae!!!).

We can also read them now!!

I have yet to have the pleasure of viewing these wondrous new Tables Books. Do they have the co-ordinate geometry of the circle formulae?

If so, I am definately acing maths!

sheep-go-baa · 02-09-2009 9:36pm

They seem really good especially for physics, but it'll definitely take getting used to. I had the same log tables since first year!

rainbowtrout · 02-09-2009 10:41pm

jumpguy wrote: »

For the Junior Cert, the log tables were grand, all you had to was open page 9. It's only a pity the thing was illegible. The tables page are useless altogether, we never even learned to use it. New tables are more modern and are hopefully alot more legible.

That's probably because you had a calculator, when I did my JC in 94 (JC only came in 1992) calculators were not allowed!!!:eek: All the middle pages in my log tables are well worn and marks from calculating squares, roots, sin, cos, tan etc. All done with the log tables. Some would think it's an obsolete skill but it did make us use our brains more.

RexMundi · 02-09-2009 10:50pm

rainbowtrout wrote: »

That's probably because you had a calculator, when I did my JC in 94 (JC only came in 1992) calculators were not allowed!!!:eek: All the middle pages in my log tables are well worn and marks from calculating squares, roots, sin, cos, tan etc. All done with the log tables. Some would think it's an obsolete skill but it did make us use our brains more.

As someone with experience of both methods (I regularly forget my calculator for exams...) I can tell you that using such methods does not require any extra brain power, just time to waste in a tedious and rather mindane way. Using a calculator in fact frees the brain for use on more... challenging things.

rainbowtrout · 02-09-2009 10:56pm

RexMundi wrote: »

As someone with experience of both methods (I regularly forget my calculator for exams...) I can tell you that using such methods does not require any extra brain power, just time to waste in a tedious and rather mindane way. Using a calculator in fact frees the brain for use on more... challenging things.

Well I just find from teaching now that some students who have not been shown how to use log tables and do everything with a calculator are lost when they have no calculator and are handed a pen and paper....

Fad · 02-09-2009 11:14pm

I did my JC in '06 (Maybe '07, I just got home........) and I was taught how to use the log table (Why? I still dont know)

li-evo7 · 02-09-2009 11:18pm

I am repeating this year and doing chemistry which needs use of log tables.Will I be alright with the old ones or will I have to buy the new ones??

Fad · 02-09-2009 11:21pm

li-evo7 wrote: »

I am repeating this year and doing chemistry which needs use of log tables.Will I be alright with the old ones or will I have to buy the new ones??

There's the pH formula in the new ones (Dunno what else), pick up a new one.

eVeNtInE · 02-09-2009 11:22pm

This post has been deleted.

Aoibheann · 02-09-2009 11:30pm

This makes me irrationally sad..

There was plenty in the old log tables! Although tbh the only thing I really used my log tables for was the probability option question. But still! I like being able to say "back in my day things were more difficult.. we walked to school for 10 miles in the snow, we used basic log tables.." *shakes fist*.. which was.. *ahem* 2007. >_>

Pygmalion · 03-09-2009 7:06am

Are there scans of them up or something? I might pick one up anyway if it's cheap, there's a maths module on the CA course in DCU I think, at the very least I might run into some maths related problem in future.

Actually no, that's not the reason... I just want one.

wexhurdler · 03-09-2009 8:33am

RexMundi wrote: »

Do they have the co-ordinate geometry of the circle formulae?

If so, I am definately acing maths!

Could you not just learn them

RexMundi · 03-09-2009 3:46pm

wexhurdler wrote: »

Could you not just learn them

Well, if i don't have to learn them then there is nothing to learn in the entire section. All I'll need is a bit of practice and that's 1/6 of the exam sorted.

MathsManiac · 03-09-2009 9:10pm

li-evo7 wrote: »

I am repeating this year and doing chemistry which needs use of log tables.Will I be alright with the old ones or will I have to buy the new ones??

You should get the new ones to get used to them. The old ones won't be available in the exam next year, and you're not allowed bring your own tables in.

MathsManiac · 03-09-2009 9:11pm

RexMundi wrote: »

I have yet to have the pleasure of viewing these wondrous new Tables Books. Do they have the co-ordinate geometry of the circle formulae?

...

Yes.

eamonn4321 · 23-09-2009 8:45pm

I noticed on P23 that the set of natural number is shown as {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ...}.

Seems pretty likely to cause confusion (the fact that 0 is omitted).

I know there are 2 acceptable definitions of the set N, one with 0 and the other without, but the definition including 0 is used in the secondary school curriculum, from first year onwards. The fact that 0 is included in N is usually emphasised to make sure the students don't forget it.

Was this considered before they settled on this definition in the new 'log book'?

I wonder will the marking schemes allow answers based on either definition to be considered acceptable?

jumpguy · 23-09-2009 9:00pm

eamonn4321 wrote: »

I noticed on P23 that the set of natural number is shown as {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ...}.

Seems pretty likely to cause confusion (the fact that 0 is omitted).

I know there are 2 acceptable definitions of the set N, one with 0 and the other without, but the definition including 0 is used in the secondary school curriculum, from first year onwards. The fact that 0 is included in N is usually emphasised to make sure the students don't forget it.

Was this considered before they settled on this definition in the new 'log book'?

I wonder will the marking schemes allow answers based on either definition to be considered acceptable?

The marking scheme will probably adjust, although I doubt anyone would look up the log tables to find out what the set of natural numbers are, they're the simplest ones to remember.

If you have to look up natural numbers...it's probably not gonna be the log tables that will dictate your maths grade.

eamonn4321 · 23-09-2009 9:23pm

Yeap true but could be the difference betweem a D and an E for someone struggling at JC Ordinary level.

sheep-go-baa · 23-09-2009 9:29pm

Could be some trouble though in the exams when you usually get marks for writing down any formulas, you can't really get marks if you only got the formula out of the log tables, can you?

jumpguy · 23-09-2009 9:32pm

RexMundi wrote: »

Well, if i don't have to learn them then there is nothing to learn in the entire section. All I'll need is a bit of practice and that's 1/6 of the exam sorted.

I'd advise you to get the log tables and make sure EVERYTHING you need is there. The log tables don't have absolutely everything done. Also, it'd make it easier on the day as you'd be familiar with them.

eamonn4321 wrote: »

Yeap true but could be the difference betweem a D and an E for someone struggling at JC Ordinary level.

Hmm true I guess...it could effect a tiny, tiny proportion (people who are stuggling at JC OL maths and don't know what natural numbers are) of people. I'm sure the marking scheme will allow for both answers. With the maths tables about to become such an integral part of exams, I'm sure most teachers worth their salt will ask their students to buy the tables and familiarize themselves, now that they've become much more relevant to the exams.

eamonn4321 · 23-09-2009 9:49pm

Ah, its more a point of practicality - why couldn't they go with the definition that most of us (maybe 99% at a guess) learned instead of the other one?

0 is included in the set N in all of the most popular books (AFAIK) for the whole secondary curriculum e.g Tests and Texts, New Concise Maths, Discovering Maths.

Now the 'log book' directly contradicts that.

Cue lots of kids getting confused / becoming distrustful of what is in the log book, when in fact it is full of very valuable info.

Just not very practical as I say.

Anyway, that 'error' jumped out at me, hopefully there aren't others.

I love the fact that you can actually read the mensuration formulae - always a plus.

Loads of other nice info that will be fantastic help for those of a mind to familiarise themselves with it, which every student should unless they are completely lazy, ignorant or just thick

.

blubloblu · 23-09-2009 11:22pm

Anyone spot the obvious mistake on the unit circle?

eamonn4321 · 23-09-2009 11:30pm

Dear oh dear - not good.

Wonder how many more errors are in there, if one had time to check it.

Wonder how big the print run is........:rolleyes:

Delta Kilo · 24-09-2009 4:31pm

RexMundi wrote: »

Well, if i don't have to learn them then there is nothing to learn in the entire section. All I'll need is a bit of practice and that's 1/6 of the exam sorted.

Hmmm, you have 2 papers and you have to answer 6 questions on each so that is a total of 12 questions, which means that you have 1/12 of the exam sorted.

What was that you said about acing maths again?:p

jdc123 · 24-09-2009 5:24pm

Don't mean to rain on everyone's parade but we had an maths inspection this week in school and the inspector said that she doesn't think the new logs will be used in 2010 and that the wont be brought in for maths until the new maths curriculum comes in. She said that it isn't definite yet but that it is very unlikely that they will be used!:(:mad::mad::(:mad::(:mad::(:mad: :mad::mad::mad:

TheDonMan · 24-09-2009 6:54pm

jdc123 wrote: »

Don't mean to rain on everyone's parade but we had an maths inspection this week in school and the inspector said that she doesn't think the new logs will be used in 2010 and that the wont be brought in for maths until the new maths curriculum comes in. She said that it isn't definite yet but that it is very unlikely that they will be used!:(:mad::mad::(:mad::(:mad::(:mad: :mad::mad::mad:

The whole reason they have bought them out is to be used, the old ones aren't even being sold any more AFIK. So rest assured, the new log tables will be available in the 2010 LC.

MathsManiac wrote: »

It's intriguing that people still refer to this as "the log book" and "the log tables". It hasn't been called that officially for donkeys' years. The new one doesn't even have any log tables in it! But I'm sure it'll still be called "the new log book"!

Anyway, how many people here know how to use log tables to calculate stuff, I wonder? Or a slide rule, for that matter?

Same reason why people still call aluminium foil "tin foil", old habits die hard I guess.

Fad · 24-09-2009 7:09pm

jdc123 wrote: »

Don't mean to rain on everyone's parade but we had an maths inspection this week in school and the inspector said that she doesn't think the new logs will be used in 2010 and that the wont be brought in for maths until the new maths curriculum comes in. She said that it isn't definite yet but that it is very unlikely that they will be used!:(:mad::mad::(:mad::(:mad::(:mad: :mad::mad::mad:

They wouldnt be in every single book shop if they werent being rolled out immediately.

MathsManiac · 24-09-2009 11:38pm

jdc123 wrote: »

Don't mean to rain on everyone's parade but we had an maths inspection this week in school and the inspector said that she doesn't think the new logs will be used in 2010 and that the wont be brought in for maths until the new maths curriculum comes in. She said that it isn't definite yet but that it is very unlikely that they will be used!:(:mad::mad::(:mad::(:mad::(:mad: :mad::mad::mad:

This circular on the SEC website says, in the first paragraph, that they are in for 2010:
http://www.examinations.ie/secmain/S_56_09_New_Booklet_of_Formulae_and_Tables_for_use_in_State_Examinations_Commission_2010.pdf

CosmicLove · 25-09-2009 4:52pm

I'm delighted there's more chemistry formulae included in 'em, aswell as the extra for HL maths
My teacher (who teaches both subjects) was sooo excited telling us.

jumpguy · 25-09-2009 9:26pm

blubloblu wrote: »

Anyone spot the obvious mistake on the unit circle?

Now THAT'S a big mistake. Is it the (0,1) part of the circle is labelled (1,0)? That's pretty bad.

JSK 252 · 25-09-2009 10:49pm

Fad wrote: »

There's the pH formula in the new ones (Dunno what else), pick up a new one.

Thats rediculous, its a formula which you should know already!

This new log book is really going to dumb down the exams.

Bonkers_xOx · 27-09-2009 5:05pm

Exciting times!

New log tables

Comments