Physics/New log tables

CantStandMeNow

Do ye think that they will make any difference in regards the nature of the questions? Apparently the SEC won't tell teachers if there will changes to the way questions or asked and stuff. Obviously they won't accept the formulae as definitons anymore but will there be any more changes do ye think?

**Timbuk2**

I reckon they will ask more derivations, as these require you to actually know the formula rather than just test your ability to find it in the tables. This is only a guess though.

stainluss

CantStandMeNow wrote: »

Obviously they won't accept the formulae as definitons anymore but will there be any more changes do ye think?

Did they actually say this??

CantStandMeNow

stainluss wrote: »

Did they actually say this??

Not that I know of but it would be pretty crazy if they still accepted them.. Unfair on the students who actually learned their definitions aswell.. Yeah I agree about the derivations alright!

ch252

http://www.examinations.ie/schools/S_60_09_Information_re_Formulae_and_Booklet_Tables.pdf
Theres the info on them, looks like they wont change things until 2011?

Does that mean we won't be given constants such as acc. due to gravity or mass of an electron on the paper if they're in the tables?

Or is that the case from 2011 onwards? I liked having the constants...they were like clues to what formula you should be using.

CantStandMeNow

Deleted User wrote: »

Does that mean we won't be given constants such as acc. due to gravity or mass of an electron on the paper if they're in the tables?

Or is that the case from 2011 onwards? I liked having the constants...they were like clues to what formula you should be using.

Yeah think that's just from 2011 onwards.. Hopefully:p ... It said they won't provide information available in the tables from 2011 onwards so I presume they will this year so!

**Timbuk2**

I hope so! It would be very difficult without the constants! The tables give them in great detail (well over 7 places of decimals in some cases, I think) so you would be unsure which to use.

At least when you were doing a heat question, and the bottom of a question said Specific Latent Heat Capacity of Water = 4200 J/kg, so you knew to use that, rather than 4180 J/kg

stainluss

CantStandMeNow wrote: »

Yeah think that's just from 2011 onwards.. Hopefully:p ... It said they won't provide information available in the tables from 2011 onwards so I presume they will this year so!

**Timbuk2** wrote: »

I hope so! It would be very difficult without the constants! The tables give them in great detail (well over 7 places of decimals in some cases, I think) so you would be unsure which to use.

At least when you were doing a heat question, and the bottom of a question said Specific Latent Heat Capacity of Water = 4200 J/kg, so you knew to use that, rather than 4180 J/kg

We were told we are the last LC to be given them

CantStandMeNow

"This means that, in 2010 only, candidates will have access to the information concerned in both the new [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman][FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]Formulae and Tables [/FONT][/FONT]booklet and on the examination paper. "

Nice One:D

Still don't know if the questions we'll get asked will be different though!

gant0

More than likely there will be no changes to the papers.We only got these log tables this year because it was a mistake.They weren't ment to come out till next year so we're at a huge advantage.

MathsManiac

gant0 wrote: »

...We only got these log tables this year because it was a mistake.They weren't ment to come out till next year so we're at a huge advantage.

Where did you get that idea from? It's pretty clear from the circulars from the SEC that they were brought out exactly as planned.

First, they sent a letter to the schools in May 2009, telling them that the tables would be coming out for June 2010 and explaining the implications for the exams. They also said in that letter that, in order to avoid confusion for the 2009 candidates, the tables wouldn't be released before the end of June that year.

Then they released them during that summer, as they said they would.

Then they sent a letter to schools in September, reminding them about all this, enclosing copies, and giving some further clarification about the implications for the exams.

The only thing that I can see that was possibly unplanned was the issuing of the slightly amended version in December. (I say "possibly", because maybe they planned to do that anyway - they could hardly have expected to bring out a first edition of such a long technical publication without it containing at least a few misprints or errors.)

By the way, the thing that might throw people a bit if they're not expecting it is the slight changes of notation (capital letters for points and all that). The notation for vectors in maths, while it makes perfect sense, might bother some people if they're not used to it. See the example on the top of page 3 in this letter: http://www.examinations.ie/schools/S_60_09_Information_re_Formulae_and_Booklet_Tables.pdf)

gant0

MathsManiac wrote: »

Where did you get that idea from?

Well at the start of the year my physics or maths teacher hadn't even heard of the new tables and the school definatly didn't get any letters and my physics grinds teacher has told us that it was a mistake that they released them this year and I trust her as she knows what she's talking about.

shizle

CantStandMeNow wrote: »

Not that I know of but it would be pretty crazy if they still accepted them.. Unfair on the students who actually learned their definitions aswell..

My physics teacher is a Leaving Cert examiner and at their conference last year, he asked if formulae would still be accepted for definitions and if we would still get marks for writing down the relevant equation.

The answer was yes in both cases (we'll get marks for finding the correct formula, as it will obviously be a huge struggle to look up the table of contents :rolleyes: ) Of course, you will have to specify what the various unknowns represents, however I think that has always been the case.

MathsManiac

gant0 wrote: »

Well at the start of the year my physics or maths teacher hadn't even heard of the new tables and the school definatly didn't get any letters and my physics grinds teacher has told us that it was a mistake that they released them this year and I trust her as she knows what she's talking about.

The fact that your physics or maths teachers hadn't read the letter doesn't mean that the school didn't get it. My experience tells me that letters that arrive in schools very often don't get passed on to everyone for whom they are relevant. (I used to be a teacher.)

I know that maths examiners at the examining conferences last year were aware of the arrival of the new tables for 2010. Shizle's message indicates that the physics examiners were also aware of it last year. These facts, plus the fact that the letter I referred to is on the exams commission's website and is dated May 2009, indicates to me that all of this happened according to a planned schedule, (even if it was a plan that your teachers were not aware of).

leavingcert

This is unbelieveable news!
I actually couldn't be happier right now.
I'm doing Physics Chemistry and honours maths so it's such an advantage!

But on the down side i dont think i'd be able to repeat.. there'd be so much to learn!