Maths paper II

Dub973 · 08-06-2009 04:51PM

daisy17 wrote: »

Maths Higher Level, Paper 2, Question 1, B The gold ring question

(i)
4 x 3 x 2 = 24 cm3 of gold
1cm3 = €400
So 24 x 400 = €9600

(ii)
Cannot use cm3 volume as measurement is in mm.
4 cm = 40 mm
3 cm = 30 mm
2 cm = 20 mm

40 x 30 x 20 = 24000
24000 divided by 250 = 96 rings

(iii)
Cost of block = €9600
No. of rings = 96
9600 divided by 96 = €100 per ring
€120 - €100 = €20 profit

Ok I got that but can you do section A of question 1 out fully for me

sFitz · 08-06-2009 04:59PM

Namlub wrote: »

Uhh I got 9.6 rings as well, and then I just rounded that down to 9 because you can't have .6 of a ring like! Bloody hate maths...

Em, sorry but you should have rounded the 9.6 uuuup to 10, Ah well

GirlsAloud · 08-06-2009 05:01PM

sFitz wrote: »

Em, sorry but you should have rounded the 9.6 uuuup to 10, Ah well

How though??? because you can only physically have 9.6 rings..... to have a 10th ring the ring would have to be like smaller or something... xxxxx

Dub973 · 08-06-2009 05:01PM

Well can anyone show me how to do part A of question 1

RHRN · 08-06-2009 05:04PM

sFitz wrote: »

Em, sorry but you should have rounded the 9.6 uuuup to 10, Ah well

Em,no.
As you are wrong by a factor of 10, I'm assuming you didn't use 1cm(3)=1000mm(3) but 1cm(3)=100mm(3).
The answer was 96, as my maths teacher, who did the paper, said.

Dub973 · 08-06-2009 05:05PM

Anybody? Question 1 part A

RHRN · 08-06-2009 05:06PM

Dub973 wrote: »

Well can anyone show me how to do part A of question 1

You have to do 2piRsquared (curved surface area) plus piRsquared (the flat circle at the top)
To the nearest whole number I think it was..... something around 420? I don't really remember though..

EDIT@ Ah, 462 that was it. Well....I got 2 numbers right :P

daisy17 · 08-06-2009 05:09PM

Dub973 wrote: »

Ok I got that but can you do section A of question 1 out fully for me

Oh sorry I misread ur q! Well I hope someone benefits from that explanation!

Maths Higher Level, Paper 2, Question 1 A

Diameter = 14
∴ radius = 14 ÷ 2 = 7

Total Surface Area =
2∏r² + ∏r²
= (2 × 3.14 × 7²) + (3.14 × 7²)
= (2 × 3.14 × 49) + (3.14 × 49)
= 307.72 + 153.86
= 461.58
≈ 462cm²

There you go!

jclol · 08-06-2009 05:19PM

5bii i got the angles but for some insane reason i did something random to do with a over sin a = b over sin b... but i used 51.5 degrees and stated how i got it so do i still get full marks for it?(yeh i know it rounds up but still :P)

6 iv - never got percentage only got the amount xD how many marks? :x

Thought it was alright, panicked a bit during the exam but i think its a bit unfair since they have implemented so many new "practical" things this year where we have less practise :x Hoping for the A tho. :

soccymonster · 08-06-2009 05:20PM

omg i nearly died in the maths exam..
I was doing trigonometry and my answers all kept coming up as a negative which was obviously wrong as you cant have -2.567metres. I was totally sure I was using the correct method and everything. So I just went on to the next question hoping and praying that when i came back to trig that it would work out.. so when i came back to it, it still wasn't working out for me..
Until the last 15mins when I saw that my calculator was set to radians and not degrees! ugh!.. So I just wnet back and in a rush of panic did the method and answers!.. PHEW!:P

RHRN · 08-06-2009 05:22PM

jclol wrote: »

6 iv - never got percentage only got the amount xD how many marks? :x

Lose blunder of 3.. i think.

Dub973 · 08-06-2009 05:23PM

daisy17 wrote: »

Oh sorry I misread ur q! Well I hope someone benefits from that explanation!

Maths Higher Level, Paper 2, Question 1 A

Diameter = 14
∴ radius = 14 ÷ 2 = 7

Total Surface Area =
2∏r² + ∏r²
= (2 × 3.14 × 7²) + (3.14 × 7²)
= (2 × 3.14 × 49) + (3.14 × 49)
= 307.72 + 153.86
= 461.58
≈ 462cm²

There you go!

Ok question 1 part A is worth ten marks

I forgot t do the area of the disc on top. Any ideas how many marks I would get out of 10 for that?

jclol · 08-06-2009 05:24PM

RHRN wrote: »

Lose blunder of 3.. i think.

Meh hopefully... its marked on graph so.

Some strange feeling is telling me i will get something fag like 84%

To those of you concerned over 1B and the 2C graph question :

Your only penalised for your mistake once so even if you got the A part (or the line wrong) once you do the correct method with your given answer to the previous, you get full marks for the rest of the question so in most cases you'll only loose 3 marks. Usually thats how it is anyway - Same in business so dont stress tomorrow

soccymonster · 08-06-2009 05:26PM

Dub973 wrote: »

Ok question 1 part A is worth ten marks

I forgot t do the area of the disc on top. Any ideas how many marks I would get out of 10 for that?

oh s**t same!

Dub973 · 08-06-2009 05:29PM

Dub973 wrote: »

Ok question 1 part A is worth ten marks

I forgot t do the area of the disc on top. Any ideas how many marks I would get out of 10 for that?

Anybody any ideas then

jclol · 08-06-2009 05:31PM

Dub973 wrote: »

Ok question 1 part A is worth ten marks

I forgot t do the area of the disc on top. Any ideas how many marks I would get out of 10 for that?

No marks for formulae so not sure.

3 is attempt marks and since you worked out the volume then probably 5/10 since you did half of it i guess? :X

3 at worst, 5 at best.

adidas speed · 08-06-2009 05:49PM

anyone else get 10.5 for that triangle one just after that theorem???

jumpguy · 08-06-2009 05:50PM

Hey people lets relax and focus on something happier. What about CSPE, eh? That Bono one was a toughy, wasn't it?

partyatmygaff · 08-06-2009 05:55PM

adidas speed wrote: »

anyone else get 10.5 for that triangle one just after that theorem???

I wrote 10.5 and stupidly then put down 14 afterwards

Feel like such an idiot

Eoin MurMur · 08-06-2009 05:55PM

jumpguy wrote: »

Hey people lets relax and focus on something happier. What about CSPE, eh? That Bono one was a toughy, wasn't it?

That one was by far harder than the whole maths exam

fkt · 08-06-2009 06:07PM

beano-lawd wrote: »

pretty sure ¦cb¦ was 10.5

I got 10.5 too.

Ooh_Yeaah · 08-06-2009 07:24PM

lijh wrote: »

For the last 2, i got 59,000 and 24%?

Yeah me 2 ,

Namlub · 08-06-2009 08:57PM

So if I made nine cakes and had a bit left over, would that mean I had ten cakes?

DontFearThe · 08-06-2009 10:02PM

Looking at them answers,I don't think I got one of them.
Was hoping for B but now I'll be lucky to pass:(

Ambrosia · 08-06-2009 10:15PM

daisy17 wrote: »

Oh sorry I misread ur q! Well I hope someone benefits from that explanation!

Maths Higher Level, Paper 2, Question 1 A

Diameter = 14
∴ radius = 14 ÷ 2 = 7

Total Surface Area =
2∏r² + ∏r²
= (2 × 3.14 × 7²) + (3.14 × 7²)
= (2 × 3.14 × 49) + (3.14 × 49)
= 307.72 + 153.86
= 461.58
≈ 462cm²

There you go!

Hmm, where did oyu get that formula from? I had a different one Im sure in my log book, perhaps i took the wrong one, At any rate I got 308cm3. I agree with everything else but I got 19% for 6 c) 1v.

jumpguy · 09-06-2009 05:04PM

JUNIOR CERT MATHS PAPER 2: NO MAJOR problems were reported by teachers or students in paper 2.
Maria Kelly of the Association of Secondary Teachers Ireland was pleased with the ordinary exam. “The students were happy when they came out of the exam. They found the paper to be predictable – there were no surprises.”
She said that such predictability was crucial for students. “You don’t want them to be traumatised by anything.” Only one question might have caused problems, she added.
“The two right-angled triangles in question six part (iii). Better students were able to handle it, but weaker ones found two triangles in a diagram was a bit off-putting. But I’m really just looking for something to criticise.”
In the higher exam, John Brennan of the Ballinteer Institute was more circumspect, although generally satisfied with the paper.
“If you look at it, you can see they’re determined to bring the paper back to the 1960s and 1970s, which is all connected to the upcoming efforts to make maths more student-friendly.”
The wordiness of the paper flagged a potential concern. “There’s some complex English terminology on the paper and that can be a massive problem for those who don’t have it as a first language.” This may prove to be significant in the future, but overall he felt the paper was fair and that students would be happy enough.
As with previous years, part (c) of questions was used to filter out the A students from the Bs, he said. This year questions 4(c) and 5(c) were more tricky than most, and students will have been relieved to reach the more straightforward question 6.
Mr Brennan noted that geometry was becoming more popular and stressed the importance of looking at past papers; question 3(c) was previously set in the 1990s, so diligent students may have been relieved.

So overall, just a concern that maths paper 2 was abit too much English and too little maths. I'm curious with the assessment that they're trying to make maths more student-friendly. If that was the case you'd think they'd give us a nice and easy Q1 in paper 1 like they did with 2008.

And how on Earth are we going to get access to papers from the 1990's. The course even changed in 2000.

lijh · 09-06-2009 05:26PM

jumpguy wrote: »

JUNIOR CERT MATHS PAPER 2: NO MAJOR problems were reported by teachers or students in paper 2.
Maria Kelly of the Association of Secondary Teachers Ireland was pleased with the ordinary exam. “The students were happy when they came out of the exam. They found the paper to be predictable – there were no surprises.”
She said that such predictability was crucial for students. “You don’t want them to be traumatised by anything.” Only one question might have caused problems, she added.
“The two right-angled triangles in question six part (iii). Better students were able to handle it, but weaker ones found two triangles in a diagram was a bit off-putting. But I’m really just looking for something to criticise.”
In the higher exam, John Brennan of the Ballinteer Institute was more circumspect, although generally satisfied with the paper.
“If you look at it, you can see they’re determined to bring the paper back to the 1960s and 1970s, which is all connected to the upcoming efforts to make maths more student-friendly.”
The wordiness of the paper flagged a potential concern. “There’s some complex English terminology on the paper and that can be a massive problem for those who don’t have it as a first language.” This may prove to be significant in the future, but overall he felt the paper was fair and that students would be happy enough.
As with previous years, part (c) of questions was used to filter out the A students from the Bs, he said. This year questions 4(c) and 5(c) were more tricky than most, and students will have been relieved to reach the more straightforward question 6.
Mr Brennan noted that geometry was becoming more popular and stressed the importance of looking at past papers; question 3(c) was previously set in the 1990s, so diligent students may have been relieved..

They don't make the papers past 2003 available to us so how the fcuk are we supposed to be able to review them, let alone expect us to study every question in detail. Things like this really irk me. Paper 2 was simply more difficult than almost every past paper 2, and should be marked easier.

jumpguy · 09-06-2009 05:27PM

lijh wrote: »

They don't make the papers past 2003 available to us so how the fcuk are we supposed to be able to review them, let alone expect us to study every question in detail. Things like this really irk me. Paper 2 was simply more difficult than almost every past paper 2, and should be marked easier.

I know. I'm also pissed off that nobody mentioned the terrible legibility of the log tables!

claudtreacy · 09-06-2009 05:34PM

maths paper 2= horrific
all i can say

Sheepy99 · 09-06-2009 06:33PM

how did u do the jeweller one...de volume of de block was 25 cm and he needed 240 mm to make 1 ring

1 riiiinnnggggg

Maths paper II

Comments