conlufc wrote: » i got 210 i think...
partyatmygaff wrote: » I got 210 as well... Therefore we can be certain we're right
Maybe_Memories wrote: » Question 2. NOTE: In part C, I don't like expressions just flying around, so i name them g, h, theta, etc...
Gumbi wrote: » -210 maybe? I think I got that. I wrote it with "x" though, even though it only asked for the coefficient, will that matter?
LilMissCiara wrote: » I got that aswell so must be right..!Not because I got it, though that would be plausible, but because we both got the same answer..! :P
PJelly wrote: » Is the answer supposed to be every number up to infinity or something? If so, I kind of see the maths behind it "It is always a factor, no matter what the power" But to ask the students to be able to grasp that having never seen it before....
randylonghorn wrote: » Stop with the over-reactions, for your own sake! Yes, by the sounds of it, it wasn't a nice paper. Therefore it was a not-nice paper for everyone. So either PII will balance it, or the marking scheme will be eased, or a combination of both. The percentage of As, Bs, etc. won't be that different this year to any other year, so it will have to be balanced out. Put it aside and go prepare for PII or whatever your next exam is. I don't mean to sound unfeeling, of course it's upsetting when you get a horrible paper, but the only thing to do is to pick yourself up and move on.
bren2001 wrote: » Im a grinds tutor and have taken a quick look at the paper. It wasn't impossible, it tested your understanding of each topic as opposed to your ability to carry out trivial equations. If your teachers didn't prepare you for understanding then thats their fault. Saying that it was one of the harder papers. In particular 1(b)(ii), 2 (c) (its easy if you get the first step), 8 (c)(ii). The rest you should of been prepared for; however, their was no easy question this year. If anyone has any specific question about the paper PM me and I will do my best to get to it. Don't bother dwelling on this if you did badly, get up and start studying tomorrow. Make sure you know all the proofs and can do your option question. Again any question for paper 2, PM me and I will try to get back to them (as I obviously have a lot of grinds over the next two days so will be on Boards infrequently)
KoolAidRelic wrote: » I honestly thought the paper was grand overall, but Q1b(ii) and 2(c)(iii) were insanely difficult and I couldn't even attempt them. By inspection I got 1(b)(ii) as n being the odd numbers though. For those citing the syllabus saying "the area of a disc isn't on it!!" http://www.education.ie/servlet/blobservlet/lc_maths_sy.pdf?language=EN page 15: functions of the form (a^2 -x^2)^1/2, it's very specifically mentioned and if you didn't do it in class, I'd be complaining about your teacher, rather than the paper.
Gumbi wrote: » The courses' points' requirements will change to reflect that, so it won't really matter. In reality, the 25 extra points is merely a psychological thing.
aranciata wrote: » Can 2(c) be proven by factorising the x^2 -6x + 13 into (x-3)^2 + (2)^2 and for (i) saying that since two positive numbers equal a positive number, f(x)>0 and for (ii) saying that since these numbers have to have a sum greater than 4, because they're being divided into 1, f(x) is always < 1 ?? worrying quite a bit about how it'll be marked, i'm fairly certain what i wrote made sense, who knows..
conlufc wrote: » haha..just because i got it dosent mean its right:P:D
gaelicman wrote: » am teaching hons maths for 38 years-believe me-this is one of the worst papers-take comfort on two fronts-the paper will be marked "easy"(not a satisfactory method as some pupils lose their nerve and almost give up) and generally the second paper won't be as bad.good luck to you all-i am also angry.
Maybe_Memories wrote: » Yeah that works! If anything this is probably the "correct" way of doing it
C14N wrote: » Yes, but that's only a small part of the disc question. It still isn't on the syllabus, most students wouldn't even know how to start it.
NotExactly wrote: » If someone gets an honor this year, takes a year out and reapplys next year to the CAO do they get an extra 25 points?
LilMissCiara wrote: » Using the solutions I went and corrected myself..! :P I got 74.6%..!
Patriciamc93 wrote: » Nope ..... you wont get any extra points...... sucks I know!
bren2001 wrote: » It wasn't impossible, it tested your understanding of each topic as opposed to your ability to carry out trivial equations. If your teachers didn't prepare you for understanding then thats their fault.
NotExactly wrote: » :eek: Are you sure 'cause one of my friends is convinced you do. He's not sure if he'll get his course and was thinking of taking a year out if he doesn't and using the extra 25 points (provided he passes the paper)
NotExactly wrote: » If so it's a shame they don't round up in the LC:rolleyes:. That's still a B3, but fairplay.
MathsManiac wrote: » That's rubbish. The question clearly states that the functions are defined on all of R other than x=0 and x=-1, which is true. The issue of an arctan of an undefined function doesn't arise, as they clearly excluded the only two values of x that would lead to that happening. It then stated that the diagrams were showing you parts of the two graphs, which is again (in the case of the correct diagram, A) true. (Showing you the x>0 portions.) There is no technical inaccuracy. If you understand what derivatives tell you about a function, you can answer it. If you don't, you can't. As other students have correctly stated, B is ruled out because the derivatives of the graphs shown in B are clearly not everywhere equal, and C is ruled out because it shows increasing functions. If you draw the graphs on wolframalpha, you'll see that the diagram is pretty accurate, in fact.
Maybe_Memories wrote: » Question 7 Note, c(iii) should not have been asked at LC level. While possible if you knew your stuff well enough, a bit too tricky in fairness..
