When it says use relevant projectile motion equations from the formula sheet but there are none
2016 HSC (Accelerated)
// 2 Unit Maths // Studies of Religion 1 //
2017 HSC
// Biology // Physics // Maths Extension 1 // Maths Extension 2 // English Advanced //
If I am a conic section, then my e = ∞
Just so we don't have this discussion in the future, my definition of the natural numbers includes 0.
Thank you for all those attended . It was great to see so many people keen on doing the BoS trial papers this year. Hopefully the papers were challenging and interesting for you.
Hopefully the rather unfortunate disruptions we had in the afternoon sessions weren't too much of an issue (if anything, maybe they bought some more thinking time?). We hope you can appreciate the difficult decisions we had to make given the already complex logistical arrangements.
Massive thanks to Carrotsticks, Paradoxica, jjlim7, strawberrye, ml125 and the UNSW Mining Engineering staff for helping to supervise the exams.
The papers are attached below. Please note that they have incorporated some mostly minor feedback (e.g. on wording) so they may differ slightly to the hard copy you have.
Also keen to hear your thoughts on both the papers. Were there any questions you particularly liked? How was the difficulty in general and in comparison to previous years (if you attempted those)?
Haha good choice of Q16 .
Will the solutions also be posted here?
Last edited by pikachu975; 10 Oct 2017 at 1:04 AM.
2016 HSC (Accelerated)
// 2 Unit Maths // Studies of Religion 1 //
2017 HSC
// Biology // Physics // Maths Extension 1 // Maths Extension 2 // English Advanced //
Lol wow that's new. Proving e is transcendental.
Just a couple of minor comments on Q16 to the examiners:
1. You introduce the notion of a prime, but none of its properties besides its definition. In several steps of the proof, we prove that integers are indivisible by p essentially because they are the product of integers indivisible by p. Whilst this is a pretty basic number theoretic fact (p|xy => p|x or p|y), it isn't a trivial consequence of the provided definition of the prime number. (It is more work to establish than several steps of the proof that were worth marks). Did you expect students to know this already or prove it? Or did you have something else in mind? Given that NT is not strictly syllabus, it is my feeling that this should have been provided as a black-box fact like you did for the mean value theorem.
2. (V. minor) The lack of a visible k-dependence in the notation of \alpha could have been confusing to students. Of course, since you are led through the proof step by step, this does not lead to any illegal math so no biggie.
3. Good work as always giving up your time to organise this for the students, I hope everyone got something out of it!
Did 4U only - it was challenging as expected (duh!) but I still enjoyed it. q16 looked quite interesting, and while I didn't get to do more than one mark of it, I'm looking forward to trying it at some future point, without time pressure. The rest were, to me, a good mix of doable to borderline impossible, which is fine with me for a paper intended like this.
Cauchy-Schwarz inequality was a nice touch :P
To me, the paper was more difficult than the past papers, but then again it could just be the time pressure under exam conditions that I might not have at home. Overall great paper and very engaging questions!
tf I couldn't even do the 1st integration question in 4u...guess i'm fked for the hsc
Atar aim: *
2016 HSC (Accelerated)
// 2 Unit Maths // Studies of Religion 1 //
2017 HSC
// Biology // Physics // Maths Extension 1 // Maths Extension 2 // English Advanced //
I feel like that integral has been on the marathon somewhere before...
...feel like I might've messed up though
If you use t-results while letting t=tanx, it's a trivial question. Can't believe I missed it in the exam ...
Last question was pretty well-written in my opinion. It felt like I was really doing real analysis.
Outside of Q16, what questions did you find the most challenging?
legit only one person got the spiky volumes question correct
I feel attacked
If I am a conic section, then my e = ∞
Just so we don't have this discussion in the future, my definition of the natural numbers includes 0.
2016 HSC (Accelerated)
// 2 Unit Maths // Studies of Religion 1 //
2017 HSC
// Biology // Physics // Maths Extension 1 // Maths Extension 2 // English Advanced //
2016 HSC (Accelerated)
// 2 Unit Maths // Studies of Religion 1 //
2017 HSC
// Biology // Physics // Maths Extension 1 // Maths Extension 2 // English Advanced //
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks