Search results

Definitely wrong. Multiplying both sides by (t-1) shows that the LHS would be a (n+1) degree polynomial, while the RHS would be a n degree polynomial. If you sub in 1 the LHS would be (t+1) -> n is the degree of the highest power of t in the LHS.

A more simple method is to consider a linear equation that passes through (0,r) and (h,R). If you rotate it about the x-axis, with boundaries of 0 and h, it will produce the frustum with the dimensions and variables required. Use the cartesian equation of a line to show that the function would...

Yeah pretty much. I used a calculation to show that the illustrated velocity is nowhere near what the actual orbital velocity would be, and then a sentence to consolidate that the hypothesis is wrong

So in the exam I considered talking about speed... but the question very specifically asked about the path not the motion. Will I lose a mark for that? Also aren't charge and direction the same linked concept? I discussed that X and Y had to be positively charged and Z negative by RHR.

9:25am, give or take a few miniutes /s In all seriousness, they usually take 2 business days to upload it officially to the nesa website. Though you can look for shady versions on the conquer server.

POV: kurt when he hears that his students cannot keep up *** On a serious note, it's not healthy to disregard stress. I don't believe that primary school students should have academic anxiety for anything at all - not for naplan, the selective test or anything in spite of what parents say...

I think they should make ext 1 a 100 mark, 3-hour paper to address the concerns. There is no way you can test the scope of 12 topics effectively in 70 marks, or provide a range of easy to difficult questions, or sustain interesting and sophisticated questions with only 60 marks of short answer.

I think students anticipate the last question too highly - or you could say that nesa puts in too little effort to make something sophisticated. In 4u, most people expect the very last question to be from one of the hardest sections of the syllabus e.g. reduction formulae, de movire's theorem...

I did the BOP one and it wasn't too bad. There's been lots of interesting developments in trade and artofsmart had made a video on it so 25 and 26 were comparable in difficulty (at least for me).

I imagine the marking notes for this year will comment that very few people did q28. I did anticipate that development would be an essay question, but I think the overwhelming majority (myself included) were attracted to the straightforwardness of inflation effects.

Here's mc solns according to some person on conquer server

MC is probably the easiest since 2013. Short answer was a bit interesting in some places but not too obscure. And the essays were pretty much what you would expect if you saw what hadn't been tested in the past few years. Thank god they didn't pull a hard exam on us like what they did in maths.

Which one? I'm guessing it was the section 3 qs because q27 was free marks.

Hoping for macroeconomic policy, external stability or inflation/unemployment/eco growth.

Wait a second, aren't hsc marks determined from both raw external and moderated internal marks? So there isn't a one-to-one relationship between raw and hsc marks. That would account for the example above i.e. maybe the 49/70 aligning to 95 was the result of a very good internal mark obtained...

Interesting use of the word 'warned'. Compared to the rest of the syllabus, this is actually a pretty good deal for the long responses.

The topics you'll need for the extension levels of math are; Sequences and series Graphs and equations (curve sketching is eh, I don't think you'll need it neccessarily but it might help to know) Maximisation and minimisation All 2u integration -> possibly the most important thing u need to...

You would have to neglect the force of air resistance and friction... and gravity... and the constancy of time.

Assume the result is true. \Rightarrow E = mc^2 Multiplying both sides by a factor of 0 yields 0 = 0 which is evidently true Thus, the assumption is true

It is not part of the further graphs topic set of transformations in ext 1, if that is what you meant.