QUANTA - QUARKS... wtf?!?! (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter EXA BOY
- Start date
BlackJack
Vertigo!
I did see it in the syllabus (section 5, 3rd down of first coloumn), that's why I studied for it.
Dumbarse
Member
31c) (ii) calculate the wavelength of the next line in the balmer series
did anyone else use the balmer equation and put nf =2 and ni = 7
??
and what scientist suggested the existence of the neutrino one??
did anyone else use the balmer equation and put nf =2 and ni = 7
??
and what scientist suggested the existence of the neutrino one??
BlackJack
Vertigo!
I believe it's Pauli. And 2 and 7.
(btw, Lake, start studying for chem, ya bum!
where's your answer to my q? Everyone plz ignore this statement )
(btw, Lake, start studying for chem, ya bum!
where's your answer to my q? Everyone plz ignore this statement )Coming ... (Ignore this too)Originally posted by BlackJack
I believe it's Pauli. And 2 and 7.
(btw, Lake, start studying for chem, ya bum!
Dumbarse
Member
yeh i said Pauli, i wasnt sure if that was right, sweeeet
and i also did 2 and 7. very sweeet
and i also did 2 and 7. very sweeet
31 (b) was pretty hard, i couldnt actually use the graph to figure out the answers, as well as the other stuff, but i got Pauli which is okay. The 7 mark question was ok, it was a question that obviosly tested those that studied most of the stuff, not jus the basics i think. Although i thought that it didnt have that much info on neutron scattering in Excel, but there was plenty to talk about on the 'other' stuff, like Electron microscopes, NAA, particle accelerators etc. So it should be pretty easy to get at least 4-5 marks from there. The Quanta and Quarks questions were pretty straight forward, nothing that was really hard, except 31(b) hehe.
But upon looking at The age of Silica and stuff, i figured that was also pretty easy, even though i havent learnt or read anything on it. Ive even had a friend who did that instead of Q &Q cause it was easier, and i cant blame him.
But upon looking at The age of Silica and stuff, i figured that was also pretty easy, even though i havent learnt or read anything on it. Ive even had a friend who did that instead of Q &Q cause it was easier, and i cant blame him.
Jan Kott
New Member
what wavelength did you end up with for Balmer?
macca202
Member
Im so bitching about the elective.
How easy was the common sections!!!! i havent goten any wrong there, i think. i dont think i got more than 14/25 for last section so im looking at a max of like 90%.
how did you know to use n=2 and n=7? i had no idea, i didn't even know where the next would be, like left or right. How did you now which line was n=1 etc? alpha means fuck all to me. so vague. i wrote more than i do in english essays for the 7 marker!!(3 pages), even though i only knew 2 sentences that were true?
How can we complain, do u think they scale or modify the eelectives to have all the same marks? or maybe they will alter the marks according to how the ppl in that elective did in the common parts, i dunno. the other electives looked pretty simple, i mean the 7 marker for the age of silicon was just about transistors!!!! wt?
sooooo unfair.
How easy was the common sections!!!! i havent goten any wrong there, i think. i dont think i got more than 14/25 for last section so im looking at a max of like 90%.
how did you know to use n=2 and n=7? i had no idea, i didn't even know where the next would be, like left or right. How did you now which line was n=1 etc? alpha means fuck all to me. so vague. i wrote more than i do in english essays for the 7 marker!!(3 pages), even though i only knew 2 sentences that were true?
How can we complain, do u think they scale or modify the eelectives to have all the same marks? or maybe they will alter the marks according to how the ppl in that elective did in the common parts, i dunno. the other electives looked pretty simple, i mean the 7 marker for the age of silicon was just about transistors!!!! wt?
sooooo unfair.
hey..... simple question, maybe i didnt learn it AGAIN, but how have electron microscopes increased our understanding of MATTER?? isnt matter the quarks, lepton, hadrons, bosons etc?? i thought electron microscopes were so we can study viruses.... i dint think that they can be used to study the funamental structure of matter.... i thought that qn meant talk about particle accelerators and how the models of matter have changed since rutherfords 1st model of the atom
31
a)i) Nickel crystal scattering experiment. Xrays and electrons - finding both interference patterns are the same.
ii) Bohrs model was based on Rutherfords --> Rutherfords was criticised as accelerating charged particles would emit EMR.
If electrons were standing waves they would exist in discrete levels and would not orbit in the conventional sense.
b)i) Pauli hypotheised it. Fermi confirmed it.
ii) (Bi + e)-Po = the mass defect in amu.
iii) According to E-mc^2, the mass has been converted into an anti neutrino.
c)i) Balmer series corresponded with Bohr model (energy levels corresspond etc)
ii) H (alpha) is n=3, thus the new energy level is n=7
using Rydbergs equation, you get about 397nm wavelength
d)
.Neutron scattering allowed discovery of many sub-atomic particles.
.Discovery of quark
.Neutrons are ideal for studying subatomic particles, as they are neutral, avoiding electrostatic stuff. They also have a small wavelength and when accelerated to high speeds have extremly small wavelengths.
.Neutron scattering used to find structure of hydrogen bonds --> which feature in organic chemistry.
.Another process used is, particle accelerators.
.These accelerate particles to enormous speeds and collide them with other particles, allowing scientists to view what they were made of.
.thats all i remember from the test
a)i) Nickel crystal scattering experiment. Xrays and electrons - finding both interference patterns are the same.
ii) Bohrs model was based on Rutherfords --> Rutherfords was criticised as accelerating charged particles would emit EMR.
If electrons were standing waves they would exist in discrete levels and would not orbit in the conventional sense.
b)i) Pauli hypotheised it. Fermi confirmed it.
ii) (Bi + e)-Po = the mass defect in amu.
iii) According to E-mc^2, the mass has been converted into an anti neutrino.
c)i) Balmer series corresponded with Bohr model (energy levels corresspond etc)
ii) H (alpha) is n=3, thus the new energy level is n=7
using Rydbergs equation, you get about 397nm wavelength
d)
.Neutron scattering allowed discovery of many sub-atomic particles.
.Discovery of quark
.Neutrons are ideal for studying subatomic particles, as they are neutral, avoiding electrostatic stuff. They also have a small wavelength and when accelerated to high speeds have extremly small wavelengths.
.Neutron scattering used to find structure of hydrogen bonds --> which feature in organic chemistry.
.Another process used is, particle accelerators.
.These accelerate particles to enormous speeds and collide them with other particles, allowing scientists to view what they were made of.
.thats all i remember from the test
insearchofmarks
New Member
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2002
- Messages
- 3
el stupido
yeah, this was a rediculously hard option. at our school, half did medical and half did quanta. i was in the quanta obviously. i reckon i would have been better off answering the medical. it was rediculously easier than quanta!!!
dont know what is wrong with board of studies. oh yeah, now i remember, they got nothing better to do than make up things to fuck us up!!!
yeah, this was a rediculously hard option. at our school, half did medical and half did quanta. i was in the quanta obviously. i reckon i would have been better off answering the medical. it was rediculously easier than quanta!!!
dont know what is wrong with board of studies. oh yeah, now i remember, they got nothing better to do than make up things to fuck us up!!!
Yeah i wasnt too happy with Quanta option
I thought I was prepared for it, then I get that bitch (b)iii and the damn neutron scattering. lucky I read over it yesterday so I was able to BS a bit for a couple of marks...i also talked about particle accelerators increasing our understanding of matter, so hopefully I can gain at least 4 for that q....
but personally, I reckon I f*cked the option...the rest of the exam was surprisingly easy, but the option has basically got me worried..
I thought I was prepared for it, then I get that bitch (b)iii and the damn neutron scattering. lucky I read over it yesterday so I was able to BS a bit for a couple of marks...i also talked about particle accelerators increasing our understanding of matter, so hopefully I can gain at least 4 for that q....
but personally, I reckon I f*cked the option...the rest of the exam was surprisingly easy, but the option has basically got me worried..
kini mini
Active Member
I'm basically with you on this - I reckon I was doing alright all the way through until the option where some questions made me wonder if I'd missed something in the syllabus. I made up some BS about the energy distribution (put all the pertinent things in as well but it didn't feel sufficient
), and I knew from the reading time that I wasn't sure about the 7 marker.Discuss how neutron scattering and ONE other process HAVE BEEN USED to further our understanding of the structure of matter
'Have been' seemed to imply to me that they wanted examples to illustrate this. I didn't know any, I don't remember every reading any though there could well be one buried in the recesses of Jacaranda and Marsden. Did this occur to anyone else?
I was happy until the damn quanta to quarks section!!
I thought the syllabus was "WHY are neutrons used in neturon scattering" not WHAT IS NEUTRON SCATTERING AND HOW... damn Board of Studies.
Also, I still don't understand why the balmer series thingy was 2 and 7.
Yeah - I pretty much stuffed up most of that section come to think of it.
-- I'm just happy that the Motors and Generators section was short!!
I thought the syllabus was "WHY are neutrons used in neturon scattering" not WHAT IS NEUTRON SCATTERING AND HOW... damn Board of Studies.
Also, I still don't understand why the balmer series thingy was 2 and 7.
Yeah - I pretty much stuffed up most of that section come to think of it.
-- I'm just happy that the Motors and Generators section was short!!