• Best of luck to the class of 2019 for their HSC exams. You got this!

BoS Maths Trials 2017 (1 Viewer)

Raeservoir

New Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2017
Messages
11
Gender
Male
HSC
2017
>dying at someone getting 8/15 congrats Calamebe
Did a little worse than I thought, 50/58 for the marks I attempted. *shrugs* thanks for your time though everyone!
 

janzrn

New Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2016
Messages
9
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
aye lmao apparently people think



rip there goes ur marks

also

a lot of people forgot that √k = 1-√h

their area function was (1-√h)² instead of (1-√h)⁴

there goes another mark

bless u janzen choi for being the one person who got my spiky volume correct <3

another kid almost got the answer correct but they forgot to double the result bc they were only finding the upper half volume...

rip in pieces

also a lot of u stoners thought the curved edges were like a square minus a circle????

can u even graphs plz
<3 back
 

Trebla

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
6,375
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Updated the solutions to cover typos that were drawn to my attention.

Also, a particular point of feedback on one of the questions I marked. Far too many students actually did not attempt Q15b)iii) which should have been a free mark, especially if you're familiar with these types of questions. A surprising number of students actually wrote the limit was 1 despite the sum showing that it is clearly larger than 1.

On the flip side it was good to see a handful of students manage to get out Q15b)i) using a direct geometric series approach (which is often quite obscure to recognise) instead of the typical reduction formula approach which also would have worked.

Another point to make is Q11d), some were using inequalities with the complex numbers themselves rather than the modulus (which is a real number). You cannot create inequalities between complex numbers! You can only create inequalities describing something like their modulus or argument (which are real values).

Also, Q11a) gg so many people got owned by that integral...
 
Last edited:

seanieg89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,671
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
I think the Q16h solution is still not quite correct.

Whilst it is true that

x-k\alpha =< x for each x, we cannot simply bound the product of factors of this form by the product of the x's, as some of these terms will in general be negative.

Another way of seeing this problem is that if we take absolute values and k\alpha happens to be close to n, then we see that in fact the early terms in this product are the largest, (but the inequality is still true because the later terms in the product are small).
 

Carrotsticks

Retired
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
9,570
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
I think the Q16h solution is still not quite correct.

Whilst it is true that

x-k\alpha =< x for each x, we cannot simply bound the product of factors of this form by the product of the x's, as some of these terms will in general be negative.

Another way of seeing this problem is that if we take absolute values and k\alpha happens to be close to n, then we see that in fact the early terms in this product are the largest, (but the inequality is still true because the later terms in the product are small).
Hey man, thanks for pointing this out. I've attached a more detailed solution. I got a bit lazy towards the end and also wanted to keep it within 2 pages, but I think this should do the trick. I was supposed to write the Q16 solutions on Sat night but I̶ ̶w̶e̶n̶t̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶E̶l̶ ̶J̶a̶n̶n̶a̶h̶ ̶a̶n̶d̶ ̶c̶h̶i̶l̶l̶e̶d̶ ̶w̶i̶t̶h̶ ̶m̶a̶t̶e̶s̶ ̶t̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶1̶a̶m̶ ̶i̶n̶s̶t̶e̶a̶d̶ I didn't have time to do them, so this one's on me.

View attachment Correction.pdf
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top