Hardest Topic in 3unit? (2 Viewers)

[テリー]

Application of Cal.
- projectile motion
- change of rates

soo hav to take that back and say
its Induction and Binomial
well i dont rly like it and so im shit at it

 

[adz2452]

parametric equations was the hardest i found

P&C was easy and fun... i guess people found it hard, cause it's not calculus like the rest of the course.

 

[SoulSearcher]

Re: 回复: Re: Hardest Topic in 3unit?

:wave: Ahh comeon!!! But that's easy!! (Well, In my humble opinion )

I HATE Projectiles and the extremely hard Q.7 binomial theorems!! They suck
*Think CSSA trials* Last years binomial question was easy... damns, we have shit luck!!!:mad1:

Ridiculously easy :uhhuh:

 

[Trebla]

Re: 回复: Re: Hardest Topic in 3unit?

I HATE Projectiles and the extremely hard Q.7 binomial theorems!! They suck
*Think CSSA trials* Last years binomial question was easy... damns, we have shit luck!!!:mad1:

lol , I couldn't believe my luck when the binomial question was a piss easy one in like question 2 or 3 rather than a toughie in question 6 or 7.
Tough projectile motion questions are always in the exam paper somewhere around the last two questions. It often involves an unusual projectile motion situation (e.g. last year it was a projectile moving simulatanesouly with an object projected upwards and some years ago it was a projectile coming from a slanted surface). Most people tend to find these questions more challenging than the rest.

There's no escape from them, like it or not.....

 

[haji]

SHM and projectiles are the hardest.. i hate them... because there hard and i havnt learnt them yet

 

[Chinmoku03]

Re: 回复: Re: Hardest Topic in 3unit?

:wave: Ahh comeon!!! But that's easy!! (Well, In my humble opinion )

I HATE Projectiles and the extremely hard Q.7 binomial theorems!! They suck
*Think CSSA trials* Last years binomial question was easy... damns, we have shit luck!!!:mad1:

Lol, SHM was the only part of physical world calculus that I didn't get the hang of from the beginning. Could be cos my phys teacher never really talked stuff that is in depth about it o.o That, and I'm always doing something different from my maths class during classtime >.>;

Dammit, I'm depending too much on maths and phys overlapping IMO >.<;

 

[wrxsti]

me still hate permutations and combinations... ive went over the topic a million times..... i know what its about. i know how it works (i fink)... yet i always get the question wrong............ weird...................................

 

[Chinmoku03]

Quite a few teachers in my school told me that, with permutation, it's either that you get it the first time or you never get it :S They tried convincing us that it'll most likely come up in the HSC as an easy 2 marks by showing us past papers, but the binomial question in the CSSA Q7 this year looks kinda forboding and suggestive x.x;

 

[poWerdrY]

parametrics by far. all those restrictions and relating the parameters, it drove me crazy! second hardest was probably P&C

 

[wrxsti]

the weirdest thing is... my best topic is Applications of Calculus to physics world (rates + projectiles +SMH) and people are telling me thats the hardest :S:S:S:S:S:S:S iwish all 7 questions were on that alone



Miracles?

 

[Kmara2nv]

THE WHOLE FUCKIN COUSE IS HARDDDDDDDD

EXCEPT FOR INDUCTION

but im still passssing final mark is 33/50 so not to bad

but yea the whole course

i mean seriously SHM(Simple Harmonic Motion)....funny how it isnt SIMPLE

cant wait till end of the year burn ma ext 1 boooks

 

[Forbidden.]

Thank you Physics for assisting my understanding of projectile motion .

soo hav to take that back and say
its Induction and Binomial
well i dont rly like it and so im shit at it

QFT.

Ridiculously easy :uhhuh:

Says someone who did accelerated Mathematics Extension 1.

 

[salco]

i liked P & C ... and SHM

parametrics was a bit icky at first


but projectile motion i do not like!


lol there are only two of us in my ext class.... and maree does physics and i dont


stupid stupid stupid

"if you throw a ball up in the air whilst sitting in a truck... the ball moves with you"

pfft


almost as stupid as salt being 1/2 metal

how is a pretty white crystal a metal!?


my inner 3 year old is confused

 

[Buiboi]

perms and combs....even if i read and TRY to understand it, when it comes to giving me a question, i cant tell if its a permutation or a combination question!!

 

[m.incognito]

hahahaha ): well, I think they're all equally impossible.
But for fuck's sake, circle geometry is the equivalent of death.

It really is!

 

[z600]

hahahaha ): well, I think they're all equally impossible.
But for fuck's sake, circle geometry is the equivalent of death.

It really is!

circle isnt that bad, you should see the ones i get in 4U. You have to bloody add 3 or 4 circles to make it work.

Parametric is the gayest so far.

 

[iEdd]

^ What do you mean by "Maths Ext 2 (no units)" in your sig?

I find induction weird, but not so much hard.
1) Assume true for n=k.
2) Use our assumption from 1 to 'prove' that it will be true for n=k+1, which we know it will be because k can be any number in the first place.
It just seems induction doesn't really prove anything...

 

[iEdd]

Exactly my point. k can be 5, just as k+1 can be 5. k can be anything k+1 could possibly be. Therefore, it's impossible for it to be false for n=k+1

It's kinda like, what's bigger, infinity or infinity plus one?

 

[Forbidden.]

hahahaha ): well, I think they're all equally impossible.
But for fuck's sake, circle geometry is the equivalent of death.

It really is!

OMG at least someone agrees with me on Circle Geometry.

 

[Trebla]

Exactly my point. k can be 5, just as k+1 can be 5. k can be anything k+1 could possibly be. Therefore, it's impossible for it to be false for n=k+1

Remember that you are ASSUMING the statement is true for n = k. The reason you prove for n = k + 1, is to verify that if our assumption holds true then it is true for any value of k. If your assumption was wrong for n = k, then it is wrong to say the statement is true for n = k + 1. You haven't proved that it is true for n = k, you've only pretended it was true, because you need it to verify the next term.

Step 1: verify the initial case
Step 2: assume it is true for n = k
Step 3: prove it is true for n = k + 1 using the assumption

For example, if we let k be 5, then we assumed it is true for 5 (or for an arbitrary integer in a specified domain). How do we know this assumption is correct? We need to use another integer i.e. for convenience we use n = k + 1 to prove that it is true using the assumption. So it is only true for n = k + 1 when n = k holds true, if it doesn't hold then the formula may be false. However, at this stage (step 3), we haven't exactly proven the formula to be true for n = k, we've only pretended it was true.
All we've done is ASSUME the formula is true and shown that IF our assumption was true then it would be true for all integer k which is verified by step 3. If our assumption was correct, then the formula holds true for all arbitrary k. So how do we show that our assumption is correct? We use the fact that it is true for the initial case!

We've proven that the initial case (e.g. n = 1) is true in step 1. We've shown (without any assumption) that the initial case definitely works. Hence our assumption is CORRECT for ONE value of k. So if our initial case; n = k = 1 works, then the next one: n = k+1 = 2 also works, because we proved it in step 3 to work. Now let k = 2, since n = k = 2 works, then n = k + 1 = 3 works and so on.... This is why the conclusion of your induction proof is very important.