Re: HSC 2015 4U Marathon
Don't worry, it's not.Please dont tell me this is a typical 4u question...
Don't worry, it's not.Please dont tell me this is a typical 4u question...
Lmao I was thinking the same thingPlease dont tell me this is a typical 4u question...
I think at least part (i) could be, and maybe part (ii) if split into different partsPlease dont tell me this is a typical 4u question...
I can't do ii
Transform the inequality in part (i), as it is in the form now, it is useless for part (ii)I can't do iii and iii straightfoward what do you do for ii ?
I tried doing that but i get :Transform the inequality in part (i), as it is in the form now, it is useless for part (ii)
Rather useI tried doing that but i get :
Am i doing something wrong?
I tried doing that but i get :
Am i doing something wrong?
Yes, or a more intuitive way of looking at it:
After that all I did was:Rather use
Intuition behind this transformation is that we want an inequality with an ln() function in it because the RHS has a ln() function
Just out of curiosity, when making the substitution x=1/k, would we need to state conditions for k in order for the inequality to exist? For example, in this question, would we need to stateYes, or a more intuitive way of looking at it:
It should be a HSC standard question
Better safe than sorryJust out of curiosity, when making the substitution x=1/k, would we need to state conditions for k in order for the inequality to exist? For example, in this question, would we need to state![]()
Just out of curiosity, when making the substitution x=1/k, would we need to state conditions for k in order for the inequality to exist? For example, in this question, would we need to state![]()