• Best of luck to the class of 2024 for their HSC exams. You got this!
    Let us know your thoughts on the HSC exams here
  • YOU can help the next generation of students in the community!
    Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
MedVision ad

HSC 2016 MX2 Marathon ADVANCED (archive) (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.

seanieg89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,662
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Re: HSC 2016 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Written as intended, in step 2 you are only dealing with finite sums and integration is not the only thing you are doing in step 4. I just didn't want to be too explicit/prescriptive about the limiting argument, as methods will vary depending on level of mathematical knowledge.

If you naively allow exchanges of infinite series and integrals, then this calculation gives you zeta(2) quite speedily. If any university students attempt this, I would hope for a little more care.
 

seanieg89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,662
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Re: HSC 2016 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

And a more algebraic question:

 
Last edited:

Sy123

This too shall pass
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
3,730
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Re: HSC 2016 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

 

seanieg89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,662
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Re: HSC 2016 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Good stuff :). (Although the denominator should be d+1 in your final answer to 4. Similarly, you have lost a constant factor on your way to the final expression in 3, although of course this does not affect the proof.)

Ps, the expression you obtained at the end of 3 is basically what you were looking for in 4, so you really didn't need to do that calculation again in 4. My intention for 3 was simply to note that any d-th degree polynomial in n (eg n^d) can be written as a linear combination of the polynomials P_k(n) for k =< d, which from the previous part can individually be written as a difference that telescopes.
 

Sy123

This too shall pass
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
3,730
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Re: HSC 2016 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Should be simple, but it does not fit in the regular marathon:

 

Paradoxica

-insert title here-
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,556
Location
Outside reality
Gender
Male
HSC
2016
Re: HSC 2016 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Should be simple, but it does not fit in the regular marathon:

For anyone attempting this, it is sufficient to do the problem for



as the pure integer part is incommensurable with the irrational parts. (recall the definition of an irrational number)
 

Sy123

This too shall pass
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
3,730
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Re: HSC 2016 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

For anyone attempting this, it is sufficient to do the problem for



as the pure integer part is incommensurable with the irrational parts. (recall the definition of an irrational number)
This defeats the purpose of the question, if someone wants to do it this way, they'll need to prove the facts that they'd need to, to use it, along the way.
 

Paradoxica

-insert title here-
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,556
Location
Outside reality
Gender
Male
HSC
2016
Re: HSC 2016 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

This defeats the purpose of the question, if someone wants to do it this way, they'll need to prove the facts that they'd need to, to use it, along the way.
what facts? the separability of the equation is obvious.

also, questions have a purpose now?

you didn't restrict the means of resolving this question.

and doing so defeats the purpose of this whole thread.
 
Last edited:

Paradoxica

-insert title here-
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,556
Location
Outside reality
Gender
Male
HSC
2016
Re: HSC 2016 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

This defeats the purpose of the question, if someone wants to do it this way, they'll need to prove the facts that they'd need to, to use it, along the way.
In any case, the question is still easy, with or without seperation of equations.

The equation rearranges by inspection into:



provided none of a or b is zero (see, told you seperation is obvious)

This would, as a consequence make √6 rational, which is false. Therefore, there does not exist a solution in the case of non-zero a,b

Then a and b are 0 forcing c to be 0.

Now go eat a snickers or something.
 

seanieg89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,662
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Re: HSC 2016 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

He isn't "restricting the means" of resolving the question, he is just saying that a solution that jumps in halfway through after an unjustified reduction of the problem is not a complete solution. (And I agree with him.)

I don't think the leap from the question to your reduction is one that high school students should make without careful justification, as I think many of them would either be unable to see why this leap is true or worse, hoodwink themselves into believing that they understand the reduction when they don't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 3)

Top