Q2q (1 Viewer)

[samwell]

How did ya'll go?
how did u guys answer the question on the standard model?

 

[Jaspal]

haha the standard model i had no idea, never even heard of it before, our teacher like didnt even teach the option...
But i did better in the option than i thought i would i guess
the mass defect took a while part i

 

[addikaye03]

How did ya'll go?
how did u guys answer the question on the standard model?

Talked about quarks-types
-charges
- sub groups-hardons, mesons, baryons
leptons- types ( electron, Muon, Tau)
Generations of partices, Then just summed it up, i only mentioned bosons in passing. U?

 

[Pwnage101]

all i got 2 say is

EASY AS ..(the option)

basically for 6 marker:

model split into force carriers (bosons) and fundamental matter particles (fermions), talked about each force and its force carrirer (& hypothesised graviton), then went on to talk about quarks, flavbous, anti quarks, --> hadrons arfe groups of quarks, baryons being groups of 3 (like proton and neutron) and mesons being groups of 2 (quark plus antiquark)

leptons - 6 types, including electron

yeh

dunno how theyre gna mark that q though - cause its so broad

 

[old.skool.kid]

Yeah i hope that you didnt have to have everything for the standard model cos it was only a 4 marker. Did you guys talk about a cyclotron and draw a picture for i)?

 

[addikaye03]

all i got 2 say is

EASY AS ..(the option)

basically for 6 marker:

model split into force carriers (bosons) and fundamental matter particles (fermions), talked about each force and its force carrirer (& hypothesised graviton), then went on to talk about quarks, flavbous, anti quarks, --> hadrons arfe groups of quarks, baryons being groups of 3 (like proton and neutron) and mesons being groups of 2 (quark plus antiquark)

leptons - 6 types, including electron

yeh

dunno how theyre gna mark that q though - cause its so broad

I only sad bsons were force carriers and went into heaps of depth with quarks and leptons, and wasn't it a 4 mark question? havent got the paper

 

[addikaye03]

Yeah i hope that you didnt have to have everything for the standard model cos it was only a 4 marker. Did you guys talk about a cyclotron and draw a picture for i)?

i did linear accelerator, but cylcotron on synchotron would have also been right

 

[samwell]

all i got 2 say is

EASY AS ..(the option)

basically for 6 marker:

model split into force carriers (bosons) and fundamental matter particles (fermions), talked about each force and its force carrirer (& hypothesised graviton), then went on to talk about quarks, flavbous, anti quarks, --> hadrons arfe groups of quarks, baryons being groups of 3 (like proton and neutron) and mesons being groups of 2 (quark plus antiquark)

leptons - 6 types, including electron

yeh

dunno how theyre gna mark that q though - cause its so broad

I did the same thing but am scared my answer just missed the requirements for 4.
I did everything u did except i didnt talk about baryons and hadrons.
I talked about antiparticles to make up for my failure to mentions the subgroups. I briefly explained quarks, leptons and force carriers.
I gave examples and defined them with a sentence of evaalution giving an advantage.

Not sure if my answer will gain thee full 4 marks though.

EDIT: The 6 marker was a gud one. Paulli and bohr were the easiest to do. the combination of ideas flows so well. Good luck peeps.

 

[sonnylongbottom]

i attempted to draw a synchotron, didnt really look well.

mass defect i think i mucked up

talked about rutherford and bohr for last 6 marker

 

[samwell]

Yeah i hope that you didnt have to have everything for the standard model cos it was only a 4 marker. Did you guys talk about a cyclotron and draw a picture for i)?

Did cyclotron from 2003 or 2004 and outlined the answer on success one. Highlighted key physical principles involved plus showed that if the particle was accelerated it increases in kinetic energy and increases the chances of bombardment.

The only thing i forgot to highlight was that if an electron is accelerated to that high velocity it reduces its debroglie's wavelength and thus can effectively examine structures.

 

[mynamewastaken]

i drew a linear accelerator, it was the easiest to draw

and i talked about bohr and de broglie. but i also slipped in planck and davisson and germer (extremely, uber briefly - like two words).

and mass defect didnt take me that long, so im worried that it extremely wrong now oh dear..

my teacher said to do q2q first, because we know it all, but in reading time i thought i knew nothing, so i did it last. turns out i knew more than i thought (i hope).

im just hoping i got b) right, im so bad at chemistry things.

and standard model, i hope i did enough, because it was only 4 marks, so i didnt explain absolutely everything in detail.

 

[Pwnage101]

I did the same thing but am scared my answer just missed the requirements for 4.
I did everything u did except i didnt talk about baryons and hadrons.
I talked about antiparticles to make up for my failure to mentions the subgroups. I briefly explained quarks, leptons and force carriers.
I gave examples and defined them with a sentence of evaalution giving an advantage.

Not sure if my answer will gain thee full 4 marks though.

EDIT: The 6 marker was a gud one. Paulli and bohr were the easiest to do. the combination of ideas flows so well. Good luck peeps.

well they cant have strict criteria for such a Q i dont think, cause they never said to specificallye xplain a section

i rekon if u mentioned quarks, leptons and bosons PLUS elaborate on 2-3 points about standard model (just about anyhting relevant, cause they never specified) thats 4 marks , cause the criteria will probs say something liek that

i disagree - bohr and de broglie FTW!!!!! lol, yeh pauli wouldve been easy, man i love quantum mechanics, if only teh physics course went depper into it, caus ethey only superficially treat pauli and heisenberg, but wheres shrodinger??? what about dirac???

lol im rambling...oh well, tis over

i started drawing a cyclotron then said 'screw it' - LINAC FTW!!!

 

[himiniji]

I forgot to add on the electrons in the mass defect question

 

[samwell]

i disagree - bohr and de broglie FTW!!!!! lol, yeh pauli wouldve been easy, man i love quantum mechanics, if only teh physics course went depper into it, caus ethey only superficially treat pauli and heisenberg, but wheres shrodinger??? what about dirac???

lol im rambling...oh well, tis over

i started drawing a cyclotron then said 'screw it' - LINAC FTW!!![/quote]

My plan has like 5 scientists and put ideas forth for all and saw that Bohr and paulli we the best. But i said that De broglie made his assumption but ended up with Bohr's second postulate.

lol i drew cyclotron and i luv Quantam physics too. probably gonna be reading it after hsc.

 

[Js^-1]

Haha for the standard model I wrote three and three quarter pages, but I probably won't get four marks lol. Linear accelerator, and then Bohr and Rutherford.

 

[Kearnzo]

I did Rutherford and de Broglie. I sorta incorporated the move from Dalton to Rutherford even though it isnt really in the course. Then connected that to Bohr and went in depth for de Broglie and its implications and connection to heaps of stuff.
Hopefully i dont get marks for not really doing it evenly.

 

[hamzie]

For the mass defect one
did anyone manage to get the exact value they said
9.007 i think they said
from my class everyone got 9.004 or 9.003 *cant remember*

 

[adnan91]

For the mass defect one
did anyone manage to get the exact value they said
9.007 i think they said
from my class everyone got 9.004 or 9.003 *cant remember*

YEAAH i got .094 not o.097 wtf was wityh that. But apparently if u add electrons then the answer comes out .097

 

[Jaspal]

Omg yeah same, i didnt get the exact answer... took me a while

 

[independantz]

YEAAH i got .094 not o.097 wtf was wityh that. But apparently if u add electrons then the answer comes out .097

You have to factor in the 6 electrons. As the carbon atom is neutral and there are 6 protns there must also be 6 electrons.