The 2004 HSC - Mathematics Paper (3 Viewers)

[TJ297]

What I did was find the probability of you getting higher that 45 which ended up to be:

(1/6 x 1/6) x (1/6 x 1/6) x 2 - 5x5 then 5x5 or 5x5 then 5x4 is the only way you could get higher than 45 so I then went 1-(that answer) which ended up to be 647/648. Of course I could be wrong but thats the way I did it.

Thats waht i got...

 

[Willmaker]

Thats waht i got...

*starts feeling happy*

 

[ShatteredDreams]

9cii: No, you needed to acceleration to cancel out + with - , thus the time when velocity hit 0 again, and that was at 4=t

Forget what I said about me being good at maths.

Kinda worked out I was crap at maths when I don't even understand the question AFTER it's explained to me.

 

[adrianp]

FUCKERN SHITHOUSE
I HATE MATHS AND I HATE THE BOS SO FUCK THEM ALL!

phew.. never have to do this shit again!

 

[Managore]

I'm a bad explainer. acm put it better. The answer, I promise you, is 4 (I put 2...)

 

[jhakka]

What I did was find the probability of you getting higher that 45 which ended up to be:

(1/6 x 1/6) x (1/6 x 1/6) x 2 - 5x5 then 5x5 or 5x5 then 5x4 is the only way you could get higher than 45 so I then went 1-(that answer) which ended up to be 647/648. Of course I could be wrong but thats the way I did it.

Ok, I got that wrong.

 

[Managore]

http://au.geocities.com/designingevolution/3.JPG
http://au.geocities.com/designingevolution/4.JPG
http://au.geocities.com/designingevolution/5.JPG
http://au.geocities.com/designingevolution/6.JPG
http://au.geocities.com/designingevolution/7.JPG
http://au.geocities.com/designingevolution/8.JPG
http://au.geocities.com/designingevolution/9.JPG
http://au.geocities.com/designingevolution/10.JPG

(THESE DONT WORK, GEOCITIES CAPPED MY ACCOUNT AND WILL GIVE YOU A STUPID ERROR MESSAGE)

 

[acmilan]

Ok, I got that wrong.

I think i did too. i got something very close but not exact, i think something like 1291/1296

 

[The Bograt]

I think i did too. i got something very close but not exact, i think something like 1291/1296

yeah I squared 36 to get the bottom number

i got 1295/1296

 

[SpaceMonkey]

Q's 1-7 were pretty good... not as difficult as I expected but 8, 9, 10 was bleh...

 

[SPED]

It is 2 because that wil be a max stat pt in velocity and a max stat pt in velocity means it is a max distance in displacement rite?

 

[Dr Go-tech]

9cii: No, you needed to acceleration to cancel out + with - , thus the time when velocity hit 0 again, and that was at 4=t

The particle is at a velocity of 0 at 3 though, isn't it?? I put 3, thinking this was right, coz after 3 the displacement decreases, therefore it travels back to the origin... doesn't it???

Overall, shit exam. Aced first 7, but where the hell did 8, 9, and 10 come from?? they were REDICULOUSLY hard!!! Much harder than previous years' exams

 

[ShatteredDreams]

I'm a bad explainer. acm put it better. The answer, I promise you, is 4 (I put 2...)

Ahh wait, now I get it.
At the point x=4, the Area above and below the x-axis are equal and that's when Velocity = 0, right?

Bloody hell. I thought I was so clever for working out it was "3".

 

[miffytoki]

What I did was find the probability of you getting higher that 45 which ended up to be:

(1/6 x 1/6) x (1/6 x 1/6) x 2 - 5x5 then 5x5 or 5x5 then 5x4 is the only way you could get higher than 45 so I then went 1-(that answer) which ended up to be 647/648. Of course I could be wrong but thats the way I did it.

i can't remember what i got...but i did it the same way and got some awful number like that....i actually wrote out all the possible solutions in a grid

 

[Shimtek]

im pretty happy with it, if i get 70% ill be w00ting
but i reckon i'll get in the 60's

answered atleast 80% of it and most of them very confidently

I guess it helps to be relaxed a little which i was although i didnt forget a bit of my cram from last night especially vertex etc.

the vertex/directrix question is the one thats really gonna kill me

 

[superbird]

lol i didnt study vertex's or directix's

 

[matt_f64]

yeah that wasnt too bad, wat u all complaining about it was easier then last years test. most of it was REALLY easy with the exception of a few trickier ones near the end. i answered it all except the last part of the last question.. 10.b) iv. which was only 2 marks so other then that im confident at getting most right... i hope!

 

[yulia]

That was an eassssssy paper.

If I had studied, I would've passed.

Oh wells.

 

[Shimtek]

Ahh wait, now I get it.
At the point x=4, the Area above and below the x-axis are equal and that's when Velocity = 0, right?

Bloody hell. I thought I was so clever for working out it was "3".

it was 4

cos0 = 1 , 1+3(1) = 4

if i remember correctly

i dont know if i got this one right though

i ended up crap answers for pi/2 and pi like 2.99 for each and in the end skipped part of it, picked up most of the marks though i reckon

 

[matt_f64]

lol i didnt study vertex's or directix's

u didnt need to study the directrix stuff. it gave u the coordinates of C down the bottom, so u just use the y coordinate of C and then that line thru there is the directrix.... very simple.