was quanta stuffed or just me?? (1 Viewer)

[dnt stop runnin]

was the quanta to quarks section hard or was it just me that foudn it hard??
wrote like 4-5 pages for that 8 mark question....dnt ask about wat

 

[Takuya]

No way, it was easier than any of the past papers' questions on Q2Q. Much much easier. The 8 mark question was basically:

Reactor components, give some info on nuclear fission (i.e. use the equation from before), then show how they control reaction (i.e. absorb all but one neutron per atom of u-235)

 

[new1]

i agree, it was one of the easiest quanta sections i have seen. There was suprisingly little on the evolution of the structure of matter (first 3 marks) and the question on standard model, they basically gave us the answer.

 

[Bannanafish]

not even talk about debroglies matter waves or heisenburg, pauli, or anything else a bit harder

 

[Takuya]

Originally posted by Bannanafish
not even talk about debroglies matter waves or heisenburg, pauli, or anything else a bit harder

Exactly. They're the most interesting things... About how DeBroglie showed Bohr's 3rd postulate, how the Rydberg equation was formulated from Bohr's postulates, etc...

I was all ready for a standard model question, or even something on Heisenberg and Pauli.

 

[+:: $i[Q]u3 ::+]

it was surprisingly.. (and perhaps disappointingly) easy.
Basic, straightforward, straight out of what we knew. =P
not even a mass defect question.

 

[Bannanafish]

or a balmer series equation

 

[walla]

yep i agree
even needed to explain the basics of a fission reactor TWICE

 

[mikehunt]

Originally posted by walla
yep i agree
even needed to explain the basics of a fission reactor TWICE

same here, pretty good hey?

i thought it was really really easy

the whole exam was easy

 

[deweydude]

Originally posted by +:: $i[Q]u3 ::+
not even a mass defect question.

I believe the word is deficit not defect. And yeah, it was a little lacking in the variety side of things.

 

[mikehunt]

Originally posted by deweydude
I believe the word is deficit not defect. And yeah, it was a little lacking in the variety side of things.

hate to tell you, but its defect

 

[walla]

really is defect

 

[Bannanafish]

heheh yeah

i reckon it was TOO easy, people will get bunched up and 1 mark may be dragged out to 5

 

[SoCal]

Far out, would you believe it if I told you I picked the wrong naturally occurring transmutation of Uranium AND the transmutation that has a practicle applicatin. I simply can't believe it, how stupid!

 

[Kent_Cadarn]

Yeah q2q was easy as, for the 8 marker wrote 1.5 pages

 

[+Po1ntDeXt3r+]

Deceptively easy? that 3 marker for the proton and neutron was a lil tooo easy... or am i being paranoid?

 

[Mathematician]

..

I think the whole exam was a waste. They put weird q's. I wanted the how stuff works stuff. Like Ac Motors , Dc .. Ac vs Dc, Silicon vs Germanium, Safe reentry..

With these weird q's i found it hard to express my knowledge.. and what if u misread a q like the solenoid... 4marks (i didnt but i dont think my answer was good enough)..


Going onto Quanta to Quarks..

The first q that stumped me was that q about the radio isotope application.. Are they restricting us i thought to Uranium or Thorium isotope.. But then i read it again and it application of reaction(e.g. alpha decay) .. so i was a little pleased. I could use the alpha decay of Americium as an example..

The next annoying thing was the gravitational and electrostatic force contribution thing.

I started using F(e) = kq(1).q(2)/d^2 but didnt know the value of the cohnstant(not in data sheet ) and was lost for a it and then realised we gotta use the graphs . phew .. took a lot of time though.

The other problem i had with constants was that shit about the wire dipped in salt solution.(Core topic)

using F/l = kI(1).I(2)/d
I didnt know constant and it wasnt on DATA SHEET ---> VERY MAD HERE.


The 8 MaRKER was a pest ..For no reason i drew a crappy diagram of a nuclear reactor.. and i think they REQUIRED u to talk about the Supercritical mass for the bomb for a bit..

I said the word fission 500 times in my response.. i was so crazy.. and found myself saying crappy explanations for Moderators, Control rods...

Wanna do it again

And my worst q in test was the projectile q (which i thought would be good for me) im too crap at looking at shit like graphs and concentrating.. I COULDNT Do much at ALL for this q and left it to come back and didnt.. But theres more theres this other q... I think ive talked enough SORRY LOL

 

[d00d]

hey is 2 naturally occuring and 3 practical?

 

[Mathematician]

..

Yeah 1 and 3 are artificially induced or whatever and 2 is a natural alpha decay due to normal instability ( excessive neutrons to protons if u wanna say)

 

[walla]

Originally posted by +Po1ntDeXt3r+
Deceptively easy? that 3 marker for the proton and neutron was a lil tooo easy... or am i being paranoid?

i thought this too
because compare needs to point out similarities and differences, i said both had three quarks and that each quark was one of the three colours. then obviously just spoke about charges and which quarks (uud and udd) were in each. not much else you can do