Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 02:40:08 pm
1)E 2) C 3)D 4)A 5)E 6)A 7)D 8)D 9)D 10)C 11)D 12)B 13)C 14)D 15)E 16)C 17)B 18)E 19)B 20)B 21)D 22)C
ANALYSIS SECTION
1)a)i) 0.1678
ii) 0.2936
iii) 0.214
b)i) 0.2951
ii) 0.2849
c)i) Negative quasi-parabolic curve over [2,6] (somewhat skewed to the right), maximum turning point at (4.31,0.38)
(Best to draw a line along the x-axis to represent the '0 elsewhere')
ii) 0.1211
iii) 4.1333 hours
2)a)i) -7/a
ii) sqrt(a) [positive root as a>1]
b)i) 7
ii) 1/e
c)i) A=(7/2a)(a^2-1)
ii) (7a)/2-7/(2a)=7 => a=1+sqrt(2)
iii) Given integral is less than area found in c)i) = 7, => given integral < 7, => a<e
3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correct
b) 3.6 hrs > 3.19 hrs
c) Show that T = 2[(sqrt(9+x^2)/5)+(9-x)/13]
d) dT/dx=2[x/(5sqrt(9+x^2) - 2/13] = 0 at x=1.25, sign diagram to justify minimum
e) 2.49 hrs < 3.19 hrs
f) A at (0,16), C at (1,24)
g) z=16/d + 8, no need for domain ['equation', not 'function']
h) Six days: z(0)=16, z increases by 8 every day => z(1)=24, z(2)=32, z(3)=40, z(4)=48, z(5)=54>50 => Need to take antidote on six days (Initially I read this incorrectly - five days will probably not be accepted, unless perhaps you have a strong argument that conveys your logic [-1])
4)a)i) f'(pi/2)=1
ii) m[normal] = -1 => y-1=-(x-pi/2) => y=-x + (pi/2 + 1)
b) {-pi/2, pi/2, 3pi/2, 5pi/2} ([-1] again for me =P)
c) a=1-pi/2
d)i) 0.5[cos(x/2)+sec^2(x/2)]
ii) x=2pi
e) Graph of h(x), asymptotes at x=-pi, x=pi, x=3pi
y-intercept at (0,2), stationary point of inflexion at (2pi,2)
Post by: Jeffree on November 10, 2008, 02:54:42 pm
Post by: Jeffree on November 10, 2008, 02:56:08 pm
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 02:57:17 pm
Post by: danieltennis on November 10, 2008, 02:58:09 pm
Post by: We Want Peace. on November 10, 2008, 03:13:26 pm
Damn, I got 4 days for 3h.
reckon i got 5 more marks wrong
Post by: sisqo1111 on November 10, 2008, 03:20:41 pm
Damn, I got 4 days for 3h.
me too :(
Post by: ilovevce on November 10, 2008, 03:30:55 pm
Post by: Nelle91 on November 10, 2008, 03:39:49 pm
Post by: matteh on November 10, 2008, 03:42:40 pm
Quote
ii) 1/eare you sure? i have 1/(e^7)
Post by: Nelle91 on November 10, 2008, 03:44:05 pm
Post by: zzdfa on November 10, 2008, 03:49:43 pm
it's pi/2, 3pi/2, 5pi/2 and -pi/2
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 03:50:41 pm
That's probably 78/80 for me then :P
Post by: the_head on November 10, 2008, 03:52:25 pm
Me to lol.Damn, I got 4 days for 3h.
me too :(
I fail at life. I got 40/40 on exam 1 and maybe 60/80 on exam 2 and here is everyone saying it was piss easy
Post by: methodsboy on November 10, 2008, 03:53:59 pm
im confused...
did normal methods (non-CAS) have different questions?
cause for the analysis prob one i got 0.8000
Post by: danieltennis on November 10, 2008, 03:54:54 pm
huh?
im confused...
did normal methods (non-CAS) have different questions?
cause for the analysis prob one i got 0.8000
Same.
I got 80% for the percentage one.
Post by: Nelle91 on November 10, 2008, 03:55:38 pm
Post by: Collin Li on November 10, 2008, 03:55:41 pm
huh?
im confused...
did normal methods (non-CAS) have different questions?
cause for the analysis prob one i got 0.8000
Yeah, CAS and non-CAS have slightly different questions.
Post by: pfftlah on November 10, 2008, 03:56:36 pm
are these answers to the cas exam? the other thread isn't cas exam answers is it?
*lost*
Post by: Collin Li on November 10, 2008, 03:58:25 pm
yeh im confused too!
are these answers to the cas exam? the other thread isn't cas exam answers is it?
*lost*
I don't think anyone's put up CAS solutions...
Post by: zzdfa on November 10, 2008, 04:01:48 pm
Should curve CD have a domain of [1,2)
fuckfuckfuck i hope not. i remember reading that question in reading time and telling myself to remember to put a domain on it. but the question asked for an 'equation' not 'function', Can/do equations have domains?
Post by: Nelle91 on November 10, 2008, 04:04:10 pm
Post by: jajab on November 10, 2008, 04:07:15 pm
i know its a simple calculation but im not getting '7/a'
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 04:08:29 pm
And, I'm not sure about the domain for curve CD...I didn't write one.
Post by: orsel on November 10, 2008, 04:10:35 pm
Quote
3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 04:14:33 pm
Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Post by: Collin Li on November 10, 2008, 04:15:30 pm
can someone please explain the gradient in 2(a)?
i know its a simple calculation but im not getting '7/a'
Divide by
Post by: Nelle91 on November 10, 2008, 04:15:47 pm
Post by: Collin Li on November 10, 2008, 04:16:37 pm
do you get follow through marks in methods? because in 2ci i had did 7-1 instead of 7-7, so i had the same as synesthetic except plus, but my answer in 2cii was still right if i had +6?
You will get 'method marks', but you will lose the 'answer marks' they give, for any incorrect answers, I believe.
Post by: jajab on November 10, 2008, 04:20:36 pm
Post by: Nelle91 on November 10, 2008, 04:21:54 pm
Post by: Collin Li on November 10, 2008, 04:25:49 pm
what would dropping 8 marks over both exams give you for a study score
40+, I think.
Post by: Nelle91 on November 10, 2008, 04:26:14 pm
Post by: Nelle91 on November 10, 2008, 04:27:21 pm
what would dropping 8 marks over both exams give you for a study score
40+, I think.
awesome
Post by: zzdfa on November 10, 2008, 04:27:27 pm
O and for 1c would the graph need to include 0 when not between 2 and 6yes , it says in the last 2 examiner's reports.
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 04:29:08 pm
huh?
im confused...
did normal methods (non-CAS) have different questions?
cause for the analysis prob one i got 0.8000
Same.
I got 80% for the percentage one.
She scores 8 goals on her first 8 attempts with p=0.8 => Pr(X=8) = (8C8)(0.8)^8(0.2)^0 = 0.8^8 = 0.1678 to four decimal places.
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 04:29:46 pm
O and for 1c would the graph need to include 0 when not between 2 and 6
Yeah you have a point...I drew a pencil line along the x-axis to represent that.
Post by: orsel on November 10, 2008, 04:30:17 pm
Yes, but to refer again to the rabbits example; even if you do not have 2 rabbits, you'd round to whatever they ask you.Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Its a debate of semantics I suppose. Meh, not gonna bother continuing this then.
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 04:33:56 pm
Yes, but to refer again to the rabbits example; even if you do not have 2 rabbits, you'd round to whatever they ask you.Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Its a debate of semantics I suppose. Meh, not gonna bother continuing this then.
Yeah, I agree. I was furiously debating with myself whether to change it or not as the examiner came up the row to collect my paper ;D
Post by: anonymous12 on November 10, 2008, 04:37:20 pm
Post by: fredrick on November 10, 2008, 04:38:20 pm
Post by: Butler on November 10, 2008, 04:41:08 pm
Yes, but to refer again to the rabbits example; even if you do not have 2 rabbits, you'd round to whatever they ask you.Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Its a debate of semantics I suppose. Meh, not gonna bother continuing this then.
Yeah, I agree. I was furiously debating with myself whether to change it or not as the examiner came up the row to collect my paper ;D
Yes, I was too. I ended up deciding on 191, because it takes the reality of the scenario into account. If the question had asked "Rounded to the nearest minute, how long until the concentration is 100" perhaps 192 would have been better, but it specifically asks how long he has to get the antidote before he dies. I hope VCAA see it our way.
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 04:45:39 pm
where is the answer to Q1)cii)??????
c)i) Negative quasi-parabolic curve over [2,6] (somewhat skewed to the right), maximum turning point at (4.31,0.38)
(Best to draw a line along the x-axis to represent the '0 elsewhere')
ii) 0.1211
Yes, but to refer again to the rabbits example; even if you do not have 2 rabbits, you'd round to whatever they ask you.Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Its a debate of semantics I suppose. Meh, not gonna bother continuing this then.
Yeah, I agree. I was furiously debating with myself whether to change it or not as the examiner came up the row to collect my paper ;D
Yes, I was too. I ended up deciding on 191, because it takes the reality of the scenario into account. If the question had asked "Rounded to the nearest minute, how long until the concentration is 100" perhaps 192 would have been better, but it specifically asks how long he has to get the antidote before he dies. I hope VCAA see it our way.
They may accept both - depending on the way you structured your argument. They should allow some leeway given the ambiguity of the question stem...
Post by: trinon on November 10, 2008, 04:48:34 pm
Your solutions are gay. Wheres Mao?
http://vcenotes.com/forum/index.php/topic,7394.0.html
Mine are there.
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 04:49:29 pm
where is the answer to Q1)cii)??????
Yeah I forgot to include it, mean = 4.1333 hours (updated OP)
Post by: anonymous12 on November 10, 2008, 05:18:10 pm
Your solutions are gay. Wheres Mao?http://vcenotes.com/forum/index.php/topic,7394.0.html
Mine are there.
Thanks man.
Post by: nathankb on November 10, 2008, 05:37:26 pm
Post by: flubbles on November 10, 2008, 05:42:03 pm
can someone please explain q1aiii? thanks:)
Quote from: 1ciiiWhat is the probability, correct to three decimal places, that her first 4 attempts at scoring a goal are successful, given that exactly 6 of her first 8 attempts at scoring a goal in a match are successful?
Combinatorics solution:
- Given exactly 6 successes == given exactly 2 failures
- Our probability space has these 2 failures anywhere in the 8 attempts, so 8 choices for the first fail * 7 choices for the second fail = 56
- The event we want has these 2 failures anywhere in the last 4 attempts, so 4 choices for the first fail * 3 choices for the second fail = 12
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 05:46:54 pm
She shoots for goal 8 times;
Split the problem into two scenarios: the first four shots at goal[1], then the next four[2].
[1] Probability she scores each of the first four times
n=4, r=4, p=0.8 => Pr(X=4) = (4C4)(0.8)^4(0.2)^0 = 0.8^4 = 0.4096
[2] Probability she scores two of the next four times
n=4, r=2, p=0.8 => Pr(X=2) = (4C2)(0.8)^2(0.2)^2 = 0.1536
[1] x [2] = 0.063 to 3 d.p.
From part a)ii) of that question, Pr(X=6) = 0.2936
Conditional probability: 0.063 / 0.2936 = 0.214 to 3 d.p.
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 06:08:23 pm
Quoteii) 1/eare you sure? i have 1/(e^7)
1/e is correct
3g should have + 16 instead of 8 shouldnt it
No, curve CD is 8 units above curve AD. Although each time he takes a capsule z increases by 16, each day z decreases by 8; there is a net gain of 8 z-units.
Post by: pg88 on November 10, 2008, 06:25:41 pm
aarrrgh i hate conseqential marks! i screwed up that gradient (by not simplifying it properly) and i consequently lost about 10 marks!
fk =.= i did the same thing as u D= *hi5* lets go have our own party
Post by: rustic_metal on November 10, 2008, 06:32:50 pm
where is the answer to Q1)cii)??????
c)i) Negative quasi-parabolic curve over [2,6] (somewhat skewed to the right), maximum turning point at (4.31,0.38)
(Best to draw a line along the x-axis to represent the '0 elsewhere')
ii) 0.1211Yes, but to refer again to the rabbits example; even if you do not have 2 rabbits, you'd round to whatever they ask you.Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Its a debate of semantics I suppose. Meh, not gonna bother continuing this then.
Yeah, I agree. I was furiously debating with myself whether to change it or not as the examiner came up the row to collect my paper ;D
Yes, I was too. I ended up deciding on 191, because it takes the reality of the scenario into account. If the question had asked "Rounded to the nearest minute, how long until the concentration is 100" perhaps 192 would have been better, but it specifically asks how long he has to get the antidote before he dies. I hope VCAA see it our way.
They may accept both - depending on the way you structured your argument. They should allow some leeway given the ambiguity of the question stem...
'to the nearest minute' would imply that it has to be an integer value of minutes. He is dead by the end of that minute, so he doesnt have that minute to find an antidote. That phrase just stops people from putting decimal answers.
Post by: Synesthetic on November 10, 2008, 06:44:35 pm
where is the answer to Q1)cii)??????
c)i) Negative quasi-parabolic curve over [2,6] (somewhat skewed to the right), maximum turning point at (4.31,0.38)
(Best to draw a line along the x-axis to represent the '0 elsewhere')
ii) 0.1211Yes, but to refer again to the rabbits example; even if you do not have 2 rabbits, you'd round to whatever they ask you.Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Its a debate of semantics I suppose. Meh, not gonna bother continuing this then.
Yeah, I agree. I was furiously debating with myself whether to change it or not as the examiner came up the row to collect my paper ;D
Yes, I was too. I ended up deciding on 191, because it takes the reality of the scenario into account. If the question had asked "Rounded to the nearest minute, how long until the concentration is 100" perhaps 192 would have been better, but it specifically asks how long he has to get the antidote before he dies. I hope VCAA see it our way.
They may accept both - depending on the way you structured your argument. They should allow some leeway given the ambiguity of the question stem...
'to the nearest minute' would imply that it has to be an integer value of minutes. He is dead by the end of that minute, so he doesnt have that minute to find an antidote. That phrase just stops people from putting decimal answers.
Yup, that was my answer.
Although in the 2002 paper exam 2 final question - an 'adventure park ride' first reaches 24 metres above ground level at 55.32 seconds, but in their solutions VCAA gave 55 seconds - even though 'logically' the ride hasn't reached 24 metres high yet.
But today's question was somewhat different, someone's life was at stake :P
Post by: Pandemonium on November 10, 2008, 06:47:04 pm
Post by: mskwmskw on November 10, 2008, 07:24:31 pm
Post by: /0 on November 10, 2008, 07:50:06 pm
where is the answer to Q1)cii)??????
c)i) Negative quasi-parabolic curve over [2,6] (somewhat skewed to the right), maximum turning point at (4.31,0.38)
(Best to draw a line along the x-axis to represent the '0 elsewhere')
ii) 0.1211Yes, but to refer again to the rabbits example; even if you do not have 2 rabbits, you'd round to whatever they ask you.Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Its a debate of semantics I suppose. Meh, not gonna bother continuing this then.
Yeah, I agree. I was furiously debating with myself whether to change it or not as the examiner came up the row to collect my paper ;D
Yes, I was too. I ended up deciding on 191, because it takes the reality of the scenario into account. If the question had asked "Rounded to the nearest minute, how long until the concentration is 100" perhaps 192 would have been better, but it specifically asks how long he has to get the antidote before he dies. I hope VCAA see it our way.
They may accept both - depending on the way you structured your argument. They should allow some leeway given the ambiguity of the question stem...
'to the nearest minute' would imply that it has to be an integer value of minutes. He is dead by the end of that minute, so he doesnt have that minute to find an antidote. That phrase just stops people from putting decimal answers.
Yup, that was my answer.
Although in the 2002 paper exam 2 final question - an 'adventure park ride' first reaches 24 metres above ground level at 55.32 seconds, but in their solutions VCAA gave 55 seconds - even though 'logically' the ride hasn't reached 24 metres high yet.
But today's question was somewhat different, someone's life was at stake :P
It's Tasmania Jones; no matter what, he must survive until the 2009 Methods exams.
Post by: JackOfSpades on November 10, 2008, 07:59:55 pm
Post by: /0 on November 10, 2008, 09:21:23 pm
for the question about finding an equation for CD i think it was... you've got 16/d+8 which works but so does 48/(d+1) are these equivalent??? am i missing something.... because if you sub in 1 and 2 you get 24 and 16 respectively and for yours it is the same...
They say that the shape of CD the same as the shape of AB, so I assume you can only use translations, not dilations to find CD.
Post by: sailavan on November 10, 2008, 10:28:24 pm
FINISHED WITH 30 MINUTES TO GO.
But still, I still got that gosh darned poo-faced fucker 1c (or was it d) wrong.
GAHHH DAMN!
Post by: Charbel on November 10, 2008, 10:46:14 pm
Post by: JackOfSpades on November 10, 2008, 10:53:05 pm
Post by: Charbel on November 10, 2008, 11:03:41 pm
where is the answer to Q1)cii)??????
c)i) Negative quasi-parabolic curve over [2,6] (somewhat skewed to the right), maximum turning point at (4.31,0.38)
(Best to draw a line along the x-axis to represent the '0 elsewhere')
ii) 0.1211Yes, but to refer again to the rabbits example; even if you do not have 2 rabbits, you'd round to whatever they ask you.Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Its a debate of semantics I suppose. Meh, not gonna bother continuing this then.
Yeah, I agree. I was furiously debating with myself whether to change it or not as the examiner came up the row to collect my paper ;D
Yes, I was too. I ended up deciding on 191, because it takes the reality of the scenario into account. If the question had asked "Rounded to the nearest minute, how long until the concentration is 100" perhaps 192 would have been better, but it specifically asks how long he has to get the antidote before he dies. I hope VCAA see it our way.
They may accept both - depending on the way you structured your argument. They should allow some leeway given the ambiguity of the question stem...
'to the nearest minute' would imply that it has to be an integer value of minutes. He is dead by the end of that minute, so he doesnt have that minute to find an antidote. That phrase just stops people from putting decimal answers.
Yup, that was my answer.
Although in the 2002 paper exam 2 final question - an 'adventure park ride' first reaches 24 metres above ground level at 55.32 seconds, but in their solutions VCAA gave 55 seconds - even though 'logically' the ride hasn't reached 24 metres high yet.
But today's question was somewhat different, someone's life was at stake :P
It's Tasmania Jones; no matter what, he must survive until the 2009 Methods exams.
HAHAHAHAHA ! i did it last year! and i got a poor score, well not really... scaled 44ish... ANd when i saw him this year... I felt a slight sense of happiness that he had a near death experience.
Post by: rustic_metal on November 10, 2008, 11:25:15 pm
where is the answer to Q1)cii)??????
c)i) Negative quasi-parabolic curve over [2,6] (somewhat skewed to the right), maximum turning point at (4.31,0.38)
(Best to draw a line along the x-axis to represent the '0 elsewhere')
ii) 0.1211Yes, but to refer again to the rabbits example; even if you do not have 2 rabbits, you'd round to whatever they ask you.Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Its a debate of semantics I suppose. Meh, not gonna bother continuing this then.
Yeah, I agree. I was furiously debating with myself whether to change it or not as the examiner came up the row to collect my paper ;D
Yes, I was too. I ended up deciding on 191, because it takes the reality of the scenario into account. If the question had asked "Rounded to the nearest minute, how long until the concentration is 100" perhaps 192 would have been better, but it specifically asks how long he has to get the antidote before he dies. I hope VCAA see it our way.
They may accept both - depending on the way you structured your argument. They should allow some leeway given the ambiguity of the question stem...
'to the nearest minute' would imply that it has to be an integer value of minutes. He is dead by the end of that minute, so he doesnt have that minute to find an antidote. That phrase just stops people from putting decimal answers.
Yup, that was my answer.
Although in the 2002 paper exam 2 final question - an 'adventure park ride' first reaches 24 metres above ground level at 55.32 seconds, but in their solutions VCAA gave 55 seconds - even though 'logically' the ride hasn't reached 24 metres high yet.
But today's question was somewhat different, someone's life was at stake :P
Did you adjust for a tall european passenger?
Post by: Synesthetic on November 11, 2008, 08:35:26 am
where is the answer to Q1)cii)??????
c)i) Negative quasi-parabolic curve over [2,6] (somewhat skewed to the right), maximum turning point at (4.31,0.38)
(Best to draw a line along the x-axis to represent the '0 elsewhere')
ii) 0.1211Yes, but to refer again to the rabbits example; even if you do not have 2 rabbits, you'd round to whatever they ask you.Quote3)a) 191 minutes; t~3.19 hours = 191.67 days = 192 minutes after rounding, BUT at 192 minutes he is DEAD, therefore 191 minutes is correctIt specifically asks you to round to the nearest minute, therefore even if it was 191.5001 you'd round to 192, not 191.
It's like if they had asked you to round to the nearest integer of, say, rabbits, when you find there are 1.6 rabbits. Even though, normally, you'd round down, here you must round to 2.
The question asks for the "time...[he] has to find an antidote"
If you state 192 minutes, he doesn't HAVE that amount of time, he'll be dead by then.
Thus you round down to 191 minutes.
Its a debate of semantics I suppose. Meh, not gonna bother continuing this then.
Yeah, I agree. I was furiously debating with myself whether to change it or not as the examiner came up the row to collect my paper ;D
Yes, I was too. I ended up deciding on 191, because it takes the reality of the scenario into account. If the question had asked "Rounded to the nearest minute, how long until the concentration is 100" perhaps 192 would have been better, but it specifically asks how long he has to get the antidote before he dies. I hope VCAA see it our way.
They may accept both - depending on the way you structured your argument. They should allow some leeway given the ambiguity of the question stem...
'to the nearest minute' would imply that it has to be an integer value of minutes. He is dead by the end of that minute, so he doesnt have that minute to find an antidote. That phrase just stops people from putting decimal answers.
Yup, that was my answer.
Although in the 2002 paper exam 2 final question - an 'adventure park ride' first reaches 24 metres above ground level at 55.32 seconds, but in their solutions VCAA gave 55 seconds - even though 'logically' the ride hasn't reached 24 metres high yet.
But today's question was somewhat different, someone's life was at stake :P
Did you adjust for a tall european passenger?
Fair enough.