How did we all go? Physics June 2011

[HCbigstick]

Sounds like scaling will be greatly in everyonrs favour this year

How so?

[jinny1]

Anyone know when the results are released???

[HCbigstick]

Mid August I think.

[Cinnah]

Sounds like scaling will be greatly in everyonrs favour this year

How so?

From what I have heard here and elsewhere, even many of the more capable students didn't even finish/ get all the marks they could, and as an overall comparison to other years, the spread seems more balanced to the lower end, hence more scaling.

[Madic74]

I'm surprised at how bad people think it went. Motion was extremely easy, breezed through it. Gravity was a joke, Kepler's Law was all you needed and bam, free marks. Electricity was kind of tricky though, I accidently put the VOUT on the Thermistor and used 4500ohms. Damn, hopefully some marks. Oh, and I used pencil to draw the graph, hopefully it comes out properly when it gets scanned. 

What did people get for the mesh on the diving board? It wasn't very specific whether the board was actually connected in place between A and B. So it was either mesh on the entire top of the board, or little bit at bottom, rest at top.

[DarkVisor]

For some reason I completely assumed it was connected at B, so I put the answer that had most of it at the top and a little at the bottom on the left..
It doesnt state 'how' B supports it?!

[HCbigstick]

The question asking to choose and explain the graph representing the total spring potential energy was tricky

[cranberry]

^yeh, and if u did VCAA 2008 exam recently, u would have chosen the wrong graph for the 3 mark question - what i did lol....apparently VCAA loves doing that

[HCbigstick]

I said the total spring potential energy was directly proportional to x^2, but I chose the half inverted parabola. Hopefully I get at least 1 mark for the explanation.

[soopertaco]

for that three mark question about the spring potential would you lose all marks for explaining the wrong graph?

[heba]

OKay guys i have something BIG to tell you... my physics teacher is a total genius and what he says is right and today he told us that the modulation graph was the same as the one given, only inversed AND DOES NOT TOUCH THE X-AXIS, SINCE THE LED STAYS SWITCHED ON THE WHOLE TIME (SO THE BRIGHTNESS CAN NEVER BE 0). i dont know how he saw that one coming.

[pi]

In relation to the thread question, I think my new SS aim for physics (see my sig) says how I did

OKay guys i have something BIG to tell you... my physics teacher is a total genius and what he says is right and today he told us that the modulation graph was the same as the one given, only inversed AND DOES NOT TOUCH THE X-AXIS, SINCE THE LED STAYS SWITCHED ON THE WHOLE TIME (SO THE BRIGHTNESS CAN NEVER BE 0). i dont know how he saw that one coming.

Yeh, I was surprised I actually got that. One of the few things i DID actually get...

[jhinton]

For the brightness graph, if you drew a curvy instead of straight wave, but everything else was right (it was inverted and above 0) will you still get 1 mark out of the two?

[Shark 774]

For the brightness graph, if you drew a curvy instead of straight wave, but everything else was right (it was inverted and above 0) will you still get 1 mark out of the two?

Yes I think so.

[thushan]

For the brightness graph, if you drew a curvy instead of straight wave, but everything else was right (it was inverted and above 0) will you still get 1 mark out of the two?

Maybe even 2/2, it was technically curvy (if you perform the calcs from P=VI you see that you get a curvy graph with cusps). But VCAA will pay both (if your curvy one was cusped).