* Physics HL 2011 * HL predictions / discussion / aftermath * (1 thread only please)

deiseguuy93

is there going to be a soloution to this paper put up?

Hollzy

I just do it cos I had to do another subject :rolleyes: .[/QUOTE]

I know how you feel! And now I have to count it because of Maths!

vDarr

Gyaradose wrote: »

Q6 was grand, see saw and part a were junior cert suff, c on the other hand was tricky but a few friends and I got 0.83 or summit like that for the angular velocity

Got that too, was sure I was wrong

sh1tin-a-brick

Hollzy wrote: »

I just do it cos I had to do another subject :rolleyes: .

I know how you feel! And now I have to count it because of Maths![/QUOTE]

I do applied maths as an extra subject, so hoping to count it instead! It better be a nice paper, otherwise repeating looks like a nice option :eek: Ah well!

deiseguuy93

I do applied maths as an extra subject, so hoping to count it instead! It better be a nice paper, otherwise repeating looks like a nice option :eek: Ah well![/QUOTE]

Ahh it was a handy enough go for our trial run at the leaving cert!! imagine how well it will o next year

RADON99

anyone now how many marks ill lose for doin the wavelength of monochromatic light calculation wrong? i got it all but i for whatever reason read the table as being in degrees and minutes so used them thus giving me a different answer. how many will i lose?

HxGH

Section A
Question 1 - Conservation of Momentum: Simple

Question 2 - Boyle's Law: Simple

Question 3 - Wavelength of Monochromatic Light Source: Average, Alot of people were thrown off by the question asking what would happen if...
(i) (ii) (iii)

Question 4 - Variation of I with V [Copper Sulfate method]

Section B
Question 5 - Only got 5/6 out of 8. Dissapointed. (My fault really)

Question 6 - Probably should have done this question instead of 7. [Moments, etc]

Question 7 - Pretty horrible heat calculations. Annoying.

Question 8 - Fair attempt at part (a) but (b) was lame. [a = interference of sound waves, b = Sound intensity calculations]

Question 9 - Part (a) didn't look nice. (Didn't even read it) I was rather uncertain about (c) so I just skipped the whole thing.

Question 10 - All good except got mixed up at final calculation [Particle Physics, Option Question]

Question 11 - Did this question at the end of the exam. One line, made up answers, on each question without reading the article. hehe

Question 12 - Did parts (b) [Refraction of Light] and (d) [Radioisotope]. Fair attemp I guess.

Estimated Result: 60%
I mark tough so not to have my hopes destroyed!

-Really folks, experiments couldn't have been any better. All tipped too.
I hope everyone was happy with the questions and their performances!

HxGH

RADON99 wrote: »

anyone now how many marks ill lose for doin the wavelength of monochromatic light calculation wrong? i got it all but i for whatever reason read the table as being in degrees and minutes so used them thus giving me a different answer. how many will i lose?

• Name a source of monochromatic light.
• Describe, with the aid of a diagram, how the data were obtained.
• Using the data, calculate the wavelength of the monochromatic light.[24 marks]

24 marks were awarded for the three questions. If you worked it out wrong I'll guess you lost 12 marks? [Total guess] I wouldn't worry about it.

RADON99

HxGH wrote: »

• Name a source of monochromatic light.
• Describe, with the aid of a diagram, how the data were obtained.
• Using the data, calculate the wavelength of the monochromatic light.[24 marks]

24 marks were awarded for the three questions. If you worked it out wrong I'll guess you lost 12 marks? [Total guess] I wouldn't worry about it.

thanks but like my calculations are all right i just changed it to minutes and degrees

LilMissCiara

HxGH wrote: »

• Name a source of monochromatic light.
• Describe, with the aid of a diagram, how the data were obtained.
• Using the data, calculate the wavelength of the monochromatic light.[24 marks]

24 marks were awarded for the three questions. If you worked it out wrong I'll guess you lost 12 marks? [Total guess] I wouldn't worry about it.

No way would you lose half marks for using the wrong figures in part of the question.

Marks would be:
6, 10 and 8

Out of the 8 I'd imagine you'd lose 3, maybe 4 marks at most for the wrong figures.

HxGH

RADON99 wrote: »

thanks but like my calculations are all right i just changed it to minutes and degrees

I don't actually see what you could have done with minutes and degrees tbh. You might get attempt marks? Good luck with the rest of your exams.

RedBlueRedBlue

Stretch101 wrote: »

The electric charge of an electron

how many marks would you lose if you just wrote electron

HxGH

LilMissCiara wrote: »

No way would you lose half marks for using the wrong figures in part of the question.

Marks would be:
6, 10 and 8

Out of the 8 I'd imagine you'd lose 3, maybe 4 marks at most for the wrong figures.

I stand corrected. Really I was just guessing.

RADON99

HxGH wrote: »

I don't actually see what you could have done with minutes and degrees tbh. You might get attempt marks? Good luck with the rest of your exams.

i just read it as 31dgrees 9 minutes no idea why but yeh

megumiwinS

Horrible exam :(

Aoifums

I did awfully Section A and Q5 were great and I felt fantastic. Then I looked at each question in depth and realised how screwed I was.

Q5 Grand but I think I only got 7 right. w
Q6 Pretty nice but (a) had me trawling through my memories for the Junior Cert :P And asking me to draw a diagram of a child on a merry-go-round is a bad idea. I can't draw so I hope my corrector doesn't mind stick figures :P
Q7 wasn't too bad. I couldn't remember what the second metal in a thermocouple was so I had to guess it.
Q8 was a little weird. It never said if part b was in air or a vacuum until the bottom which meant I finished the question before I saw that. So I did the question as if it were in a vacuum and then had to hastily redo it at the end.
Q9 WTF was with part a? It lost me completely The rest was fine just that one part was awful.
Q10 This confused me so much. I really wanted to do this as particle physics is my strongest question.
Q11 was pretty bad. I think I screwed a lot of it up
Q12 I couldn't do any of the sections :eek: Just awful!!

I did 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 11. Overall it was bad

BrendaN_f

Aoifums wrote: »

I did awfully Section A and Q5 were great and I felt fantastic. Then I looked at each question in depth and realised how screwed I was.

Q5 Grand but I think I only got 7 right. w
Q6 Pretty nice but (a) had me trawling through my memories for the Junior Cert :P And asking me to draw a diagram of a child on a merry-go-round is a bad idea. I can't draw so I hope my corrector doesn't mind stick figures :P
Q7 wasn't too bad. I couldn't remember what the second metal in a thermocouple was so I had to guess it.
Q8 was a little weird. It never said if part b was in air or a vacuum until the bottom which meant I finished the question before I saw that. So I did the question as if it were in a vacuum and then had to hastily redo it at the end.
Q9 WTF was with part a? It lost me completely The rest was fine just that one part was awful.
Q10 This confused me so much. I really wanted to do this as particle physics is my strongest question.
Q11 was pretty bad. I think I screwed a lot of it up
Q12 I couldn't do any of the sections :eek: Just awful!!

I did 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 11. Overall it was bad

how did you manage to do a sound question as if it were in a vacuum?

DM360

BrendaN_f wrote: »

how did you manage to do a sound question as if it were in a vacuum?

I was wondering that my self, since part (b) was about being at a rock concert...wrong question perhaps?

Aoifums

BrendaN_f wrote: »

how did you manage to do a sound question as if it were in a vacuum?

... :eek: Exam stress getting to my head?! Must have been...
Ah well, I did it correctly in the end.

cabbage kid

I think Section B was a bit harder than usual. Predicted all the experiments though :D

jamesr1775

lol yea the experiments section was fantastic i learned the first three the yesterday and rewrote them out in the morning

Geog ariphic

Just to give me two cents, I thought that was a fairly tricky exam overall, you really had to know what you were doing and understand concepts aswell as common problem solving.

The first part of question five is specifically JC syllabus and not ours, would have lost a lot on part (a) had i attempted it.

They really made us work for nuclear physics didn't they! I'm probably just repeating what was said earlier on this thread, but i can't read it ALL...
So with no units on the paper we had to go hunting for eV->Joule conversion rate, the mass of a charged pion (which then turned out to be relative to the mass of an electron, so then flick back a page and multiply by the relative mass), and other such fun numbers.

The electricity involving induction and the farady cage/suit....very long. Wrtie out two demos/experiments in one question.
Ate into my 'spare question' time that i keep for the end, only did an extra from 12 rather than an entire extra.

And yet AGAIN, conservation of momentum that...wasn't really equal. Just approximate. :-?

Overall i'm happy that several of the questions are being broken as per standard maths and Geography format, i.e. part a, b and c, with more of a breakdown of the marks for each part. Just...feels easier, and more organised, to me. XD

However quite tricky and nigh-on impossible in parts if you were relying soley on predictions and didn't know your formula book well.

Also, practice makes perfect, as i found out to my chagrin after converting all of the volumes on the (predicted) boyle's law question to metres cubed, only to realise i now had to invert the values, and could have left it in centimetres.

Also, didnt answer the end of the 12 b at, only found out afterwards.

How did people get on with 12?

Aoifums

Thanks for mentioning that Geog ariphic, I forgot how much bloody time I wasted flicking back and forth between the given values in the log tables, pg 45 or so and the page with the actual formula :rolleyes:

Geog ariphic

Cardor wrote: »

Its a bit late advising people not to leave out chapters considering the exam is tomorrow.. Tonight requires smart studying and a smart student would study what he/she believes is going to come up.. spend the day studying a chapter in depth which you believe might come up.. trying to flick through every chapter is illogical!

Well i do have faith in predicitions if it's not been on for a long time, or there is an 'every -second-year' pattern.

But tbh, i did that for biology. I read my genetics notes first, then went through the whole book start to finish, focusing on diagrams and definitions, and stuff i know i forget from experiments. 4 hours (and a half?), done. And, it worked really well. I'm hoping for an A in biology.

Really depends on how well you know the stuff though. I've always had a good handle on bio and physics (though i'll concede i did spend actual time revising human repr).

DM360

Geog ariphic wrote: »

How did people get on with 12?

Kept well away from 12 (a) as I always do.
In hindsight I should have done (b), the diagram scared me off a little.
12 (c) was fine, name some factors and a very simple calculation.
12 (d) was grand, the only proper bit of Modern Physics on the paper. Relatively easy but I misread a question, was asked 'how the readings varied' and instead explained why.

And was anyone else unsure of using all decimal places? When I used them for Q. 10 and the protons my answer was roughly around 140MeV. Then I used the standard values (3x10^8 etc.) and ended up get closer to the 140 given? Did they expect us to use them? It really ticked me off having to keep flicking through the tables

Gyaradose

So can anyone confirm the answer to question 6 c? I got omega is equal to 0.83 and so did a few others but I'm not sure what the right diagram is or what will happen if there was no friction ( i put down the merry go round will rotate under him and he would remain stationary as a joke and answered it seriously too)

Geog ariphic

dannyirishman wrote: »

For particle physics is it only me or is every scientist's name associated with it hilarious?

Gellman
Cockroft
Ernest
Zweig

Millikman deserves a mention too.

How can people find it hard learning all the names anyway. Well it's easy for me anyway because I try to picture names so they stick

Who the heck were gellman and zweig? obviously another german (the latter), but...??

Yes Millikan came up, i only remeber him because the day we started the electron all the chem ppl were so snooty about it, the oil dropper experiment, millikan, etc etc.... i was insulted so i remembered! xD

(Tbf us app maths ppl were the same when vectors and mechanics came round...zzzz zzzz)

Geog ariphic

DM360 wrote: »

Kept well away from 12 (a) as I always do.
In hindsight I should have done (b), the diagram scared me off a little.
12 (c) was fine, name some factors and a very simple calculation.
12 (d) was grand, the only proper bit of Modern Physics on the paper. Relatively easy but I misread a question, was asked 'how the readings varied' and instead explained why.

And was anyone else unsure of using all decimal places? When I used them for Q. 10 and the protons my answer was roughly around 140MeV. Then I used the standard values (3x10^8 etc.) and ended up get closer to the 140 given? Did they expect us to use them? It really ticked me off having to keep flicking through the tables

12 c was easy? Tarnation! >.<

By 'explained why' do you mean you explained how the GM tube works, or...? If you even mentioned varying thickness of paper your gonna get some marks.

jumpguy

For "describe how the reading on the detector may vary" I just went on about how the thickness of the paper may vary thus that means the amount of beta radiation hitting the detector will vary with the thickness of the paper and etc.

Aoifums

Gyaradose wrote: »

So can anyone confirm the answer to question 6 c? I got omega is equal to 0.83 and so did a few others but I'm not sure what the right diagram is or what will happen if there was no friction ( i put down the merry go round will rotate under him and he would remain stationary as a joke and answered it seriously too)

What I said (may or may not be right. I made it all up) <, >, ^, v being the directions of the forces. Merry-go-round was going right (>)
The force of the merry-go-round beneath the child. >
Gravity pushing down, v
The force of the merry-go-round acting up on the child ^
Air resistance <
Friction <
and I think I put one more.