how was the physics atp 5054/42 may/june 2014

[muhammadali233]

are you 100% sure it said to start from origin? cuz i saw it said "plot the line of best fit"
furthermore, there was no point 0,0 in the table, which we had to plot........

you really need specteacles man!
first,the question clearly stated that start from origin (i know what u mean ,cause i did that first but when rechecking i read that question and i was starstruck it said start from the origin) i drew a line from origin to i think 8.6 maybe,
Secondly,Try opening your eyes I'm sure you are not Chinese ...Just for the sake ;take a look at this (it was like this ) It had zero ,zero

 

[Abdul Hanan]

you really need specteacles man!
first,the question clearly stated that start from origin (i know what u mean ,cause i did that first but when rechecking i read that question and i was starstruck it said start from the origin) i drew a line from origin to i think 8.6 maybe,
Secondly,Try opening your eyes I'm sure you are not Chinese ...Just for the sake ;take a look at this (it was like this ) It had zero ,zero
View attachment 41649

i think it said "mark your scale from the origin" one of my friends told me this. but if its wrong then i can just pray for the best :/

 

[muhammadali233]

i think it said "mark your scale from the origin" one of my friends told me this. but if its wrong then i can just pray for the best :/

It said start from origin im sure of that and yeah hope for the best

 

[waqas123]

you really need specteacles man!
first,the question clearly stated that start from origin (i know what u mean ,cause i did that first but when rechecking i read that question and i was starstruck it said start from the origin) i drew a line from origin to i think 8.6 maybe,
Secondly,Try opening your eyes I'm sure you are not Chinese ...Just for the sake ;take a look at this (it was like this ) It had zero ,zero
View attachment 41649

It said start axis from origin not the graph.

 

[Mazin Junaid]

wait wait that was i about to do but the question said start from the origin which wasted my 20min in thinking how do it but in the end it made sense

Starting from the origin in that ques referred to the markings on the x and y axis....I think they meant that the markings should be from 0-0 matlab origin

 

[muhammadali233]

It said start axis from origin not the graph.

bum bum bum ,I said i saw that line for about like 10min so i am sure what i did there ,Next is what marking scheme will tell us

 

[Mazin Junaid]

Btw if you did make a line from the origin to the first plotted point to matlab poora graph hi bekaar hogaya....it would mean ke zero rubber bands pe bhi it was totally immersed in the water and when as the rubber bands increased it started floating before sinking again at 11 rubber band?

 

[muhammadali233]

Btw if you did make a line from the origin to the first plotted point to matlab poora graph hi bekaar hogaya....it would mean ke zero rubber bands pe bhi it was totally immersed in the water and when as the rubber bands increased it started floating before sinking again at 11 rubber band?

you are genius !
The number of bands are on x axis okay?if there are no bands it will fully sink into the water the question told us about that!
As one (rubberband) is added 8.86cm is outside the beaker(it now floats somehow) and sooooo on

you are one heck of genius guy

 

[M.Omar]

you are genius !
The number of bands are on x axis okay?if there are no bands it will fully sink into the water the question told us about that!
As one (rubberband) is added 8.86cm is outside the beaker(it now floats somehow) and sooooo on

you are one heck of genius guy

Yar ur idea is totally bogus.
For one most(and by tht I mean almost all)types of wood float in water.Secondly,the question was implicitly related to buoyancy effect(even though they didn,t ask anything abt but the experiment did illustrate the effect:Usually when a wood floats,it wud do so in stable equilibrium and thus wud lay in horizontal pos;but since a rubber band at one end exclusive are being added,the weight shifts towards that sideand it wud counteract so tht the line of weight does not cause any more moment of force or any other effect.it does so by vertically aligning and hence u get a vertically floating wood with its mass underneath).
Secondly u have posted the right graph;we had to draw a line of best fit;axes had to begin frm the origin(nothing wrong with tht) and the initial value was when one 1st rubber band and its corresponding effect was studied and then so on.Originally,the wood WUD float even before the rubber bands were added.Hence a simple and completely uncomplicated line of best fit would have to be drawn,like everyone else have stated so

 

[Mazin Junaid]

you are genius !
The number of bands are on x axis okay?if there are no bands it will fully sink into the water the question told us about that!
As one (rubberband) is added 8.86cm is outside the beaker(it now floats somehow) and sooooo on

you are one heck of genius guy

Never go full retard bro

 

[Mazin Junaid]

you are genius !
The number of bands are on x axis okay?if there are no bands it will fully sink into the water the question told us about that!
As one (rubberband) is added 8.86cm is outside the beaker(it now floats somehow) and sooooo on

you are one heck of genius guy

Lol mujhe wo rubber band dikha do that can make an object that has actually sunk float again but but but only if you add less than 11 kyun ke obviously that would make it sink again
Ap to genius nikle autograph dain na

 

[asadalam]

Yar ur idea is totally bogus.
For one most(and by tht I mean almost all)types of wood float in water.Secondly,the question was implicitly related to buoyancy effect(even though they didn,t ask anything abt but the experiment did illustrate the effect:Usually when a wood floats,it wud do so in stable equilibrium and thus wud lay in horizontal pos;but since a rubber band at one end exclusive are being added,the weight shifts towards that sideand it wud counteract so tht the line of weight does not cause any more moment of force or any other effect.it does so by vertically aligning and hence u get a vertically floating wood with its mass underneath).
Secondly u have posted the right graph;we had to draw a line of best fit;axes had to begin frm the origin(nothing wrong with tht) and the initial value was when one 1st rubber band and its corresponding effect was studied and then so on.Originally,the wood WUD float even before the rubber bands were added.Hence a simple and completely uncomplicated line of best fit would have to be drawn,like everyone else have stated so

Bro,if i made the 1 unit on x axis as 7 small boxes,would it be penalised,cuz i tried to give more width to the graph,but its sometimes stated in ms to give sensible axes.They were all equally spaced and all,but would the weird length be penalised.I though i much thinner line would look more unsuitable so thats why i made it.

 

[Suhaib]

are you 100% sure it said to start from origin? cuz i saw it said "plot the line of best fit"
furthermore, there was no point 0,0 in the table, which we had to plot........

Agreed with u , i too think so that there wasnt anything like start from origin..

 

[DAZ1234]

you really need specteacles man!
first,the question clearly stated that start from origin (i know what u mean ,cause i did that first but when rechecking i read that question and i was starstruck it said start from the origin) i drew a line from origin to i think 8.6 maybe,
Secondly,Try opening your eyes I'm sure you are not Chinese ...Just for the sake ;take a look at this (it was like this ) It had zero ,zero
View attachment 41649

When they say 'start your graph from the origin', they mean starting both your axis from 0.
Haven't u done any Physics ATPs :|

 

[Suhaib]

the day before yesterday i was reading a blog just about 3g and 4g and how lives are affected through communications, so i wrote around 515 words started from page 4 to 6

Well in this case u'll Rock in this paper

 

[Mazin Junaid]

Bro,if i made the 1 unit on x axis as 7 small boxes,would it be penalised,cuz i tried to give more width to the graph,but its sometimes stated in ms to give sensible axes.They were all equally spaced and all,but would the weird length be penalised.I though i much thinner line would look more unsuitable so thats why i made it.

How was your y axis marked?

 

[asadalam]

How was your y axis marked?

Correct.And the line was also straight,no curves or anything.But they award a mark for both axes correct,i'm worried they'll penalise my x-axis :/

 

[Mazin Junaid]

Correct.And the line was also straight,no curves or anything.But they award a mark for both axes correct,i'm worried they'll penalise my x-axis :/

Had you used 5blocks for 1 unitto koi masla nahi tha but using 7 may be penalized

 

[M.Omar]

Bro,if i made the 1 unit on x axis as 7 small boxes,would it be penalised,cuz i tried to give more width to the graph,but its sometimes stated in ms to give sensible axes.They were all equally spaced and all,but would the weird length be penalised.I though i much thinner line would look more unsuitable so thats why i made it.

I too found the whole x axis awkward;it was abt 60 % of the graph in the horizontal length.However,the question which asked for no of band to sink meant we cud exten the line and the graph(by my x axis scale (which was probably initially ur idea as well))wud now cover abt 80% of the horizontal side.
Abt ur scale,firstly examiner tips or guidance in this matter(stated in booklet) said the graph shud cover at least 50% of the space and hence I cud see ur apprehension(and I was no exception) when the scale was seemingly small.(I have clarified it abv)
Then thing abt ur division is tht it is an abnormal division(according to CIE booklet) a scale of 2;5 1;2 wud be acceptable but not like 3:5 1:3 or the alike.I think ur division might be wrong.I think tht so.However (just for the record) even if the scale is wrong,u need not worry abt the consequences like the line and markings since they are marked independently and if the line and plots are in accord (even with the wrong scale) u wont be penalized for tht

 

[asadalam]

I too found the whole x axis awkward;it was abt 60 % of the graph in the horizontal length.However,the question which asked for no of band to sink meant we cud exten the line and the graph(by my x axis scale (which was probably initially ur idea as well))wud now cover abt 80% of the horizontal side.
Abt ur scale,firstly examiner tips or guidance in this matter(stated in booklet) said the graph shud cover at least 50% of the space and hence I cud see ur apprehension(and I was no exception) when the scale was seemingly small.(I have clarified it abv)
Then thing abt ur division is tht it is an abnormal division(according to CIE booklet) a scale of 2;5 1;2 wud be acceptable but not like 3:5 1:3 or the alike.I think ur division might be wrong.I think tht so.However (just for the record) even if the scale is wrong,u need not worry abt the consequences like the line and markings since they are marked independently and if the line and plots are in accord (even with the wrong scale) u wont be penalized for tht

I know but a mark would still be lost.And would my estimation wala q be accepted,cuz i didnt extend i just guessed like the question said and it fell to roughly above 11 so i chose 12.But if they see no sign of extension on my graph will they mark it correct.And yeah i guess they meant for it to be small so we could extend it easily...