Physics: Post your doubts here!

[ughkno]

For paper 52, did we have to take 10^3 for the nR to calculate gradient?

 

[A*****]

Yes it was mentioned
Though i wrote about it had greater area and less resistivity is that correct?

Yes correct

 

[Tauqir_hamed]

you are correct. the frequency increases. thats the correct answer

in the question related to doppler effect , even though the source was going far from the observer but its velocity was decreasing .. when we considered till 8s as mentioned in question. so should'nt the frequency increase

 

[Zaki ali asghar]

PLZ HELP ME
i got an A overall in AS
but a B in p3
n in MCQs i got an A but m sure it was a close one
my theory went fine...ill get an 80 or above that
but i messed up my p5
i might get 21 or 22
can i still get an A*?
Zaki ali asghar Holmes haithsoul Error Syntax guys plz help

The minimum marks you had in AS were 88, but you must have gotten more as the threshold was for P2 was quite low. Now if you get even 80 and 22, thats an easy A* hopefully. Makes the total around 190.

 

[Zaki ali asghar]

I am in a similar situation here. expecting around 25-26 in P5. 80+ in P4. I hate myself for messing up Q2 slightly today

 

[M.@(-)M@D $0(-)@!L]

Yes it was mentioned
Though i wrote about it had greater area and less resistivity is that correct?

I wrote greater area and less length? Is it correct?

 

[anastasia grey113]

I am in a similar situation here. expecting around 25-26 in P5. 80+ in P4. I hate myself for messing up Q2 slightly today

yh same
it went bad for me n m relying on ecf now
i think the gt will come down to 20 this year

 

[Zaki ali asghar]

yh same
it went bad for me n m relying on ecf now
i think the gt will come down to 20 this year

which parts did u mess up?

 

[Ahmed kooheji]

which parts did u mess up?

yh same
it went bad for me n m relying on ecf now
i think the gt will come down to 20 this year

Even p51 was a bit difficult

 

[Tauqir_hamed]

yh same
it went bad for me n m relying on ecf now
i think the gt will come down to 20 this year

was today's p52 a bit difficult? question 1 was definitely not simple. q2 had a confusing last problem as well. a different kinda question

 

[Ahmed kooheji]

was today's p52 a bit difficult? question 1 was definitely not simple. q2 had a confusing last problem as well. a different kinda question

You did p51?

 

[fatima_jawed]

Anyone who did P21 today up for a discussion?

 

[Zaki ali asghar]

for p52, could the expression for gradient have been Cln(E/(E-V)) almost everyone wrote -Cln(1-(V/E)) but aren't these both same?

 

[Shamlah]

any did p51? how did you guys find it? was it difficult?

 

[Ahmed kooheji]

any did p51? how did you guys find it? was it difficult?

Yes it was a bit difficult.. but I think I did alright

 

[hellodjfos;s'ff]

I wrote greater area and less length? Is it correct?

They said that length was the same for both wires so you would lose one mark. Greater area is correct, and the other correct ans was less resistivity.

 

[hellodjfos;s'ff]

If anyone has the questions for P2, do send it so I can send the correct answers for you all to check. I have forgotten a few of the questions.

 

[chichibung]

The 2nd question was straight forward for people who did lots of those types of questions and who learnt from their mistakes, however personally I found the first question difficult as I have never encountered such question but I think I’ll probably get 10/15 on that question and overall 23/30 due to significant figures which were incorrect. Overall an average paper. This is paper 51

 

[ThePacifics]

DID SOMEONE GIVE PAPER 51 CAN THEY WRITE DOWN POINTS THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE WRITTEN IN QUESTION 1 AND WHAT DIAGRAM YALL MADE IM LOSING MY SHIT

 

[hellodjfos;s'ff]

guys in the doppler effect question.....i used - instead of + (automatically meaning my final answer and the next part of the questions are wrong) so total of 5...how many marks will i lose? And one more doubt, i didnt round my values (because i solved fm18 yesterday and the ms accepted unrounded answers) so is it fine?

You would lose both marks for that part since your formula/working would be incorrect and your final answer too. For the next question, you would also lose the mark unless you somehow said that the observed frequency would increase(the correct answer). Even if you wrote that observed frequency would increase, your explanation for it would be incorrect(it was a state and explain Q), so it unlikely that you would get a mark for it. So you would lose 3 in total. You can lose 2 marks at max for not using the right no. of significant figures. You lose 1 mark if you got significant figures incorrect a few times, and you would lose 2 if you got the no. of significant incorrect frequently.