General Thoughts: Mathematics Extension 2 (1 Viewer)

[Bobbo1]

lol

The only maths chicks need to be able to do is ratios...so they can change the amount of ingredients needed for the recipes depending on the servings

^^lolololol, dont forget working out the area of a sandwich

 

[zhiying]

Expand LHS, you eventually get something in the numerator including p+q-r and other positive terms

 

[khorne]

what about the inequality in question 5(b) ?

I am such a cunt. I assumed it was true, worked to a point that it was true, then crossed it out and rewrote everything backwards

 

[Implying]

lol

The only maths chicks need to be able to do is ratios...so they can change the amount of ingredients needed for the recipes depending on the servings

hey man, they have to be able to push digits on microwaves too

 

[khorne]

hey man, they have to be able to push digits on microwaves too

s0rry I forgot about this...

If 100g of pasta needs 1 min on high, how many minutes does it take to microwave 150g of pasta on medium?

 

[muzeikchun852]

I am such a cunt. I assumed it was true, worked to a point that it was true, then crossed it out and rewrote everything backwards

i did that at the start as well. but i cbb to continue since it's question 5. so moved on with other questions.

 

[HyperComplexxx]

 

[Implying]

s0rry I forgot about this...

If 100g of pasta needs 1 min on high, how many minutes does it take to microwave 150g of pasta on medium?

answer: trial and error until it feels hottish

 

[khorne]

answer: trial and error until it feels hottish

correct

 

[largarithmic]

Expand LHS, you eventually get something in the numerator including p+q-r and other positive terms

Theres a really neat way to do it if you start by observing that x/(1+x) = 1 - 1/(1+x) and 1/(1+r) ≥ 1/(1+p+q+pq) = 1/(1+p)(1+q): the equation then factorises into positive things

 

[Implying]

lol'd but clearly fake, most of those girls are butt ugly

 

[hup]

I am such a cunt. I assumed it was true, worked to a point that it was true, then crossed it out and rewrote everything backwards

thats wat i usually but couldnt get anywhere with this one

poast solution pls

 

[NubMuncher]

people saying 90/120 cut off for e4 are fucking scaring me....

If last year 79/120 (66%) ->92 then i doubt the cut off this year will be 75% considering the paper this year wasn't that much easier in comparison ....

 

[khorne]

people saying 90/120 cut off for e4 are fucking scaring me....

If last year 79/120 (66%) ->92 then i doubt the cut off this year will be 75% considering the paper this year wasn't that much easier in comparison ....

i think last years cut off was like 72 or so, so this years will be around 70

 

[largarithmic]

thats wat i usually but couldnt get anywhere with this one

poast solution pls

This works:

 

[eyeswideshut]

^ I bet you topped the state

 

[zhiying]

Nice, doubt many people would have saw that neat trick though :S

For me I just thought of expanding it and see what I get

 

[4025808]

Nice, doubt many people would have saw that neat trick though :S

For me I just thought of expanding it and see what I get

Same here, I expanded the left hand side, then I got a conclusion that p + q + 2pq was greater or less than zero, then I wrote backwards from there on the actual answer page.

 

[AbzMan]

i got owned, thought i was doing mad then got owned after q3
Hoping for a 85+

 

[brachester]

its a straight line x = -1/2. then you shade in the area closer to x = -1. i fink not sure tho.

Lol, i was trying to change it into a+iy form, coudn't finish though