Re: HSC 2015 4U Marathon
Don't worry, it's not.Please dont tell me this is a typical 4u question...
Don't worry, it's not.Please dont tell me this is a typical 4u question...
Lmao I was thinking the same thingPlease dont tell me this is a typical 4u question...
I think at least part (i) could be, and maybe part (ii) if split into different partsPlease dont tell me this is a typical 4u question...
I can't do ii i and iii straightfoward what do you do for ii ?
Transform the inequality in part (i), as it is in the form now, it is useless for part (ii)I can't do ii i and iii straightfoward what do you do for ii ?
I tried doing that but i get :Transform the inequality in part (i), as it is in the form now, it is useless for part (ii)
Rather useI tried doing that but i get :
Am i doing something wrong?
I tried doing that but i get :
Am i doing something wrong?
Yes, or a more intuitive way of looking at it:
After that all I did was:Rather use
Intuition behind this transformation is that we want an inequality with an ln() function in it because the RHS has a ln() function
Just out of curiosity, when making the substitution x=1/k, would we need to state conditions for k in order for the inequality to exist? For example, in this question, would we need to stateYes, or a more intuitive way of looking at it:
It should be a HSC standard question
Better safe than sorryJust out of curiosity, when making the substitution x=1/k, would we need to state conditions for k in order for the inequality to exist? For example, in this question, would we need to state
Just out of curiosity, when making the substitution x=1/k, would we need to state conditions for k in order for the inequality to exist? For example, in this question, would we need to state