Search results

What is BS? 0.00002 = 0.2*10^-4 You know that \sqrt(2) is about 1.41 and sqrt of 10 is about 3.2 ... So \sqrt(0.2) is approx. 1.41/3.2 and then just divide by 100 since \sqrt (1/10000) = 1/100 So \sqrt(0.00002) is about 1.41/3.2 * 1/100 which is about 0.4 *10^-2 = 4*10^-3. How much was I off...

No, technically you should go by the greatest amount of significant places given in the data. ie. Since you are given that c=3*10^8 you can only go to 1 sig fig, as far as I know (even though you were given 0.99999c). But at HSC level they don't really care (unless it's for mass defects in Q2Q...

The speed was like 0.99999c wasn't it? I don't remember the rest length. I don't see what's so hard about it. (0.99999)^2 is obviously going to be a little bit less than 0.99999 (I'd guess that it'd be about 0.99998 or 0.99997). And then taking the square root would be the easy part.

Umm... okay... so it doesn't work with all functions?

lol, that method I've used always works for cubics... Not too sure if the leading power is greater than that. What would your thoughts be on this method?

Uhh no they wont because judging by everyone's answers here I got the same answer. No... I can't use one (ie. not good at using one). I thought you would've established that by what I've said. Complex numbers in Physics??? No way :P ... I thought I'd have some fun there.

I find it amazing that many people believe that it's impossible to do such calculations presented in the 2009 HSC Physics paper without using a calculator. May I repeat again that in HSC level Physics you can be a decimal or so off and still get the marks PROVIDED THAT YOU SHOWED ALL WORKING...

That x=0 is NOT a point of inflexion. For a point of inflexion the third derivative cannot equal zero. Obviously you'd only use this method when the third derivative is easy to obtain (like in your example).

Or use the 3rd derivative test (easier).

It's not that hard... For example, for \sqrt(69) you know that \sqrt(64) = 8, and \sqrt(81)=9... So \sqrt(69) is going to be more near 8 than 9... So it's about 8.

Yep.

That was uncalled for.

It's not as hard as you make it out to be. Problem with most people is that they've become too calculator dependent, which in itself isn't that bad, but I just don't want to fall into that category :) And I make stupid mistakes on a calculator sometimes, which is eliminated if I don't use one...

Yep, not hard indeed.

Wasn't the question whether the accel or speed changes?

Yeah I can install packages. I've already installed like polynom (for automatic long division of polynomials) and I think it amsmath was already installed. What does amssymb do?

TeXnic centre. I had a play around with it ages ago but I didn't like it very much. I'll play around with it a bit more before I start writing. I'll probably have it layed out in a 2 column approach to save paper if it is printed.

What program do you use for graphs (eg. curve sketching) and say 3D trig? Probably upload them, but we'll see.

I'll try LateX out, but the diagrams can be troublesome I think, so both?

lol, easier for you Yes :P I dunno how I'm going to get the binomials chapter done by myself though, I kinda suck at that topic. I think I'll start with Series and Integration lol.