Oh ok. Is it all the lanuages?Haha, while that is true, all I said was that redfield reminded me of him.
Oh ok. Is it all the lanuages?Haha, while that is true, all I said was that redfield reminded me of him.
Yeh, lol.Oh ok. Is it all the lanuages?
It's the "mental method" - a hybrid of the substitution and equating the coefficients (when necessary)Cheers for the insight.
The quicker method, surely you're referring to the substitution method?
Sometimes I use this, but usually the above.i think he is reffering to the "supa cool method"
suppose:
5x = a(x-2) + b(x)
what you can do is,
let x = 0
thus you can solve for a straightaway
then for b
you let x = 2
which will make a = 0 and you can get b straightaway again.
if you call this substitution method, then you are not doing this method justice.
get it right and call it "supa cool method".
funny that you mentioned that, I thought the exact same thingLooking at your subject marks, I reckon that as long as your English is up there, you may actually get 99.95. Infact, you remind me of Laurie Fields.
its a pretty cool way, but if you were to think about it, you are just using the "supa cool method" but just skipping a whole lot of working out lines. which makes your method quicker.It's the "mental method" - a hybrid of the substitution and equating the coefficients (when necessary)
Say you have
Sub in x=2 to . Get this number and write it on top of x-2
Sub x=-4 to , write on top of x+4
So in partial fractions:
If the question contains repeated linear factors, like this:
Sub in x=2 to . Get this number and write it on top of (x-2)2
Sub x=-4 to , write on top of x+4
Now for the number on top of (x-2) I equate the coefficients of x2
So in partial fractions:
what the fuck!@#$@%@
what raw mark should i be aiming to get 93-94 overall?
Interestingits a pretty cool way, but if you were to think about it, you are just using the "supa cool method" but just skipping a whole lot of working out lines. which makes your method quicker.
i shall give you a few names to name your method, you obviously have the honour of choosing them;
supa cool method 2.0
supa cool method 2
supa lynch method
method of death
supa fast method
awesomeness
VERY NICE
and finally my favourite
partial fraction in 10 seconds.
(y)
EDIT: i see you already have given a name. :-(
Hmm, no offense, I sorta disagree, 90, I reckon would be more than 93-94. =\ [I could be wrong though]
Is that it? 90+, how do you guys know the raw marks=scaled marks data?Imo, 90/120 would scale to 90-95.
Now to watch Two and a Half Men. XD
Oh ok. Seems reliable then. btw, got 108/120 for SGS 06, lost most of my marks on Q2 and the circle geoWell as you already know, Hugh Parsonage got 87/120 which equated to 93 HSC marks. Hopefully that gives you an idea.
Anyway, back on topic - 2004: 92/120
Yeah, i did this paper in the beginning. Got 97/120Did anybody else find the 05 paper fairly difficult?
I managed 81/120.
I must say, it was much harder than the papers from the last few years, and prior to it.Did anybody else find the 05 paper fairly difficult?
I managed 81/120.
Definately an E4. Anything over 70% is an E4. I'm pretty sure the person who sets the band cut-offs each yr for 4u sets them quite low (usually in the 60%s). I think last yr's paper was fairly difficult though, cause I know a few guys who got E4s and they reckoned they got 71-75/120. But anyway, yes, 71% would be an E4.i did 2006 last night and got 71%-would that be E4 orE3