• Congratulations to the Class of 2024 on your results!
    Let us know how you went here
    Got a question about your uni preferences? Ask us here

Looking for solutions (1 Viewer)

Joined
Sep 20, 2010
Messages
2,225
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2012
Note that Q3c) in the paper MathMan wrote is outside the syllabus =)
 

Carrotsticks

Retired
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
9,494
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Note that Q3c) in the paper MathMan wrote is outside the syllabus =)
Correct. Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (this question uses the 1st part of it, since there are two) is outside the syllabus.

Probably should have stated something like:

You may assume without proof that



If f(t) is continuous in the interval [a,b] and x E [a,b].
 

Nooblet94

Premium Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
1,044
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
Has anyone got a copy of the full paper? I would love to give it a go.
 

Carrotsticks

Retired
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
9,494
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
I do, but I will ask Math Man if he's willing to distribute it.
 

seanieg89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,662
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Correct. Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (this question uses the 1st part of it, since there are two) is outside the syllabus.

Probably should have stated something like:

You may assume without proof that



If f(t) is continuous in the interval [a,b] and x E [a,b].
The question also uses differentiation under the integral to obtain an expression for B'(t), out of syllabus and not always valid.
 

math man

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
503
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
View attachment holiday_test 2.zip

Yeh i learnt after test that 3 (c) was not in syllabus anymore, but still such a trivial question.
I know Q5 the FTC part was too difficult, but i had shown my students it before and how to use
it a while ago, i was tossing whether or not to put the formula there, but i was in an evil mood so
i didn't. Otherwise the rest of q5 was very doable. Also mc and q1-4 were fairly decent, more of
a std paper those parts were.

Edit: note this test more suited my students as i gave questions on things i have taught them specifically,
such as collapsing sums, riemann upper/lower sums, convergence
 
Last edited:

nightweaver066

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2010
Messages
1,585
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
View attachment 25855

Yeh i learnt after test that 3 (c) was not in syllabus anymore, but still such a trivial question.
I know Q5 the FTC part was too difficult, but i had shown my students it before and how to use
it a while ago, i was tossing whether or not to put the formula there, but i was in an evil mood so
i didn't. Otherwise the rest of q5 was very doable. Also mc and q1-4 were fairly decent, more of
a std paper those parts were.
Will have some fun tonight. :)

Thanks
 

math man

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
503
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
The average for the test was 50, which is the highest average i have ever had on a paper i wrote,
and the top mark was 71.5.
 

Nooblet94

Premium Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
1,044
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
View attachment 25855

Yeh i learnt after test that 3 (c) was not in syllabus anymore, but still such a trivial question.
I know Q5 the FTC part was too difficult, but i had shown my students it before and how to use
it a while ago, i was tossing whether or not to put the formula there, but i was in an evil mood so
i didn't. Otherwise the rest of q5 was very doable. Also mc and q1-4 were fairly decent, more of
a std paper those parts were.

Edit: note this test more suited my students as i gave questions on things i have taught them specifically,
such as collapsing sums, riemann upper/lower sums, convergence
Thank you so much! I shall be having some fun tomorrow morning :D
 

nightweaver066

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2010
Messages
1,585
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
The average for the test was 50, which is the highest average i have ever had on a paper i wrote,
and the top mark was 71.5.
If possible, could you put up the solutions as well so we could mark it? lol

Clearly you've eased up a bit on the difficulty without realising it :p

Need to make them more challenging.
 

math man

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
503
Location
Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
N/A
If possible, could you put up the solutions as well so we could mark it? lol

Clearly you've eased up a bit on the difficulty without realising it :p

Need to make them more challenging.
im only giving solutions to ppl who had to endure the test under exam conditions, but dw
next holiday test will be the worst yet
 

Trebla

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Feb 16, 2005
Messages
8,401
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
I had a look through the paper and then did question 8. I found it surprisingly easy in comparison to the rest of the paper. It was as easy, if not easier than some of the earlier questions IMO.



I'm pretty sure your proof for (iii) is circular. You're assuming the result from (ii) is true, but in part (ii) you assume what you're proving in (iii).

Also, for finding the expression for g(x) in part (ii) can't you just replace the n's in with n+1 rather than having to go through the whole process of differentiating and then integrating? You get the same result.
I don't think there is a circular argument. My structure for (iii) is probably not what you would write in an exam but I'm just highlighting the connection between (ii) and (iii). The point of part (ii) was in fact to show the inductive step. I don't see where any assumption of (iii) came in at all in my proof for part (ii). Part (ii) is basically saying suppose that

call this (1)

then we can prove that

call this (2)

hence

call this (3)

So we're effectively saying IF (1) holds so does (2) hence (3)


If you look at the inductive step of (iii) carefully, it's saying assume



then prove



i.e. Prove if (1) holds then (3) holds which is the same thing you proved in part (ii) through equation (2). So you could rewrite the entire proof in full if you want but you'll effectively be repeating yourself from (ii).

The whole replacement of n with n + 1 was not the intention of part (ii) (though that is probably the flaw in the question) and it is not exactly a 'proof'. Also, doing it that way defeats its intention which was to help you with the inductive step in part (iii).
 
Last edited:

deswa1

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
2,256
Gender
Male
HSC
2012
The average for the test was 50, which is the highest average i have ever had on a paper i wrote,
and the top mark was 71.5.
So 71.5 is the mark to beat lol. The test looks really solid though- will attempt tomorrow or Wed.
 

Fus Ro Dah

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2011
Messages
248
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
lol at the warning. To be honest, I don't think this paper truly reflects the abilities needed to get a State Rank because it requires methods outside the syllabus. Although some things in the HSC Examination are out of syllabus and not necessarily taught at schools or in textbooks, they are always intuitive things that can be deduced by an observant student. The 'FMC #1' however is not intuitive at all and a rigourous proof for it isn't exactly simple. Even the simple 'proof' uses things outside the syllabus like the MVT and Newton's Quotient. I like question 5 (a) because of the result. I presume you're meant to use polynomial long division? Otherwise you can just use Cauchy's Integral :p
 

seanieg89

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2006
Messages
2,662
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
lol at the warning. To be honest, I don't think this paper truly reflects the abilities needed to get a State Rank because it requires methods outside the syllabus. Although some things in the HSC Examination are out of syllabus and not necessarily taught at schools or in textbooks, they are always intuitive things that can be deduced by an observant student. The 'FMC #1' however is not intuitive at all and a rigourous proof for it isn't exactly simple. Even the simple 'proof' uses things outside the syllabus like the MVT and Newton's Quotient. I like question 5 (a) because of the result. I presume you're meant to use polynomial long division? Otherwise you can just use Cauchy's Integral :p
Write the numerator as the sum of two polynomials, one with a factor of (x^2-1), another with a factor of (x^2+1). It falls apart from there.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top