Ethan French Posted November 2, 2016 Report Share Posted November 2, 2016 Hey Guys, I have recently attempted the may 2016 paper for physics and yeah, it was horrific. Do you think the paper we will receive next week will be at a similar difficulty? after the amount of backlash the may paper received? Thanks, Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stressing Posted November 3, 2016 Report Share Posted November 3, 2016 I've heard that the IB Papers are written two years in advance so we're likely to get as awful a paper as the May exams with the new syllabus. Although obviously due to the horrific nature of the exam the grade boundary should be much lower than previous years. Either that or due to the many complaints they may have gone back and made adjustments, but my teacher said that's unlikely. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire-Explosion Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 (edited) For question 4 ii.) where it shows that the answer is 4.9ms-1 Wierd thing is that when I calculated it, it either gave me 4.954ms-1 using ω =1336rads-1 or gives me 4.8205ms-1 when i use ω =1300rads-1 Exact decimal answer I got is ω =1336.847938rads-1 according to calculator. So either answer I got would round to 5.0ms-1 or 4.8ms-1, but not 4.9ms-1. Either the question itself does not appear appropriate or am I doing something wrong in this case. Edited November 4, 2016 by Fire-Explosion Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kw0573 Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 4 minutes ago, Fire-Explosion said: For question 4 ii.) where it shows that the answer is 4.9ms-1 Wierd thing is that when I calculated it, it either gave me 4.954ms-1 using ω =1336rads-1 or gives me 4.8205ms-1 when i use ω =1300rads-1 Exact decimal answer I got is ω =1336.847938rads-1 according to calculator. So either answer I got would round to 5.0ms-1 or 4.8ms-1, but not 4.9ms-1. Either the question itself does not appear appropriate or am I doing something wrong in this case. IB does not typically penalize for rounding errors. So if you get 4.954 m/s, you can just round to to 3 significant figures, such as 4.95 m/s. And if you used the right method, 4.95 m/s should be accepted by IB. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire-Explosion Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 So even if I did not show that the answer is 4.9ms-1, I can still get the full marks by getting 4.95ms-1 as my final answer? Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kw0573 Posted November 4, 2016 Report Share Posted November 4, 2016 31 minutes ago, Fire-Explosion said: So even if I did not show that the answer is 4.9ms-1, I can still get the full marks by getting 4.95ms-1 as my final answer? As long as you use an acceptable method yes. You should check markscheme to see if you are correct. Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carozzzz Posted November 8, 2016 Report Share Posted November 8, 2016 I just sat for Physics HL papers 1 and 2 this morning , let me tell you it wasn´t easy. But, it wasn´t the questions that were tricky, at least not more than usual. Paper 2 had 11 excercises with parts a b c d ..., that takes time, even if you have studied a lot, like me, and you understand the majority of the things in the syllabus you don´t have time to solve everything, unless you have taught the subject for the last 20 years or something. A student that has spent the last two years and seen the 12 topics, plus the option, plus the HL extension of the option cannot solve this exam in the given time. I hope they are considerate, a lot of futures depend on these grades. I am dissappointed, I knew the IB was hard, but I didn´t expect it to be unrealistic. Thank you! Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.