SC2Player

VIP
  • Content count

    212
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

SC2Player last won the day on May 31

SC2Player had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

80 Brilliant

1 Follower

About SC2Player

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Exams
    Nov 2017
  • Country
    Hong Kong

Recent Profile Visitors

2,969 profile views
  1. It may be recommended to study chemistry/biology at HL for application to Australia (I know the University of Queensland used to require chem HL, before it changed to graduate-only applications), but AFAIK no universities require one or both at HL anymore for direct entry. It can still help you be more competitive, however, seeing that medicine can be quite a difficult course to get into. Check university websites for more specifics. I myself started with 4 HLs, then dropped English HL for Further HL. 4 HL's aren't that hard if you're motivated, but it mostly doesn't seem to actually help much in applying to university. In terms of HL chemistry, I found it fairly simple, and one of my friends who takes both HL bio and chem finds HL chem easier. It's apparently more conceptual than bio (but not so much as physics), and requires only some memorisation.
  2. I'm not too sure what do you mean by solve; that should be the answer right there. If you're asking why that's the answer, then first consider the integral of 1 with respect to y.
  3. You don't really need to know the answer to the RQ - it's usually exploring something that's sort of new to you (but it does not need to be new to everybody). Indeed, you're sort of using the experiment to come to a valid conclusion. Keep in mind that your hypothesis does not necessarily have to be supported by your results. For your specific RQ, it might be OK if you can link it to some chemical theory outside the syllabus - if you can explain it just using collision theory or basic rate theory or something like that, then it is definitely too simple. I've taken a quick google search, and there does seem to be factors that temperature affects that are somewhat complex. However, I'm not an expert on this topic, so it'd be a good idea to ask others who are more knowledgeable about this too. In terms of coming up with an RQ, try exploring around with different topic areas in chemistry and see what interests you.
  4. AFAIK universities often look at total scores, especially for courses that don't have a requirement for specific subjects, so you'd usually want to maximize your scores for your diploma. Check with the universities that you're planning to apply to and look at their requirements, and maybe you can then drop a subject that isn't necessary. If you like doing VA, then maybe you can do it in your free time.
  5. Basically what @LLLLYYYY said - just do the whole experiment again. You'd need some variation of variables for an experiment, so it'd be impossible to really do this study with only one group. I think that having two groups is OK, but you probably should check with your teacher. You should still give it as a verbal bit after you finish your experiment, just in case your teacher checks (and of course to be ethical), but definitely write it in the appendix as part of the script. Some tips that I found helpful: Don't worry if your results are really weird - try to figure out why in the discussion, and put some good reasons. In the discussion, carefully choose the issues and improvements you want to discuss - remember there's a word limit, and you want to discuss the best ones. Don't cram everything into the appendix - the appendix is only for supplementary information which isn't truly necessary in the main body e.g. script, consent form, information sheet. Check everything against the criteria, as this is what you're being marked against.
  6. To first offer some of my own thoughts on your questions: 1+2 If benzonite clay is a mixture, then it will indeed be quite difficult to compare molecular polarity, and I doubt your workaround would be that feasible (it seems a bit too clumsy). Perhaps you could compare pure activated carbon with other pure compounds? 3+4 If you're looking at their molecular structure with their bonds and stuff, then this would basically be the chemical formula in more detail, so there isn't that much of a need for the specific formula itself (it's mostly for stoichiometry calculations). While adsorption is indeed related to chemistry, it does touch more upon the physical aspects (intermolecular bonding is sort of borderline physics\chemistry), so I don't know if this topic is that feasible. Might be worthwhile to change your topic imo - if you're stuck with a bad topic (like I am right now), then you will not be able to do well regardless of how good you are at writing reports up. However, I am no expert on adsorption and water purification, so it'd be worthwhile to collect more information from others more knowledgeable than me - there might be a strong chemical basis on it that I don't know of. I would have recommended an organic chemistry EE because it has clear chemical contents (reactions and stuff), but if you haven't done the topic then it's difficult. Acid-base experiments could also be viable, again because of the usually clear link with chemistry with the stuff involving reactions. However, you don't need to restrict yourself to only one topic - indeed, you'll probably find that you're going to be using concepts from multiple topics in chemistry while doing your EE. It's still a good way to start though.
  7. From what you've outlined, you seem to have, at the very least, a fairly good grasp of safety issues, and I don't see why your teacher would restrict you from doing this IA for reasons of safety, especially if they've had 6 months to tell you. Of course, it may be more to do with how you're releasing CO2 in the environment, which is a potentially toxic gas. If you specify how you're going to measure it in a safe way and make sure that you don't really breathe in the fumes, then you should be fine for that. I know some of my classmates conducted IAs on combustion of alkanes, which is relatively similar, except on a smaller scale.
  8. I'd also recommend taking a look at the IB math HL syllabus, which can be found by a quick Google search, and checking to see how much you already know - if you've already done some of the topics before, then you should be OK for HL. Difficulty in math, as in most other subjects, is relative - some people may find it easier while others may find it more difficult. As @kw0573 said, the only way to really get a feel for the course is to actually do it yourself - I was nearly scared into doing math SL, but chose HL in the end, and I now know for a fact I would've regretted choosing SL instead of HL. If you're still unsure (which is fair enough), then you could initially take 4 HL courses, and then drop math HL if you're finding it too difficult, or drop a useless HL if you're finding it doable.
  9. Funny, our psychology teacher gave us that very study to analyse, although she didn't use the original paper of course. It is possible, although probably quite unlikely, that the study was published posthumously. However, I've just done some searching of my own on both google scholar and sciencedirect, and I cannot find a single mention of the specific monk study that you've mentioned. The closest I've found published by both authors together was this study, but seeing that it was published in 1966 and is not related to serotonin nor sensory deprivation, it's obviously not the study you mention. There is also a review of hallucinogens and serotonin published in 1999, but two problems - different author, and it's a review, not an observational study. The relationship between serotonin and hallucinations is quite well documented, however, so the study actually seems pretty valid, which means it's actually quite well-done if it's been fabricated. Anyways, I may do some more digging around later if I have the time, but for now I'm forced to conclude that the study doesn't exist, so it's probably good to substitute this study for another one for anyone planning to use this. Probably also good to mention that neither the Oxford study guide nor the Pearson textbook mentions this study, and usually it's pretty easy to find the original paper for the studies (e.g. Asch (1951), Loftus and Palmer (1974)).
  10. Wah your extracurriculars are way better than mine. Speaking for HK, which is somewhat grade-centric but also does look at extracurriculars, you should be fine for HKU and HKUST for most courses such as engineering and finance. Might be somewhat difficult for courses that have higher cutoffs though such as law or business.
  11. Tbh I think Paper 1 wasn't that bad, but yeah Paper 2 was really pretty difficult, and 2014-2016 exams were mostly easier (especially 2014). Pretty much gave up on the last question in Paper 2. Were you supposed to use matrices to represent the hyperbola? Because if you were, then that might have helped me with the horrid mess of algebra that I got into. Really hope the grade boundaries are lower this year, although it's always hard to tell.
  12. When our psychology teacher sets out SAQs similar to that question, it's usually with only one effect. Not actually too sure how to do it on 2 effects - I think it's OK to have just one study, but I suppose having 2 can't hurt if you have the time.
  13. TBH radioactive decay is more physics-related than chemistry-related - it's covered in the physics syllabus, but not the chemistry one. Just maybe keep that in mind for personal engagement if you do a math IA on it.
  14. Overall your course workload doesn't seem too bad. I'm not too sure if you have to take history HL - maybe there's another Group 3 subject? If not, then you may just have to stick with it. Doing 4 HLs probably won't help too much when applying to university, but if you have to it's definitely doable (I'm doing 4 myself). Chemistry HL honestly isn't too bad if you're decent at memorization and basic math skills. It's fairly conceptual (not as much as HL Physics, but probably more so than HL Bio), so just be prepared to face a lot of fairly new concepts (although you may have covered quite a bit in Honors Chem). Bio HL is apparently a lot of memorization from what I've heard (as @Lord of the Pickles pointed out), so if you're good at that you should be fine.
  15. The Golden Ratio is OK to do if you follow the structure properly - while it is a fairly common topic, I'm not too sure if that'll cause you to be marked down. There're also a large number of different ways to take the golden ratio further in depth besides the commonly referenced Fibonacci numbers and relationship with aesthetics, such as it's properties in trigonometry - Wolfram Alpha has a few nice extensions here: http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GoldenRatio.html.