Search results

i think the first one is more simple, the total initial kinetic energy would be the same had u thrown it up or down, and as u are in the same position on the cliff, the initial gravitational potential energy would also be the same, assuming air resistance is neglected, there will be no loss in...

use Ni = 1 and Nf = infinity, by definition the work required to move the electron from the inifinite(outside atom) state to the lowest state, this x -1 will become the ionisation energy

i seriously doubt it, but did anyone here do the CSSA software design paper?

the part we were discussing was how to determine the period of mars though

yes i can't believe i said that either, i just looked at the forumla and was used to doing calculations on objects orbiting the earth that i forgot its not always the earth mass in the calculation. hopefully i don't do something incredibly stupid like that in the hsc

i seriously don't think u would ever use a ruler in the physics exam, the diagram is definatly not drawn to scale as the sun takes up like 90% of the volume in the solar system also i know its close but the mass of the earth is not exactly the mass of mars which would make a slight difference...

lol i meant 2/3's of the distance of the orbit travelled by the earth >.< i guess thats 1/3 then though

i hope thats ok.. if i were to do this question i wouldn't have put 1/3 though, all i would know is its less would they accept like 2/3 or something?

actually forget it, u need the mass aswell

i don't suppose the radius of mars is on the physics data sheet? if we knew it as a % of the earths radius, we could use keplars 3rd law to determine the orbital period... other than that, no idea

whats wrong with chem?! ur doing better in it than business and history and it scales a tonne better!

ehh crap, i looked at it and got stumped 2... i know the earth will be about opposite in its orbit as ~half a year passes, but the position of mars is harder to figure out without knowing the relative radius of orbit in comparison to the earths as further out objects orbit slower

it might be helpful to show the question, or is my computer failing again?

our school hasn't got that far, but from what i remember from the tsfx, it was the bombarding of Uranium with neutrons, this was an attempt to discover elements with higher elements it would work like U238->U239->U240 but that becomes unstable and thus undergoes beta decay: U240->...

yes u need to pass english to get a HSC, however, it is immposible to fail english unless u make a non serious attempt, if u attempt the questions and just write a few lines for all the essays, you will get at least 50

f(x^2) was ok... its quite similar to f(|x|) as u reflect the positive side to the left of x axis, the abcissa's of the main points are just square rooted aswell, well i think thats it, we weren't taught it :burn: so my classmates all had to think logically about it. i wasn't sure how the y =...

i'm not too good at this topic, but i think question 1 is right 2: t0 is the time of the observer, tv(1.25)*sqrt(1-0.8^2) = t0 = 0.75years remember when given a speed as a % of c u can sub it in as like sqrt(1-[(0.8c)^2]/[c^2]) and the c's will cancel, easier and less chance of mistake even...

imo everything in this paper was either, really easy or really hard, not much in between

i fudged the end of induction and the sequence one

man that would be an awesome mark, did u cater in for careless mistakes? or just how many u think you got wrong? how much would 100/120 raw scale to for HSC mark?