2008 PHYSICS HSC Paper/thoughts? (1 Viewer)

[clonestar]

Hey all,

Now the Physics HSC 20078 paper is over what did students think of it?

I found the Medical physics section very straight-forward and multiple choice was a little tricky but generally OK.

A lot of essay writing in Part B. Q21 space exploration very similar to last year's einstein vs michelson morley and scientific method but this year space exploration with reference to influenced by external factors? Political/social forces? Interesting question as most students would be thinking Einstein Vs plank and social political involvement in science discovery.

Q24 Einstein work led to re conceptualisation of light is related to 2 sections. 1. Special relativity is last years paper question - other factors change to enable light to remain constant a consequence of the michelson morley experiment. 2. Photoelectric effect links to Hertz's work with UV light and re conceptualisation of light is a photon with momentum and energy quantified by E=nHf quantum explanation - Plank

Q26 transformer induction coil is so easy.. for calling out I taught this the other day to my Year 8 students...

Q27 - R=V/I yr 11 work? and nichrome is high resistance wire whilst chromium would be very low resistance i.e. a conductor. with one plot outside of LOBF possibly the wire is changing it's resistance with increased voltage non-ohmic properties ?

Nothing on superconductors, Bragg's X-ray crystallography,
projectile motion <-WTF why??? ; vacuum tubes valves vs silicon? Germany vs England ; JJ Thompson experiment; Hert'z experiment was Q 16 with production and recpetion of radiow aves with coils primary and secondary large spark and detect the presence a short distance away. oscillating particles at same frequency in coil/antennae


MC - suggested feel free to rebut and put your answers in too.

1. C
2. C
3. The idiots forgot to put "neglect air resistance". I must say this is very disappointing to think Physicists are unaware or not taught at uni that YOU MUST SAY ignore air resistance with any projectile question. Whoever wrote that question and the people that checked I must say are not real physicists shame on you BOS.....

Answer is B if you assume no air resistance I still cannot get over this idiotic question.
4. C - acceleration shown by independent time on x -axis and non linear curve indicates that velocity is increasing as a result of constant 9.8
5. C
6. A - the sum of the repulsive forces in terms of direction is = 0 LOL easy
7. C = change in flux for induced emf's in the cage
8.B this is interesting I'd say X as change in flux is greatest at X at position W flux is 0. Curious what others think here
9. B easy question induced EMF's at base of saucepan.
10. A This is an ambiguous question more so for the transistorised section. Of course the CRt will have a step up to provide the 20~50000v NECESSARY FOR OPERATION. So def A or C but for the transistorised section:

Transistors which are amplifiers are basically npn semiconductors so therefore they would (assume assume) use low voltages from original signal and step them up to higher audio signals to send them to speakers??? But the fricken question is not about the operation of the npn but the signal coming from the 240V input to them. This would have to be of a low voltage DC around +12V so this must come from original transformer in the form of a step down voltage and therefore step-down is correct for transistor section. feel free to rebut this... but I am 99% certain about this one.

11. Fc = Fm
Mv^2/r = qvBSin Theta where theta = 90 degrees (note the trickery of 40 degrees) LOL

Answer when you do math = D =2.166 x 10^-3

12. B - thompson proved electron with better vacuum and use of electric field.
13. A E= nHf = 3.427 x 10^-19J
14.D the answer is exclusion by opposing the change. This is an application of conservation fo energy
15. B Boron is p-type semiconductor. long thin line + and short -
Therefore we speak about valence band only with p-type n-type would be conduction band. This leaves A and B and therefore in line with external potential the valence band electrons move from short stubby electrode anticlockwise and therefore to the left. leaving B

Not a bad test overall but not a real physics test either. Disappointing BOS.... very disappointing... Part B is essay English style... I will leave answering that section in depth to another time and Medical is parrot talk just recall the facts from the book NOT ONE FRICKEN CALCULATION AT ALL!!!!

Curious to everyone's comments

 

[Aaron.Judd]

I'm sure 15 is D.

 

[nick90]

imo 15 is definitely b. Hole flow occurs in the valence band. I cannot understand how hole flow could occur in the conduction band. Success One physics seem also tobe under the misguided impression that hole flow occurs in the conduction band, but I'm quite sure that it's wrong.

Can anyone explain how hole flow could occur in the conduction band?

 

[clonestar]

imo 15 is definitely b. Hole flow occurs in the valence band. I cannot understand how hole flow could occur in the conduction band. Success One physics seem also tobe under the misguided impression that hole flow occurs in the conduction band, but I'm quite sure that it's wrong.

Can anyone explain how hole flow could occur in the conduction band?

Agreed... my explanation came from a university book so I really don't trust any success one HSC textbooks.

P-type is always valence band electrons trying to occupy the acceptor level hence these are the moving electrons in line with external applied voltage. There is very little doubt that it can be conduction band electrons as this would indicate a n-type conductor which is not correct with the dopant applied in this case Boron.

 

[yellow7]

I retract my orignal statement. Seems i didn't read teh question properly. the more i go through the multiple choice section, the more i realise this.

went from feeling good about the exam to 'fuck im an idiot'.

But while i'm here, may i question the answer to 12? for some reason in the exam i put B, yet i feel it is A.

wheel spining = momentum = particle = electron

 

[Lady Mara]

Isn't anyone going to say how they found the paper?

I didn't think it was a particularly difficult paper, but I screwed up nevertheless.

Cramming the syllabus a day before the exam, some sections of which had hitherto never been covered? I dont recommend it.

 

[nick90]

In terms of difficulty i didnt find the paper too bad. I made a few stupid mistakes in multi, but such is life.

Overall though, calling the material that this exam tested "physics" is really a misrepresentation. We had a 6 mark question on whether scientists are "influenced by external factors". This wouldn't be at all out of place in a modern history paper. The term "external factors" is so ambiguous it's ridiculous. Physics is a subject based on objective facts, not personal judgements.

Another 6 marker on how Einstein's Special theory and Quantum theory lead to a new model for light. The syllabus pays much attention to the contributions of scientists such as Einstein, Planck, et al. Ironically, if any of these brilliant physicists actually sat the NSW HSC physcis exam they would probably not get a band 6.

For the last 6 days before physics I had no other exams, so my time was devoted solely to physics. I came to appreciate just what a load of useless rubbish the current physics syllabus is. The skills it examines are almost entirely unuseful to any career.

I gather that the syllabus has been constructed this way to achieve the agendas of small-minded feminists, by enabling girls to perform relatively better than males in an archetypically male-dominated subject. In reality, girls who are good at physics are equally as disadvantaged by this syllabus as males who are good at physics. The only people who benefit from the current physics syllabus are people who are inept at physics. And in the long-term, these people don't even benefit, because they are likely to choose physics-related subjects at uni under the misguided impression that they will study something resembling their previous experience of 'physics'.

So they should either change the name 'physics' for this exam to something else, or change the material studied so that it actually is phsyics.

 

[iamfergo]

no nick i would agree totally with you. it is being written more and more so girls excel and boys start to suffer. wen you look at all the past papers from 2000 right through to ours the actual physics required slowly diminished and the test became much more english. there were so few calculations in the test that it was a joke and waste of paper to print up the formula sheet. As is evident girls are better at english and boys at maths. so to make the test better for the girls theyve removed the maths component and given some fuckin stupid question about how external factors influence scientists. this paper was a joke.
I would also agree with the people that rekon the sylabus is shit. cos it is. A lot of people that do physics (well used to i dont kno anymore) were either good at maths (most), wanted to do some form of engineering or go into aviation (ie pilot or aeronautical engineer). Why dont the bos make the course more relevant to what fields we are more likely to go into. Include an aviation subject get rid of some other shit. What the physics syllabus does to enhance a students knowledge at the moment would be the same as someone dong business or legal stuudies and learning about the business structre or legal system of russia. Totally and utterly pointless to the field they want to enter.

I know that i made assumtions about the careers of people who take physics, but for the most part the only people that will end up using the knowledge from this subject are the people going into those fields so why not give them some relevant information. For me i dnt need any of this crap as in doinfg accounting, though now when im at a trivia night or alike, or even just walking down the street i will be able to answer why the transmission lines are the way they are or why a spaceship takes off from the east but thats about it. i now have a lot of useless knowledge in my head that will never be used. but i spose thats just one of the perks of doing the hsc. a whole lot of stupid fucked up gay information that never gets used but bos figures we may as well test it and see how much each student can regurgitate on exam day. with that i say fuck you bos and phuck u physics. include relevant information

 

[clonestar]

Nick90 I totally agree with you and your sentiments. The experience I have seen is that girls who excel at Physics are also quite exceptional at Maths and hence fall into the same domain as males who are typically strong in this subject.

You have to wonder what the examiners or boffins are doing writing these style of questions valued at 6 marks and require full page answers...

Is this really Physics and PHYSICS compared to other countries syllabus curriculum? I must say we are falling behind the 8-ball big time since the implementation of this new curriculum in 2001. Sure, it's got new content and delivers newer syllabus content but by geeee it sure does dumb it down to a parrot recall attitude without the nitty gritty problem solving aspect that it was before.

Definition of a dumb Physics syllabus -> Give them the formula sheet for all assessable Formulas

Ohh by the way I will be sending my email of complaint to the NSW BOS for Q3 multiple choice and projectile /air resistance. Now, lets see how they reply... and I will post what they say this is gonna be classic.

Also Nick90 you should send them that feedback as they state the NSW BOS syllabus is World Class. I have put my complaint in for Q3 and I recommend you send them that feedback. If the syllabus and exams are so world class then why are we finding errors in it and students are failing to see the appreciation of its content. I personally believe they are living in a fantasy world(http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=GX-pVhTZg0U) down there at Clarence St in the city and if it was so good as they claim it to be why don't they have a feedback or evaluation section so students, etc can write back on how they perceived the exam was hence making it better as the years go on????? It's very political this HSC i tell ya....

 

[clonestar]

Hi all,

I finally got a response back from NSW BOS with reference to Q3 multiple choice.

Here it is:

The Chief Examiner of the course has provided me with the following advice regarding
the specific issue raised in your email.

The examination committee felt that adding the phrase ignore air
resistance was not necessary as the question required students to select
the best response from the four alternatives provided. None of the
alternatives provided in the question were calculations that included air
resistance and so the phrase was considered to be an unnecessary
distraction.

The 2008 HSC Physics examination was reviewed by a number of practicing teachers,
none of whom considered that it was necessary to add the phrase ignore air resistance .
Approximately 65% of students selected the correct alternative (B).

As you can see this is an unsatisfactory response one of which I am very disappointed with to say the least. To say it is an unnecessary distraction is to talk Physics blasphemy. I am still in shock!!!!!

Curious what students felt of this question and the BOS reply.

C

 

[tacogym27101990]

physics students dont learn how take air resistance into account, its assumed in hsc physics calculations that it is a "perfect world" with no air resistance

 

[clonestar]

physics students dont learn how take air resistance into account, its assumed in hsc physics calculations that it is a "perfect world" with no air resistance

Classix..... perfect world... LOL..

It states no where in the syllabus to assume no air resistance in projectile analysis

Even more proof of how they(NSW BOS) are "dumbing" down the course...

PAthetic test....

 

[uart]

Hi folks. I don't currently have a copy of the test but there was a multiple choice question on special relativity that I had an issue with (my answer didn't match any of those listed). It was one of the first 10 questions and from memory it was about a spaceship moving away from a "stationary" observer at 0.5c and sending a radio pulse back to the observer every 0.5 seconds (onboard ship time). I think it asked you to work out the time elapsed between radio pulses received by the observer (as measured by the observer). I hope I've got that description correct.

Anyway could someone with a copy of the paper kindly confirm if those details of the question are correct and list the four mult-choice responses.

Thankyou.

 

[uart]

Ok I found this question mentioned in another thread. It was 0.6c instead of 0.5c as I said above, but apart from that the question was recalled correctly.

BTW the correct answer of 1 second was not listed as one of the mc options though.

See http://community.boredofstudies.org/showthread.php?t=190713&page=5

 

[ShowStopper]

Can anyone submit the actual 2008 HSC Physics examination paper, seeing it has been submitted on Board of Studies yet?
thanks