Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

April 19, 2024, 02:37:00 pm

Author Topic: 3U Maths Question Thread  (Read 1235868 times)  Share 

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

legorgo18

  • Trendsetter
  • **
  • Posts: 168
  • A future lawyer.
  • Respect: +2
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1530 on: February 22, 2017, 11:15:55 pm »
0
rui i tried that then idk whats happening after, do i group a part and it becomes a limiting sum or something
HSC 2017: Advanced English(94), 2U Maths(97), 3U Maths(49), Bio(91), Chem(88), Chinese in context(88)

Atar: 97.55

Studying a bachelor of  actuarial studies/ bachelor of laws at UNSW

Tutoring details: https://highschooltutors.com.au/tutor/12153

2017 Blakehurst internals: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/13l8nV_efhmYwlA1hM5grQnymew5pznrn

RuiAce

  • ATAR Notes Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 8814
  • "All models are wrong, but some are useful."
  • Respect: +2575
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1531 on: February 22, 2017, 11:20:50 pm »
0
Actually, here's something I thought of now.

After doing the splitting, evaluate the partial sums the way they are (they aren't limiting cause they're not infinite). So use \(S_n=\frac{a(1-r^n)}{1-r}\) n times. Or maybe n-1 times since you might not need it for the first term (the 0.2)

And then, look at your terms closely. If you do some clever algebra you'll see that there's (hopefully) just ONE more partial sum left...
« Last Edit: February 22, 2017, 11:22:44 pm by RuiAce »

RuiAce

  • ATAR Notes Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 8814
  • "All models are wrong, but some are useful."
  • Respect: +2575
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1532 on: February 22, 2017, 11:37:59 pm »
0
I put my theory to the test. Do NOT look at it if you don't want to.

Answer
Are you sure you want to look at it?
Are you REALLY REALLY SURE you want to look at it?
Ok, here goes.
Last chance...
There may be a couple of silly mistakes.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2017, 11:42:15 pm by RuiAce »

Zainbow

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 81
  • Respect: +6
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1533 on: February 24, 2017, 10:47:57 am »
0
Use the sum of a geometric series to find the sum of the first n powers of 3 (starting with n=0) and prove this result by mathematical induction.

Hey guys, I'm stuck with this can you help me  :)
It doesn't work for n=0 so idk
HSC 2017 (All Rounder)

2018: B/Eng (Mechatronic (Space)) (Hons) & B/Sci (Physics) (Dalyell) at Usyd

RuiAce

  • ATAR Notes Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 8814
  • "All models are wrong, but some are useful."
  • Respect: +2575
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1534 on: February 24, 2017, 11:07:41 am »
0
Use the sum of a geometric series to find the sum of the first n powers of 3 (starting with n=0) and prove this result by mathematical induction.

Hey guys, I'm stuck with this can you help me  :)
It doesn't work for n=0 so idk






Zainbow

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 81
  • Respect: +6
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1535 on: February 24, 2017, 11:11:10 am »
0
HSC 2017 (All Rounder)

2018: B/Eng (Mechatronic (Space)) (Hons) & B/Sci (Physics) (Dalyell) at Usyd

kiwiberry

  • HSC LECTURER
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Respect: +97
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1536 on: February 24, 2017, 12:32:14 pm »
0
Prove n! > n2 for n>=4 by mathematical induction
This is how far I've gotten:
Assume true for n=k: k! > k2
Prove true for n=k+1, ie. (k+1)! > (k+1)2
LHS = (k+1)! = k!(k+1) > k2(k+1) (by assumption)

To prove it true from here you have to prove that k2 >= (k+1) right? But is there any other way of doing this without drawing a graph? I've also tried moving the inequality to one side and proving that it's greater than 0 but I got stuck as well
HSC 2017: English Adv (93) | Maths Ext 1 (99) | Maths Ext 2 (97) | Chemistry (95) | Physics (95)
ATAR: 99.85

jakesilove

  • HSC Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • Part of the furniture
  • *******
  • Posts: 1941
  • "Synergising your ATAR potential"
  • Respect: +196
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1537 on: February 24, 2017, 12:38:59 pm »
+1
Prove n! > n2 for n>=4 by mathematical induction
This is how far I've gotten:
Assume true for n=k: k! > k2
Prove true for n=k+1, ie. (k+1)! > (k+1)2
LHS = (k+1)! = k!(k+1) > k2(k+1) (by assumption)

To prove it true from here you have to prove that k2 >= (k+1) right? But is there any other way of doing this without drawing a graph? I've also tried moving the inequality to one side and proving that it's greater than 0 but I got stuck as well

To prove that






So, we know that as k gets bigger, the left hand side will always get bigger. The minimum value for k is 4. If you sub 4 in, that's clearly greater than the right hand side! So, for all further values of k, the left hand side will also be bigger than the right hand side.

This is a round about way of proving something usually done in a more mathematically rigorous way, but that is reserved for university mathematics :)

Actually, you could also solve for k. If you find that the equation is true for all k>x, and than x<4, then you've proven the thing rigorously!
ATAR: 99.80

Mathematics Extension 2: 93
Physics: 93
Chemistry: 93
Modern History: 94
English Advanced: 95
Mathematics: 96
Mathematics Extension 1: 98

Studying a combined Advanced Science/Law degree at UNSW

kiwiberry

  • HSC LECTURER
  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 315
  • Respect: +97
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1538 on: February 24, 2017, 12:56:02 pm »
0
To prove that






So, we know that as k gets bigger, the left hand side will always get bigger. The minimum value for k is 4. If you sub 4 in, that's clearly greater than the right hand side! So, for all further values of k, the left hand side will also be bigger than the right hand side.

This is a round about way of proving something usually done in a more mathematically rigorous way, but that is reserved for university mathematics :)

Actually, you could also solve for k. If you find that the equation is true for all k>x, and than x<4, then you've proven the thing rigorously!

Ahh I see, thanks Jake :)
HSC 2017: English Adv (93) | Maths Ext 1 (99) | Maths Ext 2 (97) | Chemistry (95) | Physics (95)
ATAR: 99.85

bsdfjnlkasn

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 417
  • Respect: +28
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1539 on: February 24, 2017, 08:09:37 pm »
0
Hey dudes,

Can I please get some help with finding the general solution and all solutions for the following for -180°<x<180° (in radians and the inequality signs are supposed to have the line indicating equality too - sorry i'm not sure how to type these)

THANK YOU!! I would also really appreciate explanations not just the method as my teacher didn't explain this topic at all ... :(

RuiAce

  • ATAR Notes Lecturer
  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 8814
  • "All models are wrong, but some are useful."
  • Respect: +2575
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1540 on: February 24, 2017, 08:33:57 pm »
0
Hey dudes,

Can I please get some help with finding the general solution and all solutions for the following for -180°<x<180° (in radians and the inequality signs are supposed to have the line indicating equality too - sorry i'm not sure how to type these)

THANK YOU!! I would also really appreciate explanations not just the method as my teacher didn't explain this topic at all ... :(
You're asking for an answer in degrees but... your question is in radians?



Note that when I say by inspection, since we know that n must be an integer, we just guess and check values of n that are between -pi and pi
______________________________


The purpose of changing the argument is because we're taking the tan of the WHOLE thing. So we need to compromise.

Regarding the quadrants, you're going to have to draw the diagram out. Ensure that you know what the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th quadrants are, AND the negative 1st to 4th quadrants.

The terminology used here depends really on what textbook you used. I know Cambridge calls it the "related angle" that you combine with the rule of ASTC.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2017, 08:37:41 pm by RuiAce »

bsdfjnlkasn

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 417
  • Respect: +28
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1541 on: February 24, 2017, 08:42:20 pm »
+2
You're asking for an answer in degrees but... your question is in radians?



Note that when I say by inspection, since we know that n must be an integer, we just guess and check values of n that are between -pi and pi
______________________________


The purpose of changing the argument is because we're taking the tan of the WHOLE thing. So we need to compromise.

Regarding the quadrants, you're going to have to draw the diagram out. Ensure that you know what the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th quadrants are, AND the negative 1st to 4th quadrants.

The terminology used here depends really on what textbook you used. I know Cambridge calls it the "related angle" that you combine with the rule of ASTC.


I don't think you understand how clear and helpful this has been for me - THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH!!

jamonwindeyer

  • Honorary Moderator
  • Great Wonder of ATAR Notes
  • *******
  • Posts: 10150
  • The lurker from the north.
  • Respect: +3108
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1542 on: February 24, 2017, 08:54:14 pm »
+3
I don't think you understand how clear and helpful this has been for me - THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH!!

Rui is a superhero ;)

bsdfjnlkasn

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 417
  • Respect: +28
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1543 on: February 24, 2017, 09:20:06 pm »
0


Damn what did I do wrong :/ - I'm still getting the hang of this

bsdfjnlkasn

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 417
  • Respect: +28
Re: 3U Maths Question Thread
« Reply #1544 on: February 24, 2017, 09:21:31 pm »
0



Sorry for asking so many questions, but could I please get a proper method for 8d and a hint for 8b? Thank you so much :)