<p>Omg, a lot of those answers actually look semi-familiar. Maybe I didn’t flunk!</p>
<p>thats what i did, inguyen</p>
<p>Lol yah same here…I was so surprised that I actually got a complete problem right…I felt like I was BSing the whole FrQ</p>
<p>Me too! Lol</p>
<p>It’s sad really…sigh, I wish I took form B I REALLY wanted a slope field and one of those crazy graphs that have you find the area of each shape to integrate g…</p>
<p>I had no idea on some of them…I guessed on the ater tank…like almost completely…</p>
<p>atnay, you should know that euler’s method is nothing but a string of linearizations (tangential line approx). Because inguyen used a step size of 1, that euler’s method is exactly the same as tangential approx. I am positive that inguyen will receive full credit for that problem.</p>
<p>Unfortunately inguyen, you got the second part wrong.
"at time = 5, r’ is 2.</p>
<p>(dv/dt) = (4)(pi)(2)(30)
= 240pi"</p>
<p>You forgot to square the 30 which would give you a correct answer of 7200pi.</p>
<p>Wow Yatta say that again…that’s a good feeling</p>
<p>OoOH
I did forget to square it! Shoot!!!</p>
<p>I was wondering why I didn’t remember getting such a big number for dv/dt</p>
<p>Don’t worry about it too much inguyen, that mistake will probably only get you -1 point which will have almost no effect on your score.</p>
<p>Can you tell me if i did 3d right? </p>
<p>I said that the slope of g^-1
was (1/g^-1) so (y-2) = (1/5)(x-1)</p>
<p>Yah slope field would be nice and easy…our class did mucho problems related to slope field and areas estimation things…but they were barely on the test :[…or rather not on the frq at all ARG…</p>
<p>I’m hoping for at least 35/45 (Thank God it’s multiplied by 1.2) on the mc, at least 24/ 54 (pathetic…not even 1/2) on the FRQ, and a nice curve like the one in 2003 so I can just make the border for the 5</p>
<p>I unlike most of the people on here didn’t find the exam that hard. I only left 1 MC blank. I even found the FR fairly easy compared to some of the practice questions that I had done. All they took was a little problem solving to know what they wanted.</p>
<p>Looking at the answers most of them look very similar to what I remember getting so I’m feeling very good about my results on the test. So I’m confident about getting a 5.</p>
<p><a href=“Classroom Resources - National Council of Teachers of Mathematics”>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?threadID=1568806&tstart=0...Inguyen</a> did you check here?..someone posted the link earlier…</p>
<p>i just want a 3…a 4 would be nice too</p>
<p>I took the BC exam, so I only know the area, water tower, and the balloon problems off the top of my head. I guess I can work out that problem and see what I get.</p>
<p>oops… <a href=“Classroom Resources - National Council of Teachers of Mathematics”>http://mathforum.org/kb/thread.jspa?threadID=1568806&tstart=0</a></p>
<p>Thanks!!!</p>
<p>dragoneye1589 …I want to sit on you… j/k…I wish I was as confident though :>…</p>
<p>if only we took the 2003 version…all my dreams would come true…</p>
<p>Did any of you see the form B version. It is so easy. Will they incorporate the form b scores into our curve also? If they do, then lets say my future is not too bright.</p>