Recent content by pdoueihi

lol who cares, let them drag down the state average. better for me and you

looks right to me. btw, my estimator said 99.15. ended up being pretty close. but the lower the UAI, the less reliable

it doesnt matter about your raw school marks. the rank is all that matters. what they do is, they look at the cohorts hsc marks, then they look at the ranks and allocate occordingly to determine each persons school mark. eg. Tom was ranked 1. hsc exam he got 90 Mel was ranked 2. hsc exam...

lol im the only one from my school up there....

you will get in. dont worry. my brother does Commerce/law at UNSW. you'll get in. especially because UNSW asia screwed up. when the uni is short on money, they accept more students in those higher up degrees which get them more revenue. My brother told me this because one of his law lecturers...

sorry to hear that dude. thats really fucked up. as if they give such a low uai for those results. thts fucked

all u needed to do was use the 1amu = something kg.... on the data sheet divide ur mass by this number to convert to amu

but the onli argument possible for those who say its A is that both of the frames are inertial, thus the time for the astronaut is diallated for the bloke on earth but for the astronaut, the bloke on earth's time is diallated in his opinion. i still rekon C but thats a window for those who...

lol dont worry i put c for 5 aswell. ill take off A for u :P but my teacher ses B... i still rekon C

yeh ur right it is very random... thats what happens in exams sometimes... dont laugh its slack even if it is funny ur not meant to laugh out loud at some1. laugh in ur head lol

nop hes not... and neither is rutherford i think but u can still usem

lol well by common sense it has to be longer... To get C u sub in the other way round, ie t0 for spacecraft and t for earth. u know it will take longer so u sub em in that way, not the other way... carrect me if im wrong but i thought it was c

maybe i am... but my teacher ses its neither of those, he says 0.5. maybe hes way off? lol maybe were both wrong i duno

well i duno... models have their limitations, can be interpreted differently... maybe thell take that qn out of marking, i duno i rekon both interpretations may be correct

lol i think were both going off on a tangent... but if were not, then the speed of light is constant irrespective of the speed of the observer or source, so length contraction doesnt really matter for the speed of an electromagnetic wave, or distance..