THANK YOU THESE VIDEOS ARE MY LIFE LINE

Thank you so much for this!

Thank you for an awesome video. I was just wondering how often you need to go back and re-read the stem when answering these questions? Thank you

@jesseosbourne

2 жыл бұрын

Hey Jai, I generally use note taking to draw out any information that I think might be useful, on the first read to prevent having to re-read and instead rely on my notes. Where I'm unsure or my notes aren't helping me, I'll look to relevant bits of the stem but there's generally not really time to be re-reading the whole stem

Hey Jesse, loving the GAMSAT videos you're making, it's been quite helpful preparing for my first sitting. For Question 4, would increasing velocity not make Lorentz factor close to infinity? and would that not cause contracted length to decrease as Lo is divided by infinity?

@jesseosbourne

2 жыл бұрын

Hey Steph, yep so increasing velocity does increase the Lorentz factor and it approaches infinity. So the trick to this question is that it focuses on the 'change' in length rather than the new contracted length. So yes, higher velocity causes a decrease in absolute length but this also means a 'larger' decrease in length. eg. if Lorentz = 2, then new contracted length = L0/2 (50% decrease) in length, but if Lorentz = 100, new contracted length =L0/100 = 0.01Lo (99% decrease). The second factor then is that the question gets you to compare 'absolute' decrease in length rather than just proportional decrease in length so we have to consider the actual lengths of each object too but can do this by reasoning rather than actual calculations. Does that clear things up?

@stephcurry7895

2 жыл бұрын

@@jesseosbourne Thanks for the swift reply, it does definitely clear things up, thank you! So in talking proportional decrease, a smaller "actual length" with a larger Lorentz factor would be the best however for absolute decrease it would most likely be something with a larger "actual length" but still maintaining a large Lorentz factor. Is this correct?

@jesseosbourne

2 жыл бұрын

Yep exactly right! So there are the ambiguous cases where length and velocity may not be the largest but so long as you can find the answer with the largest absolute velocity and length, you know without calculation that that’ll be the answer

In the Lorenz factor, if we were to play around with the math in the equation to understand the relationships, if different variables increase or decrease, what would you name this skill? I am not very good at maipulating formula quickly to understand how that changes the fraction. Is there a page or information you could link me to, in order to better understand this skill. For EX, If V increases / Decreases, how this would effect Lorenz factor etc. Thank you!

which Acer sample test are these questions from?

Hey Jesse love the video as always and I too think these walkthrough questions have been the most helpful thing to me! K2 > Kx Kx is also

@jesseosbourne

2 жыл бұрын

Hey Will, not a silly question at all! This is actually one of the tricks in the options and the distinction between A and C is based on the wording of the question prompt. You're right that there are cases where kx Because the question prompt says "will be", the answer has to be true for all cases ie. true 100% of the time rather than in certain cases so only C is always true for its conditions Hopefully that clears things up! :)

@LeviAckerman-yj2de

2 жыл бұрын

@@jesseosbourne Yes thank you!

Hey bro great vid as always , you forgot to add the graph to the resources page for Stem 2 question 3

@jesseosbourne

2 жыл бұрын

All fixed! :)

Thanks for the video a lot! For the Q1, I still don't get why k=M^(-1)?

@jesseosbourne

7 ай бұрын

These would be the units of the k value for each reaction. This can be calculated from the expression for k given int he question by substituting the units of each variable. This gives M / (M * M) = M^(-1)

@pthccuocsongdulich4238

2 ай бұрын

Thanks heaps. Now I don't understand why you could cancel out the molar mass 7:34 ?

Q1: RE setting up the equation. Why is it that, it’s 1/2Lo that we sub into the equation instead of 1/2L. GIVEN the question asks ‘half of its actual length’, wouldn’t this suggest, given L defined as ‘actual length’, it should be 1/2l. If you could help me to clarify this difference, I would appreciate it!

@mukundmanian

3 ай бұрын

Hey! Not Jesse, but I'll try my best to help here. In the stem, actual length is defined as Lo and contracted length is defined as L. The question asks about the length which the object 'appears' to be which refers to contracted length (L) - conveniently the equation is set up to calculate L based on Lo! For an object to appear (L) half its actual length (Lo), we need to set L = 1/2Lo There is another mathematical reasoning way to think about this. Ultimately, we're substituting in values to cancel out variables, making it easier for us to work with the equation. When we substitute 1/2Lo into L, the two Lo variables cancel out and leave us with 1/2. If we substitute in 1/2L into L, this cancelling out wouldn't be possible!

I'm a bit confused. for the Q2, you said (as t goes up, l goes down) in relationship with (gamma). However, the graph shows the relationship with v not gamma. Thanks!

@jesseosbourne

7 ай бұрын

So I say in the video that t goes up with increasing velocity and l goes down with increasing velocity, not gamma. The following explanation is then breaking down gamma and exploring how an increasing velocity changes its value and then how that relates to the change in values of t and l. Gamma is an intermediate variable hopefully that clears things up

why doesnt the mass from the moles cancel each other out? also for q 5 i dont think K can be negative so choisce B would not exist

@jesseosbourne

Жыл бұрын

Hey Jeffrey, could you give me a timestamp for your first question about the moles? Yep, rate constants can only be positive but incorrect statements can still exist as incorrect options 😜

@jeffrey3690

Жыл бұрын

@@jesseosbourne q1 7:17 the dimension analysis question

@jesseosbourne

Жыл бұрын

ah I see what you mean. So mass (m) and molar mass (M) are two different quantities. mass is an absolute measure of the substance in g and dimensions of MASS (M). But molar mass is actually a ratio or index so although it has units of g/mol, it is a constant ratio for a given compound so it does not have dimensions. Someone else had asked me this same question because there's apparently an explanation in Des of this concept and they say molar mass has dimensions of mass (M) however when I researched it a little more there is some debate over this but the majority view is that molar mass has no dimensions