Comments

The standard of the majority of the questions on the paper was similar to the last session. The paper gave rise to a wide
spread of marks and produced good differentiation between candidates. The questions were structured such that the
candidates first needed to give answers that tested recall and were then asked to apply their knowledge and
understanding to unfamiliar situations. The various styles of questions enabled the candidates to demonstrate their skills
in this subject.
The paper was well balanced and accessible to all candidates. Question 6 was more accessible to candidates than in
previous years and differentiated well across the ability range. Question 7 proved to be challenging to candidates of all
abilities.
The overall standard of the candidates was high and in line with previous papers. There were many candidates who
gave excellent answers and were, quite clearly, well-prepared for the examination. Candidates generally produced
excellent analytical solutions and gave detailed written answers.
There were a few excellent scripts. There were some parts of questions that all candidates found to be difficult. Full
marks were obtained by at least a few candidates on all the questions, except Question 7; very few candidates could
maintain this standard throughout their paper, however. The answers given showed that many candidates had a very
good understanding of the concepts across the whole of the syllabus.
There was some indication that a minority of candidates did not have sufficient time to finish the paper. This generally
meant that Question 7 was not fully answered. Candidates should be advised not to commence any answer by writing
out large portions of the question. This is wasteful of valuable time.


The road exerts a frictional force on the tyres and opposite to the velocity of the
car. By Newtons 3
rd
law, the tyres exert an equal and opposite force (i.e. in the
direction of velocity of the car) on the road surface.
The same resistive force now has to act against the component of weight down
slope (mg sin10), hence the resultant decelerating force is reduced.
Deceleration = 4.8 9.8 sin10
= 3.1 m s
-2


3.1

65.1

v
2
= u
2
+ 2as
0
2
= 25
2
+ 2(-4.8)(s)
s = 65.1 m


Resistive Force = F
net
= ma
= 750 x 4.8
= 3600 N
Comments (b)(iii)
Candidates focused on a statement of Newtons third law
rather than its application to the specific problem. Hence the
majority were able to obtain credit for the forces on the road
and the tyres being equal but very few were able to give the
correct directions for these forces.

Comments (c)(i)
Some stated
acc would be
greater when
the car is
actually
decelerating.
Candidates
should read
the question
carefully as the
majority gave
the directions
of the forces
assuming
there was
acceleration of
the car rather
than
deceleration as
in the question.



The law states that the rate of change of momentum of a system is proportional to the
net force acting on it and the change takes place in the direction of the force.
R = V
2
/P
= 12
2
/24
= 6
Energy transferred = Power x time
= 24 x 1800
= 43 200 J
E = QV
43 200 = N(1.6 x 10
-19
)(12)
N = 2.25 x 10
22

Comments Q2
The majority of candidates gave correct answers
for (a) but (b) was generally poorly answered.

Comments (a)(iii)
While most obtained the correct answer, the two most common mistakes were:
1 Finding the number of electrons per second rather than over 1800 s.
2 Quoting charge as the number of electrons.
The candidates are advised to read the question carefully.


6.0
43 200
2.25 x 10
22

Comments (b)(i)
A significant number of candidates wrongly stated that the resistance was
determined using the inverse of the gradient of the graph.


For any value of current I, the resistance is equal to the ratio of potential
difference V to current I.
This answer is based on the concept of potential division where the
total p.d. (=emf) is shared proportionately by the resistances in
series. E = IR
bulb
+ Ir
cell
+ IR
am
+ IR
var
, where cells internal
resistance r and ammeters resistance R
am
are non-zero and
variable resistors resistance R
var
can only vary from 0 to 10 O.
From Fig. 2.2, find R for
a few values of V using
R = V/I

Comments (b)(ii)
Many candidates ignored the instruction
and calculated resistance values.
Majority of the candidates gave graphs
starting from the origin or with a
negative intercept.
Comments (b)(iii)
The majority of candidates struggled with this question. Very few candidates recognised that
the battery may have internal resistance or that the resistance of the lamp was comparable
to the maximum resistance of the variable resistor.


The emf is equal to the sum of the bulbs p.d. and the p.d. across all the rest of
the resistance in the circuit. Since the resistance of the rest of the circuit cannot
be 0 and unlikely to be very much higher than that of the bulbs resistance, the
p.d. of the bulb cannot range from 0 to 12 V.
Comments (a)(i)
No credit is given for merely stating the waves meeting a slit
or passing through an obstacle.
Diffraction is the spreading of wave (bending of wavefronts) after it passes
through an aperture or after it passes around the edge of an obstacle.
Phase difference between two oscillations is the difference between their stages
(or steps) of repetitive motion.


Coherence refers to a constant phase difference between two sources of
waves.
I A
2
, hence, at positions of constructive interference, intensity is increased
while at positions of destructive interference, intensity remains zero. The
positions of maxima and minima remain unchanged.
Waves from the sources meet with different phase differences along AB because
of different path lengths. When M
1
and M
2
are in phase and the path difference is
n or (n + ), the waves meet in phase or in anti-phase respectively, resulting in
constructive (max. intensity) or destructive interference (min. intensity).
The positions of constructive and destructive interference are interchanged.
However, the intensity of the fringes remains the same.
Comments (b)(i)
The majority of candidates did not explain how the interference fringes were formed in the detail
required. Very few candidates described the need for the two sources to be coherent for the formation of
interference fringes. A significant number did not describe the conditions necessary for destructive and
constructive interference, or confused phase and path differences. It was not uncommon for candidates
to give a phase difference of n for constructive interference.
Comments (b)(ii)
1) Many candidates stated that bright fringes would be brighter and went on to state that dark
fringes would be darker. They failed to realize the question is about the interference of microwave,
which is invisible. Also, at positions of destructive interference, intensity cannot be further reduced since
it is already zero.
2) the weaker candidates suggested the complete pattern would disappear. A considerable number of
candidates demonstrated a poor understanding of phase difference.



The question should
have stated clearly
whether the intensities
of M
1
and M
2
have
increased to the same
amount. The answer
here is based on the
assumption that they are
increased to the same
amount.
Magnetic flux is defined as the product of magnetic flux density and the area
perpendicular to the magnetic flux density.
u = NBA
= (500)(5.0 x 10
-2
)(2.5 x 10
-2
)
= 0.625 Wb
0.63 Wb
Comments (a)
The majority of candidates
gave the correct definition.
Weaker candidates used
magnetic field rather than
magnetic flux density in their
definition of magnetic flux, or
did not explain the need for
the area to be perpendicular
to the field direction. A few
candidates attempted to
define magnetic flux density
rather than magnetic flux.


As the coil rotates, the angle u between the magnetic flux density and the normal
to the coil changes. Hence the flux linkage changes (proportional to cosu).
Comments (c)(ii)
Majority of the candidates missed the
milli prefix on the graph.
<emf> = Au/At
= (0.625 0)/(0.25 x 10
-3
)
= 2 500 V
2 500
The magnitude of the induced emf is equal to the gradient of the graph (Fig 4.2).
Its maximum value can therefore be estimated by the gradient at the steepest
points of the graph, such as t = 0.25 s, 0.75s, 1.25 s or 1.75 s.
Comments (c)(i)
The candidates who
gave a clear answer to
(a) generally gave
correct answers here.
There were many
answers that referred to
the coil cutting through
more or fewer field lines,
or gave an undefined
angle changing as the
coil rotated, and these
answers were not given
any credit.

Comments (c)(iii)
The good candidates related the gradient of the graph to the e.m.f. of the coil and hence were able to give
the correct point on the graph for the maximum value of e.m.f. A significant number of candidates explained
where the e.m.f. was a maximum rather than how the maximum could be determined from the graph.

Comments (a)(ii)
The majority of candidates did not relate the kinetic energy of molecules to the thermodynamic temperature.
Many answers given were generally too vague to be given any credit.
The thermodynamic temperature of an ideal gas is proportional to its internal
energy which is made up entirely of kinetic energy of the molecules.
The absolute zero is the temperature at which the internal energy of a body is
minimum.
pV = nRT
n = (1.0 x 10
5
)(0.064)/ [(8.31)(273+27)]
= 2.567 moles.
So mass = 2.567 x 0.030
= 7.7 x 10
-2
kg
7.7 x 10
-2

At T = 180 + 273 = 453 K,
n = (1.0 x 10
5
)(0.064) / [(8.31)(453)]
= 1.70 moles.
Mass escaped = (2.567 1.70) x (0.030)
= 2.6 x 10
-2
kg
2.6 x 10
-2

Ideal gas has no PE between the molecules.


(f)
45
The drop in temperature with distance is very rapid
because wood is a poor conductor which does not allow
heat to be transmitted along it readily.
Comments Q6
The question produced a good spread of marks and
discriminated well.


(16.0, 50.0)
(2.5, 92.0)



The rate at which thermal energy enters equals the rate at which it leaves.
-3.11
There is no heat loss from the rod in Fig. 6.4 due to perfect insulation. Hence
temperature at any point along the rod is higher.
If u is inversely proportional to x, then ux = constant.
At x
1
= 2.5 cm, u
1
= 92.0 C u
1
x
1
= 230 C cm
At x
2
= 17.5 cm, u
2
= 45.0 C u
2
x
2
= 788 C cm
Since ux is not constant, the proposal is incorrect.
Comments (b)(ii)
Most candidates obtained a value for the gradient within the tolerance required. Candidates lost marks by misreading the
scales on the axes or by not using the required precision when reading the co-ordinate values for a small length of the line.
Those candidates who did not use the end points of the line generally obtained a gradient outside the required range.


Temp gradient = (92.0 50.0) / (2.5 16.0)
= - 3.11 C cm
-1


Cambridge examiners stressed that where the question involves an instruction to show
then full working is expected. Hence, candidates who only gave a descriptive answer
(such as the one below) were not considered to have answered the question.
If u is inversely proportional to x, then we can write u = k/x, where k is a constant. But the
graph of u against x will be a curve based on this equation, instead of the straight line
shown in Fig 6.4. Hence the students proposal is incorrect.
57


4.04


(2.5, 4.21)
4.38
(17.5, 3.21)


u
E
= u
o
e
-x
ln u
E
= ln u
o
- x, which predicts a straight line when ln u
E
is
plotted against x, where ln u
o
is the vertical intercept and - is the gradient.
Since the data points in Fig. 6.6 form a straight line trend with negative
gradient, the proposed equation is of the correct form.
From Fig. 6.6,
ln u
0
= 4.38
u
0
= 7.98

- = gradient
= (4.21 - 3.21)/(2.5 - 17.5)
= -0.067


7.98
0.067
Comments (e)
A significant number of candidates answered this question on the wrong graph. Candidates should
read the question carefully. Those who used the correct graph often drew a line above the original.
To variable
power supply
water out
water in
H
solar
panel
Pail
High
intensity
lamp
mercury
thermometer



1 Set up the apparatus as shown. The vertical height H of the lamp above the solar panel should
be kept constant. The light should cover the whole area of the solar panel.
2 Switch on the high intensity lamp and the water supply. Place the intensity meter on a few
points on the solar panel. Record the readings and calculate the average intensity I
ave
.
3 When the two thermometers show steady temperatures, record the input water temperature u
in

and output water temperature u
out
.
4 Place an empty pail below the water outlet and start a stopwatch at the same time. When the
pail is almost full, remove the pail and stop the stopwatch at the same time. Record the time as
T.
5 Then measure the mass m of water collected in the pail using a balance by subtracting the mass
of the dry empty pail from the total mass of pail and water.
6 The power P
out
or rate of heating of the water is calculated from the equation
P
out
= mc(u
out
- u
in
)/T where c is the heat capacity of water
7 The incident power P
in
from the lamp can be obtained from
P
in
= I
ave
x area of solar panel = I
ave
x (0.1 x 0.1)
7 The efficiency of the solar panel can then be calculated using the equation
Efficiency = ( P
out
/P
in
) x 100%
8 Steps 2 to 7 can be repeated for different power by adjusting the variable power source to the
lamp. A mean value for efficiency can then be calculated.
9 The rate of water supply should be kept constant when each set of measurements is taken.
10 The experiment should be carried out in a draft free environment to reduce heat loss from the
solar panel. Different wind speed will lead to different rate of heat loss and hence variable P
out
.
11 For better accuracy, the rate of water supply should not be too high so that there is a significant
rise in temperature. A small temperature rise will have greater uncertainty.
12 To further improve accuracy, for each power setting of the variable power source,
measurements can be repeated to obtain mean values of efficiency.

(e)
(e)
(d)
(d)
(e)
(e)




DONTs
1. Do not give unnecessarily exhaustive list of apparatus.
2. Do not give unnecessarily detailed descriptions of the analysis of data.
Comments Q7
The question proved to be very difficult for the majority of candidates. A significant number of candidates
scored poorly on this question in contrast to their performance on the previous six questions.
Many candidates spent too much time drawing neat diagrams and/or did not label the key elements of the
diagram. The diagram was then often followed by an unnecessarily exhaustive list of the apparatus.
Candidates often also gave unnecessarily detailed descriptions of the analysis of the data. The information
given in the stem of the question, such as the description of the solar panel and the particular apparatus that
was available, for example the intensity meter, was ignored by a significant number of candidates. The
instruction to draw a labelled diagram and to pay particular attention to particular details was not followed by
a significant number of candidates. A number of candidates gave a fully labelled diagram that clearly
indicated how the apparatus was to be used. This type of diagram should be encouraged as it often reduces
the amount of descriptive text that is subsequently required.
The variables to be investigated and the variables that were to be kept constant were often clearly stated by
the good candidates. There were some well-prepared candidates who gave clear descriptions of the
procedures required for determining the relevant quantities. These candidates often then described how the
readings would be used to obtain a value for the efficiency of the solar panel.
Common mistakes were: to attach voltmeters and ammeters to the solar panel, to fill the solar panel with
water, to ignore the use of an intensity meter and to focus on a long description of numerous safety
procedures. The time spent on these points often meant that the candidates were unable to complete the
required descriptions of the procedures necessary for such an experiment. There was often a lack of detail
as to how many of the quantities were to be measured. Candidates often assumed that the initial
temperature of the water was at a particular value and so did plan to measure it. The volume of water was
also assumed to be given, rather than being measured. More time was spent drawing unnecessary results
tables than describing how the quantities would be determined.
Candidates should be advised to read the question and instructions carefully. The description of unwanted
material is very wasteful of the time available to candidates.