<p>Ah I forgot that. It’s sqrt r^2 + (r’)^2 d#</p>
<p>f(x) inflection points: changes from curving down to curving up, or vice versa; it’s kinda hard to tell on a graph for f(x) so I don’t think they would ask that
f’(x) inflection points: changes from increasing to decreasing, or vice versa</p>
<p>f(x) absolute max/min: the highest point and the lowest point
f’(x) absolute max/min: first find relative max/min, then plug in the x’s you get into f(x) or integrals to find the absolute max/min</p>
<p>I don’t get 6b either. How did they get base = 1/n?</p>
<p>@CORVIDS:
That’s a weird formula, I’ve never seen it before.</p>
<p>Thanks for the graph stuff.
When you say: “f’(x) inflection points: changes from increasing to decreasing, or vice versa” you mean when it goes from positive to negative? Like, crossing an axis?</p>
<p>For f’(x) absolute max/min, to find the relative max/min is that when the function crosses the axis?</p>
<p>Do we get part marks for consistent wrong answers?!</p>
<p>I found it written as sqrt (r^2 + (dr/d#)^2) d#, but personally it’s easier for me to think of it the way I wrote it.</p>
<p>No, that doesn’t necessarily from positive to negative. Inflection points deal with the second derivative. So they’re basically the max/mins for f’(x). You know that a max/min is happening on a graph when it changes from increasing to decreasing or its derivative crosses the axis.</p>
<p>Yeah, max/mins happen when f’(x) crosses the axis.</p>
<p>And I’m pretty sure you get part marks.</p>
<p>You know I don’t think I’m good at explaining things haha. I hope I didn’t confuse you more.</p>
<p>Should be integration by partial fractions, but I haven’t done that with anything but 1 in the numerator before. Can anyone explain how to do it with 2x in the numerator and/or how to solve the problem?</p>
<p>^ “So they’re basically the max/mins for f’(x). You know that a max/min is happening on a graph when it changes from increasing to decreasing or its derivative crosses the axis.”
Increasing to decreasing SLOPE, or actual value?</p>
<p>Nope, very helpful!</p>
<p>If part marks aren’t awarded I"m failing. Hard.</p>
<p>@Quaker:
No idea, sorry! I’ve only done it with numbers, I think.</p>
<p>edit: Oh, I did it.
Just do it like normal, split it into two fractions with A and B on the top. (Just A and B, nothing else) and then do the usual thing.
You’ll end up with (A+B)x + (A+2B), so just set (A+B) to 2 and (A+2B) to 0 and you’ll be able to solve the equation.
You set it to zero because there are no constant terms, only a linear term (which is represented by (A+B)x.)</p>
<p>For partial fractions, you know the step when normally you would be at “A + B = 0” because all of your “Ax + A + Bx - B . . . + Nx + N” are set equal to the coefficients? </p>
<p>Basically, if you have something like</p>
<p>(3x + 1)/[(x+2)(x-2)]</p>
<p>It decomposes into A / (x+2) + B / (x-2)</p>
<p>Ax + 2A + Bx - 2B</p>
<p>All of the terms with X’s are set equal to the terms in the fraction with x’s. So in our fraction, 3.</p>
<p>Totally.
Self-studied a 4 last year, didn’t learn any BC topics until like . . . a few days ago.
AWESOME. Not.
Going to fail majorly. I hope I get a 3.
You?</p>
<p>I feel pretty screwed for the test too. I’m self-studying BC and I’m still having trouble with series and polar stuff. Hoping I get a 3 too, Abrayo.</p>
<p>Anyone know the relative difficulty of the 2010 one? Was it easier than normal? There was only one series question on the FR, and I got a 4 on it. (On the FR only, when I just tested myself).
Seeing as there weren’t parametric/polars I’m assuming I won’t get a 4 on the real one.
I failed the series one, ha ha. . .</p>