<p>Was this test really hard or different from what was in the red book? It was like a Barrons test!</p>
<p>I thought it was very difficult. I got bored and confused reading the four hypothesis question about ACh and all of that nonsense.</p>
<p>All I could think about was the time lol. I had to read and reread so much since I could not concentrate</p>
<p>I thought it was fairly easy. There weren’t any questions I didn’t know how to answer. However, for the NaCl swixwe</p>
<p>The conflicting viewpoints section was very hard for me, I though the rest was comparable to when I took it in April.</p>
<p>i thought it was pretty straight forward but apparently no one else does. It’s either i did really well or really bad.</p>
<p>Question about the deicer section:</p>
<p>Did anyone else get like four of the same answers in a row? </p>
<p>Also, for the question about the change in temperature of tungsten in 200 mL of water: is it 10-15 degrees or 15+ degrees?</p>
<p>^ are all of you from US ?</p>
<p>@snay I hope its the first option. </p>
<p>I dont know but this was different from the practice and the red book. I hope october is easier lol</p>
<p>@Ayite07 hopefully, it was very differ. A lot more graphs than usual and unnecessary info. The curve should be good though.</p>
<p>I put 15 plus because there would be less liquid</p>
<p>15 plus… there was 400mls in the actual… potential experiment used 200 ml. 15 was the amount in the 400ml. it would presumably be higher with less water</p>
<p>@Nidget, it’s definitely 15+. If you put the same amount of heat into half the amount of water, the temperature will be higher, as there’s less water to heat.</p>
<p>i put that too ^^ how about the question about the Fe3 absorbing more than 466 nm of light? i put it absorbed little or none but dont have any support to back up my answer. just logic.</p>
<p>Lol I was so focused on time I couldn’t even think straight…anyone got some tips for next time?</p>
<p>Was that like “what material was the test tube made of …?” or something? Because that one was absorbed little or no light I believe. If the test tube absorbed the light that would interfere with the Fe3’s absorption of light</p>
<p>WHAT DID YOU GUYS PUT FOR why they did it at 4 degrees C? Was it because it was a typical winter temperature???</p>
<p>On the colorimeter one with unbounded Fe3 what did you guys put for what decreasing the BOUNDED Fe3 would do to absorption? Did you say decrease or increase? I was confused because the table had initial unbounded Fe3 but the question asked for bounded not unbounded.</p>
<p>Superninja, thats what I got.</p>
<p>^yes^^^^^^^^^^4degrees</p>