1. Dismiss Notice
  2. Hey Guest! Check out the 3 MCAT Study Plan Options listed in the 'stickies' area at the top of the forums (BoomBoom, SN2ed, and MCATJelly). Let us know which you like best.

    Also, we now offer a MCAT Test-Prep Exhibitions Forum where you can ask questions directly from the test-prep services.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. This forum is for support and discussion only. Please promote test prep materials/services (including AMAs) in the Special Offers subforum only. Thanks!
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice

Interview Feedback: Visit Interview Feedback to view and submit interview information.

Interviewing Masterclass: Free masterclass on interviewing from SDN and Medical College of Georgia

Help With Aamc Test #1!!!

Discussion in 'MCAT: Medical College Admissions Test' started by phatty925, Jul 11, 2002.

  1. phatty925

    phatty925 Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2002
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    3
    HEY...
    if any of you have taken AAMC I as a practice exam, could you help me out? I was totally lost on passage II of the physical sciences section. I need help...please explain #'s 75-79...and how you came to the answers.
    thanks!!!
     
  2. dpy

    dpy Senior Member
    10+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2002
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    0
    75.) For this question, you want same speed with a lower consumption of power. So take a look at each choice.

    For (a), lowering the current would lower power consumption, but it would also lower exit speed, so that can't be it.

    For (b), lowering the rail resistivity means that it would take less energy (which translates to power) to achieve the same amount of current. With the same amount of current, you have the same exit speed. so the answer is (b).

    For (c), I think (not too sure....) lowering cross sectional area is equivalent to increasing resistivity, which is opposite to choice B and can't be the answer based on the above logic.

    For (d), reducing mag. field strength would again lower power consumption like (a), but it would also lower exit speed, so that can't be it.


    76.) given F=ma, force = 3.0, mass = 0.06. you find that a=50m/sec2. plug that into the formula: x=vt + 0.5at(squared). solve for t

    77.) lengthening a material does not increase its resistance...what changes its resistance are properties such as cross sectional area, type of material, etc.
    the mag field is also not affected, it can be affected by a change in current, not length.
    force also cannot be changed with increase length.
    only choice left is (d). with a longer rail, the force is applied over a longer period of time, thus increasing the speed.

    78.) from the chart based on the first 2 experiments, you see 1.5x the currrent is equivalent to 1.5x the speed. this indicates that the relationship between current and speed is directly proportional. so decreasing current by 2x will decrease speed by 2 times

    79.) don't remember the formula off the top of my head, but basically the horizontal speed has no relevance to this problem because we only want vertical motion..just imagine it's a free fall question with initial velocity in y direction of 0m/s...like, "how far does an object fall in 0.01 sec?"


    hope this helps....correct me if i'm wrong with any of these guys...

    bobby
     
  3. phatty925

    phatty925 Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2002
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    3
    hey bobby,
    thanks so much for your help! i pm'ed you...

    julie
     
  4. Mudd

    Mudd Charlatan & Trouble Maker
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    2
    dpy:

    That is ubelievably cool of you to share that. I'm going to add a slightly different perspective on the answers, which may or may not help.

    75.) The projectile is being propelled by force due to the magnetic field strength, which ultimately depends on current. The question involves maintianing the same kinetic energy (exit speed) without spending the same amount of input energy. To solve this, we can focus on the areas where energy is lost. In this case, friction and electrical resistance are the two prime candidates. From here I agree with dpy's reply (with a slight adaptation of choice (c)):

    For (a), lowering the current would lower power consumption, but it would also lower exit speed, so that can't be it.

    For (b), lowering the rail resistivity means that it would take less energy (which translates to power) to achieve the same amount of current. With the same amount of current, you have the same exit speed. so the answer is (b).

    For (c), lowering cross sectional area is equivalent to increasing resistivity (think of a hallway becoming more narrow), which is opposite to choice B and can't be the answer based on the above logic.

    For (d), reducing mag. field strength would again lower power consumption like (a), but it would also lower exit speed, so that can't be it.


    76.) given F=ma, force = 3.0, mass = 0.06. you find that a=50m/sec2. plug that into the formula: x= 0.5at2. solve for t

    77.) while lengthening the rails increases its electrical resistance and the time over which the projectile is being exposed to friction, the more important concept here is time during which an acceleration is applied. Longer rails allow the projectile to be accelrated over a greater distance, and thus to a greater speed. While choice (a) may be a true statement in and of itself, it would explain a slower speed, so choice (a) is eliminated. Choices (b) and (c) both would explain and increase in speed, if they were true. Neither is applicable in this case, because increasing the rail length would not increase the magnetic field strength, which in turn would not increase the force applied to the projectile.

    78.) from the chart based on the first 2 experiments, you see 1.5x the currrent is equivalent to 1.5x the speed. this indicates that the relationship between current and speed is directly proportional. so decreasing current by 2x will decrease speed by 2 times EXCELLENT EXPLANATION Let me add the units/equation approach too. It is given in the passage that the force is proportional to current squared. It is also true that the kinetic energy is equal to force x distance, so ultimately, the force is proportional to the exit speed squared. Because for is proportional to both current squared and velocity squared, the current and velocity must be directly proportional. Choices (c) and (d) should have been eliminated immediately, because increasing current is going to increase the speed. The question is simply whether it is directly or whether it has a square root relationship. Table or equation, both get you the answer.

    79.) this requires the same formula as #76. h = 0.5at2. a is 9.8, so 0.5 x 9.8 yields 4.9. This eliminates choices (c) and (d). Squaring the time yields 10-4, so choice A is best.
     
  5. phatty925

    phatty925 Senior Member
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2002
    Messages:
    124
    Likes Received:
    3
    mudd-
    thanks! it's really cool to know that you guys are willing to help.
    i had a question about part of your explanation:

    "It is given in the passage that the force is proportional to current squared. It is also true that the kinetic energy is equal to force x distance, so ultimately, the force is proportional to the exit speed squared. Because for is proportional to both current squared and velocity squared, the current and velocity must be directly proportional. "

    firstly, did you say that KE=FxD b/c FxD=work and the only work done here is the change in kinetic energy?
    also, from this, how did you determine that the force is proportional to the exit speed squared?

    that was great logic you used to solve the problem though...
    thanks for your help.

    julie
     
  6. Mudd

    Mudd Charlatan & Trouble Maker
    7+ Year Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2002
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    2
    The projectile starts at rest and ultimately exits with some kinetic energy (0.5mv2), so any kinetic energy it has is due solely to the work exerted on the projectile. So, KE = work = FxD (in this case at least). The conclusion is that FxD = 0.5mv2, so F is proportional to v2, as long as mass and distance do not vary.
     

Share This Page