STEP 2001 Paper 2 Question 5
This thread is an excerpt from a discussion
of the STEP papers immediately after they took place.
By Olof Sisask on Thursday, June 28,
2001 - 03:24 pm :
By the way - for the very last bit of Q5, did you simply say
that the gradient of C2 is increasing more quickly
than that of C1 between 0 and 1, and therefore the
result follows?
By Nikhil Shah on Thursday, June 28,
2001 - 04:10 pm :
For q5, how important do you think the last part (namely
showing that k> 1/2e-1 (0r whatever!) is? For some
odd reason, I just completely left that out, I'm so annoyed about
that!
By Michael Doré on Thursday, June 28, 2001 -
04:45 pm :
For Q5, the last part follows from
and
.
By Tom Hardcastle on Thursday, June 28,
2001 - 05:09 pm :
For the last part of question 5, Olof, yes, that's how I did
it. (you should also mention that they both start at the
origin.)
Tom.
By Michael Doré on Thursday, June 28, 2001 -
09:05 pm :
So for the last part of Q5, you simply use
for
.
By Olof Sisask on Thursday, June 28,
2001 - 09:11 pm :
You use that to say that the C2 is increasing more
quickly than C1 right?
By Michael Doré on Thursday, June 28, 2001 -
09:18 pm :
Yes, or from first principles, if
denotes
as a function of
then define:
Then:
for
. And so we have
as the above inequality is
strict for all
other than 0, 1 so we get
and since
the result immediately follows.
By Olof Sisask on Thursday, June 28,
2001 - 10:14 pm :
Ah, nice!
Olof